A DEFENCE OF Sir Fopling Flutter.

A Certain Knight, who has employ'd ſo much of his empty Labour in extol⯑ling the weak Perfor⯑mances of ſome living Authors, has ſcurriouſly and inhumanly in the 65th Spectator, attack'd one of the moſt entertaining Comedies of the laſt Age, written by a moſt ingenious Gentleman, who perfect⯑ly underſtood the World, the Court, [2] and the Town, and whoſe Reputation has now for near thirty Years together, ſurviv'd his Perſon, and will, in all Pro⯑bability, ſurvive it as long as Comedy ſhall be in vogue; by which Proceed⯑ing, this worthy Knight has incurr'd the double Cenſure, that Olivia in the pl [...]'d Dealer has caſt upon a certain Coxcomb ‘Who rather, ſays ſhe, then not flatter, will flatter the Poets of the Age, whom none will flatter; and rather then not rail, will rail at the Dead, at whom none beſides will rail.’

If other Authors have had the Mis⯑fortune, to incurr the Cenſure of ill⯑nature with unthinking deluded People, for no other ſo much as pretended Rea⯑ſon, than becauſe to improve a noble Art, they have expos'd the Errors of popular Writers, who ow'd their Suc⯑ceſs, to the infamous Method of ſecur⯑ing an ignorant or a corrupt Cabal; when thoſe Writers were not only liv⯑ing, but in full Proſperity, and at full Liberty to anſwer for themſelves; what Appellation muſt he deſerve, who has baſely and ſcurrilouſly attack'd the Re⯑putation of a Favourite of the comick Muſe, and of the Darling of the Graces, after Death has for ſo many Years depriv'd [3] him of the Means of anſwering for himſelf.

What the Knight falſely and impu⯑dently ſays of the Comedy, may be juſtly ſaid of the Criticiſm, and of the whole 65th Spectator, that 'tis a perfect Contradiction to good Manners and good Senſe. He allows this Comedy, he ſays, to be in Nature, but 'tis Nature in its utmoſt Corruption and Dege⯑neracy.

Suppoſe this were true, I would fain know where he learnt, that Nature in its utmoſt Corruption and Degeneracy, is not the proper Subject of Comedy? Is not this a merry Perſon, who, after he has been writing what he calls Comedy for twenty Years together, ſhews plain⯑ly to all the World that he knows no⯑thing of the Nature of true Comedy, and that he has not learnt the very firſt Rudiments of an Art which he pretends to teach? I muſt confeſs, the Ridicule in Sir Fopling Flutter, is an Imitation of corrupt and degenerate Nature, but not the moſt corrupt and the moſt degene⯑rate; for there is neither Adultery, Murder, nor Sodomy in it. But can any Thing but corrupt and degenerate [4] Nature be the proper Subject of Ridi⯑cule? And can any Thing but Ridicule be the proper Subject of Comedy? Has not Ariſtotle told us in the Fifth Chapter of his Poeticks, that Comedy is an Imi⯑tation of the very worſt of Men? Not the worſt, ſays He, in every Sort of Vice, but the worſt in the Ridicule. And has not Horace, in the Fourth Sa⯑tyr of his Firſt Book, reminded us, that the old Athenian Comick Poets made it their Buſineſs to bring all Sorts of Vil⯑lains upon the Stage, Adulterers, Cheats, Theives, Murderers? But then they always took Care, ſays a modern Cri⯑tick, that thoſe ſeveral Villanies ſhould be envelop'd in the Ridicule, which a⯑lone, ſays he, could make them the proper Subjects of Comedy. If this facetious Knight had formerly liv'd at Lacedemon with the ſame wrong turn'd Noddle that he has now among us, would he not, do you think, have in⯑veighed againſt that People, for ſhewing their drunken Slaves to their Children? Would he not have repreſented it as a Thing of moſt pernicious Example? What the Lacedemonians did by Drunk⯑enneſs, the Comick Poet does by that and all other Vices. He expoſes them to the View of his Fellow Subjects, for no [5] other Reaſon, than to render them ridi⯑culous and contemptible.

