Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 9.djvu/693

 SEVENTEENTH CENTURY POETRY.] FRANCE (Jj7 (1G10-1C60) and Sarrasin (1G03-1G54), devoted them selves rather to burlesque of serious verse. Most of the great dramatic authors of the time also wrote miscellaneous poetry, and there was even an epic school of the most singular kind, in ridiculing and discrediting which Boileau for once did undoubtedly good service. The Pucelle of Chapelain (1595-1674), the unfortunate author who was deliberately trained and educated for a poet, who enjoyed for some time a sort of dictatorship in French literature on the strength of his forthcoming work, and at whom from the day of its publication every critic of French literature has agreed to laugh, was the most famous and perhaps the worst of these. But Scudery (1601-16G7) wrote an Alaric, the Pere le Moyne (1G02-1G71) a St Louis, and St Amand a Mo ise, which are not much better, though Thdophilo Gautier in his Grotesques has valiantly defended these and other contemporary versifiers. St Amand, indeed, was capable of writing excellent poetry in other styles, and not seldom actually produced such. Some of the lighter poets and classes of poetry just alluded to also produced some remarkable verse. The Pre&quot;cieuses of the Hotel Rambouillet, with all their absurdities, encouraged if they did not produce good literary work. In their society there is no doubt that a great reformation of manners took place, if not of morals, and that the tendency to literature elegant and polished, yet not destitute of vigour, which marks the Nth century, was largely developed side by side with much scandalmongering and anecdotage. Many of the authors whom these influences inspired, such as Voiture, St Evre- mond, and others, have been or will be noticed. But even such poets and wits as Scnecd (1643-1737), Segrais (1624-1701), Charleval, Godeau (1605-1672), Gombaud (1570-1666), are not without interest in the history of literature; while if Cotin (1604-1682) sinks below this level, Menage (1630-1692) certainly rises above it, not withstanding Moliere s satire. Menage s name naturally suggests the Ana which arose at this time and were long fashionable, stores of endless gossip, sometimes providing instruction and often amusement The Guirlande de Julie, in which most of the poets of the time celebrated Julie d Angennes, daughter of the Marquise, is perhaps the best of all such albums, and Voiture, the typical poet of the coterie, was certainly the best writer of vers de societc who is known to us. The poetical war which arose between the Uranistes, the followers of Voiture, and the Jobistes, those of Benserade, produced reams of sonnets, epigrams, and similar verses. This habit of occasional versification con tinued long. It led as a less important consequence to the rhymed Gazettes of Loret, which recount in octosyllabic verse of a light and lively kind the festivals and court events of the early years of Louis XIV. It led also to perhaps the most remarkable non-dramatic poetry of the century, the Contes and Fables of La Fontaine (1621-1695). No French writer is better known than La Fontaine, and there is no need to dilate on his merits. It 1ms been well said that he completes Moliere, and that the two together give something to French literature which no other litera ture possesses. Yet La Fontaine is after all only a writer of fabliaux, in the language and with the manners of his own century. All the writers we have mentioned belong more or less to the first half of the century, and so do Conrart, Furetiere, Chapelle, Desmarets, and others not worth special mention. The latter half of the century is far less productive, and the poetical quality of its production is even lower than the quantity. In it Boileau (1636-1711) is the chief poetical figure. Next to him can only be mentioned Madame Beshouli6res (1 638-1 69 4), Brebeuf, the translator of Lucan, Quinault (1655-1688), the composer of opera libretti. It is almost impossible to call either of these writers poets, with the doubtful exception of Quinault. The denunciation Boileau. of Boileau as a versifier whose best verses are those of a promising sixth-form boy, and his worst those of an un promising boy in the third form, is not epigram or exag geration. His satire, where it has much merit, is usually borrowed direct from Horace. He had a certain faculty as a critic of the slashing order, and might have profitably used it if he had written in prose. But of his poetry it must be said, not so much that it is bad, as that it is not poetry at all, and the same is generally true of all those who followed him, with the possible exception of J. B. Rousseau, from Chaulieu (1639-1720) and La Fare (1644-1712) to Delille (1738-1813) and Le Brim (1729-1807). 17th Century Drama. We have already seen how the mediaeval theatre was formed, and how in the second half of the 16th century it met with a formidable rival in the cla. isical drama of Jodelle and Gamier. In 1588 mysteries had been prohibited, and with the prohibition of the mysteries the Confraternity of the Passion lost the principal part of its reason for existence. The other bodies and societies of amateur actors had already perished, and at length the Hotel de Bourgogne itself, the home of the con fraternity, had been handed over to a regular troop of actors, while companies of strollers, whose life has been vividly depicted in the Roman Comique of Scarron and the Capitaine Fracasse of Theophile Gautier, wandered all about the provinces. The old farce was for a time main tained or revived by Tabarin, a remarkable figure in dram atic history, of whom but little is known. The great dramatic author of the first quarter of the 17th century was Alexandre Hardy (1560-1631), who surpassed even Hey- Hardy, wood in fecundity, and very nearly approached the porten tous productiveness of Lope de Voga. Seven hundred is put down as the modest total of Hardy s pieces, but not much more than a twentieth of these exist in print. From these latter we can judge Hardy. They are hardly up to the level of the worst specimens of the contemporary Elizabethan theatre, to which, however, they bear a certain resemblance. Marston s Insatiate Countess and the worst parts of Chapman s Bussy d Ambois may give English readers some notion of them. Yet Hardy was not totally devoid of merit. He imitated and adapted Spanish litera ture, which was at this time to France what Italian was in the century before and English in the century after, in the most indiscriminate manner. But he had a considerable command of grandiloquent and melodramatic expression, a sound theory if not a sound practice of tragic writing, and that peculiar knowledge of theatrical art and of the taste of the theatrical public which since his time has been the special possession of the French playwright. It is instruc tive to compare the influence of his irregular and faulty geuius with that of the regular and precise Malherbe. From Hardy to Rotrou is, in point of literary interest, a great step, and from Rotrou to Corneille a greater. Yet the theory of Hardy only wanted the genius of Rotrou and Corneille to produce the latter. Rotrou (1609-1650) has been called the French Marlowe, and there is a curious likeness and yet a curious contrast between the two poets. The best parts of Rotrou s two best plays, Venceslas and St Rotrou. Genest, are quite beyond comparison in respect of anything that preceded them, and the central speech of the last-named play will rank with anything in French dramatic poetry. We must, despite the necessity of excluding personal details from this article, add [that the noble personal character of this little known French dramatist, his generous acknow ledgment of Corneille who succeeded and surpassed him, and the devotion with which he sacrificed his life to his official duty, are almost as admirable as his works. Con temporary with Rotrou were other dramatic writers of con siderable dramatic importance, most of thorn distinguished IX. 83