Page:Philological Museum v2.djvu/103

93 ON AFFECTATION IN ANCIENT AND MODERN ART. JN o point of difference between the works of ancient and modern art is more striking, than the almost total ab- sence of affectation in the former, and its prevalence in the latter. The thorough examination of the reason why what is the rule in one case should be the exception in the other^ would oblige us to consider all those peculiarities, physical and moral, which made the Greeks first in sculpture and in poetry : for no phenomenon of this nature can be considered as insulated ; it is only one point in that aggregate which we call national character, and to the growth of which a thousand various and mingled causes must contribute. An attempt of this kind, even the slightest, would demand a far abler hand and occupy too large a space ; but it may be useful to see if we can trace any of the more immediate causes of this one among the many superiorities of the Greeks. We must first consider what we mean by the term. Affected is generally opposed to natural ; and affectation may be defined as a visible struggle to produce an effect on a spectator. To do an act naturally is to do it as if the means were natural to us, that is, so familiar that our thoughts do not dwell on them for a single moment, and as if we were unconscious of the presence of another, by a sort of singlemindedness in which to do the act, and not how to do it, is all we think of. The way in which affectation is generally shewn, is in losing sight of the end, and substituting for it a close and manifest attention to the means. It is displeasing to us, because we look suspiciously on any avowed intention on the part of another to produce an effect upon our minds, and because in almost every instance