But the Criticiſm of the Knight in the foreſaid Spectator, is as contrary to good Manners, as it is to good Senſe. What Ariſtotle and his Interpreters ſay of Tra⯑gedy, that 'tis infallibly good, when it pleaſes both the Judges and the People, is certainly as true of Comedy; for the Judges are equally qualify'd to judge of both, and the People may be ſup⯑pos'd to be better Judges of Comedy then they are of Tragedy, becauſe Co⯑medy is nothing but a Picture of com⯑mon Life, and a Repreſentation of their own Humours and Manners. Now this Comedy of Sir Fopling Flutter, has not been only well receiv'd, and believ'd by the People of England to be a moſt agreeable Comedy for about Half a Century, but the Judges have been ſtill more pleas'd with it then the People. They have juſtly believ'd (I ſpeak of the Judges) that the Characters, and eſpecially the principal Characters, are admirably drawn, to anſwer the two Ends of Comedy, Pleaſure, and In⯑ſtruction; and that the Dialogue is the moſt charming that has been writ by the Moderns: That with Purity and [6] Simplicity, it has Art and Elegance; and with Force and Vivacity, the ut⯑moſt Grace and Delicacy. This I know very well, was the Opinion of the moſt eminent Writers, and of the beſt Judges contemporary with the Author; and of the whole Court of King Charles the Second, a Court the moſt polite that ever England ſaw.

Now, after this Comedy has paſs'd with the whole People of England, the knowing as well as the Ignorant, for a moſt entertaining and moſt inſtructive Comedy, for fifty Years together, after that long Time comes a Two-Penny Author, who has given a thouſand Proofs thro' the Courſe of his Rhapſo⯑dies, that he underſtands not a Tittle of all this Matter; this Author comes and impudently declares, that this whole celebrated Piece, that has for half a Century, been admir'd by the whole People of Great Britain, is a perfect Con⯑tradiction to good Senſe, to good Man⯑ners, and to common Honeſty. O Tem⯑pora! O Mores!

The Knight certainly wrote the fore⯑mention'd Spectator, tho' it as been writ theſe ten Years, on Purpoſe to [7] make Way for his fine Gentleman, and therefore he endeavours to prove, that Sir Fopling is not that genteel Comedy, which the World allows it to be. And then, according to his uſual Cuſtom, whenever he pretends to criticiſe, he does, by ſhuffling and cutting and con⯑founding Notions, impoſe upon his un⯑wary Reader; for either Sir George Ethe⯑ridge, did deſign to make this a genteel Comedy, or he did not. If he did not deſign it, what is it to the Purpoſe, whe⯑ther 'tis a genteel Comedy or not? Pro⯑vided that 'tis a good one: For I hope, a Comedy may be a good one, and yet not a genteel one. The Alchimiſt is an admirable Comedy, and yet it is not a genteel one. We may ſay the ſame of The Fox, and the ſilent Woman, and of a great many more. But if Sir George did deſign to make it a genteel one, he was oblig'd to adapt it to that No⯑tion of Gentility, which he knew very well, that the World at that Time had, and we ſee he ſucceeded accordingly. For it has paſs'd for a very genteel Comedy, for fifty Years together. Could it be expected that the admirable Au⯑thor, ſhould accommodate himſelf, to the wrong headed Notions of a would be Critick, who was to appear fifty [8] Years after the firſt Acting of his Play: A Gritick, who writes Criticiſm as Men commit Treaſon or Murder, by the In⯑ſtigation of the Devil himſelf, when⯑ever the old Gentleman owes the Knight a Shame.

To prove that this Comedy is not a genteel one, he endeavours to prove that one of the principal Characters, is not a fine Gentleman. I appeal to every impartial Man, if when he ſays, that a Man or a Woman are genteel, he means any Thing more, than that they are agreeble in their Air, graceful in in their Motions, and polite in their Converſation. But when he endeavours to prove, that Dorimont is not a fine Gentleman, he ſays no more to the Purpoſe, then he ſaid before, when he affirm'd that the Comedy is not a genteel Comedy; for either the Author deſign'd in Dorimont a fine Gentleman, or he did not. If he did not, the Character is ne'er the leſs excellent on that Account, becauſe Dorimnot is an admirable Picture of a Courtier in the Court of King Charles the Second. But if Dorimont was deſign'd for a fine Gentleman by the Author, he was oblig'd to accom⯑modate himſelf to that Notion of a [9] fine Gentleman, which the Court And the Town both had at the Time of the writing of this Comedy. 'Tis reaſona⯑ble to believe, that he did ſo, and we ſee that he ſucceeded accordingly. For Dorimont not only paſs'd for a fine Gen⯑tleman with the Court of King Charles the Second, but he has paſs'd for ſuch with all the World, for Fifty Years to⯑gether. And what indeed can any one mean, when he ſpeaks of a fine Gentle⯑man, but one who is qualify'd in Con⯑verſation, to pleaſe the beſt Company of either Sex.

But the Knight will be ſatisfy'd with no Notion of a fine Gentleman but his own. A fine Gentleman, ſays he, is one who is honeſt in his Actions, and refin'd in his Language. If this be a juſt Deſcription of a fine Gentleman, I will make bold to draw two Conſe⯑quences from it. The firſt is, That a Pedant is often a fine Gentleman. For I have known ſeveral of them, who have been Honeſt in their Actions, and Refin'd in their Language. The ſecond is, That I know a certain Knight, who, though he ſhould be allow'd to be a Gentleman born, yet is not a fine Gen⯑tleman. I ſhall only add, that I would adviſe for the future, all the fine Gentlemen, [10] who travel to London from Tipperary, to allow us Engliſhmen to know what we mean, when we ſpeak our native Language.

To give a true Character of this charming Comedy, it muſt be acknow⯑ledg'd, that there is no great Maſterſhip in the Deſign of it. Sir George had but little of the artful and juſt Deſigns of Ben Johnſon: But as Tragedy inſtructs chiefly by its Deſign, Comedy inſtructs by its Characters; which nor only ought to be drawn truly in Nature, but to be the reſembling Pictures of our Contemporaries, both in Court and Town. Tragedy anſwers to Hiſtory⯑Painting, but Comedy to drawing of Portraits.

How little do they know of the Nature of true Comedy, who believe that its proper Buſineſs is to ſet us Patterns for lmitation: For all ſuch Patterns are ſerious Things, and Laugh⯑ter is the Life, and the very Soul of Comedy. 'Tis its proper Buſineſs to expoſe Perſons to our View, whoſe Views we may ſhun, and whoſe Fol⯑lies we may deſpiſe; and by ſhew⯑ing us what is done upon the Comick Stage, to ſhew us what ought never [11] to be done upon the Stage of the World.

All the Characters in Sir Foppling Flutter, and eſpecially the principal Characters, are admirably drawn, both to pleaſe and to inſtruct. Firſt, they are drawn to pleaſe, becauſe they are drawn in the Truth of Nature; but to be drawn in the Truth of Nature, they muſt be drawn with thoſe Qualities that are proper to each reſpective Sea⯑ſon of Life.

This is the chief Precept given for the forming the Characters, by the two Great Maſters of the Rules which Na⯑ture herſelf dictated, and which have [...] in every Age, for the Stan⯑dards of writing ſucceſsfully, and of judging ſurely, unleſs it were with Poetaſters, and their fooliſh Admirers. The Words of Horace, in his Art of Poetry, are theſe, v. 153.

[12] And thus my Lord Roſcommon has tranſlated it:

And now ſee the Character that Ho⯑race gives of a Perſon who is in the Bloom of his Years.

And thus the 'foreſaid Noble Poet tranſlates it:

Now, Horace, to ſhew the Importance of this Precept, as ſoon as he has done with the Characters of the four Parts of Life, returns to it, repeats it, and enforces it.

‘That a Poet may never be guilty of ſuch an Abſurdity, ſays he, as to give the Character of an Old Man to a Young Man, or of a Boy to a Middle Ag'd Man, let him take Care to adhere to thoſe Qualities, which are neceſſarily or probably annexed to each reſpective Seaſon of Life.’

If a Dramatick Poet does not obſerve this Rule, he miſſes that which gives the Beauty, and the Decorum, which alone can make his Characters pleaſe.

As Horace is but an Epitomizer of Ariſtotle, in giving Rules for the Characters; [14] that Philoſopher gives us more at large the Character of a Perſon in his early Bloom, in the 14th Chapter of the Second Book of his Rheto⯑rick.

‘Young Men, ſays he, have ſtrong Ap⯑petites, and are ready to undertake any thing, in order to ſatisfy them; and of all thoſe Appetites which have a Relation to the Body, they are moſt powerfully ſway'd by Venereal ones, in which they are very changeable, and are quickly cloy'd. For their Deſires are rather acute than laſting; like the Hunger and Thirſt of the Sick. They are prone to Anger, and eaſily provok'd; vehement in their Anger, and ready to obey the Dictates of it. For by Reaſon of the Concern which they have for their Honour, they cannot bear the being undervalu'd, but reſent an Affront heinouſly. And as they are deſi⯑rous of Honour, they are more ambitious of Victory: For Youth is deſirous of ex⯑celling, and Victory is a Sort of Excel⯑lency.’ Thus far Ariſtotle.

And here it may not be amiſs to ſhew, that this Rule is founded in Reaſon and in Nature: In order to which, let us ſee what Dacier remarks upon that Verſe of Horace, which we cited above.

Behold, ſays he, a very fine, and very ſignificant Verſe; which tells us, if we render it Word for Word, ‘That we ought to give to moveable Natures and Years their proper Beauty. By moveable Natures, (ſays Dacier) Horace means Age, which ſtill runs on like a River, and which, as it runs, gives different Inclina⯑tions to Men; and thoſe different Inclina⯑tions make what he calls Decor, the Beau⯑ty proper to the Age. For every Part of Man's Life has its proper Beauties, like every Seaſon of the Year. He that gives to Manly Age the Beauties of Youth, or to Youth the Beauties of Manly Age, does like a Painter, who ſhould paint the Au⯑tumn with the Ornaments of Summer, or the Summer with the Ornaments of Au⯑tumn.’

A Comick Poet, who gives to a Young Man the Qualities that belong to a Mid⯑dle Ag'd Man, or to an Old Man, can anſwer neither of the Ends of his Art. He cannot pleaſe, becauſe he writes out of Nature, of which all Poetry is an Imitation, and without which, no Poem can poſſibly pleaſe. And as he cannot [16] pleaſe, he cannot inſtruct; becauſe, by ſhewing ſuch a young Man as is not to be ſeen in the World, he ſhews a Mon⯑ſter, and not a Man, ſets before us a particular Character, inſtead of an alle⯑gorical and univerſal one, as all his Characters, and eſpecially his principal Characters, ought to be; and therefore can give no general Inſtruction, having no Moral, no Fable, and therefore no Comedy.

Now if any one is pleaſed to com⯑pare the Character of Dorimont, to which the Knight has taken ſo much abſurd Exception with the two foremen⯑tioned Deſcriptions, he will find in his Character all the chief diſtinguiſhing Strokes of them. For ſuch is the Force of Nature, and ſo admirable a Talent had ſhe given Sir George for Comedy, that, tho' to my certain Knowledge he un⯑derſtood neither Greek nor Latin, yet one would ſwear, that in drawing his Do⯑rimant, he copy'd the foreſaid Draughts, and eſpecially that of Ariſtotle. Do⯑rimont is a young Courtier, haughty, vain, and prone to Anger, amorous, falſe, and inconſtant. He debauches Loveit, and betrays her; loves Belinda, and as ſoon as he enjoys her is falſe to her.

[17] But 2dly, The Characters in Sir Fop⯑ling are admirably contriv'd to pleaſe, and more particularly the principal ones, becauſe we find in thoſe Cha⯑racters, a true Reſemblance of the Per⯑ſons both in Court and Town, who liv'd at the Time when that Comedy was writ: For Rapin tells us with a great deal of Judgment, ‘That Comedy is as it ought to be, when an Audience is apt to imagine, that inſtead of being in the Pit and Boxes, they are in ſome Aſſembly of the Neighbourhood, or in ſome Family Meeting, and that we ſee nothing done in it, but what is done in the World. For it is, ſays he, not worth one Farthing, if we do not diſcover our ſelves in it, and do not find in it both our own Manners, and thoſe of the Perſons with whom we live and converſe.’

The Reaſon of this Rule is manifeſt: For as 'tis the Buſineſs of a Comick Poet to cure his Spectators of Vice and Folly, by the Apprehenſion of being laugh'd at; 'tis plain that his Buſineſs muſt be with the reigning Follies and Vices. The violent Paſſions, which are the Subjects of Tragedy, are the ſame in every Age, and appear with the ſame Face; but thoſe Vices and Follies, which [18] are the Subjects of Comedy, are ſeen to vary continually: Some of thoſe that belonged to our Anceſtors, have no Relation to us; and can no more come under the Cogniſance of our preſent Comick Poets, than the Sweating and Sneezing Sickneſs can come under the Practice of our contemporary Phyſicians. What Vices and Follies may infect thoſe who are to come after us, we know not; 'tis the preſent, the reigning Vices, and Follies, that muſt be the Subjects of our preſent Comedy: The Comick Po⯑et therefore muſt take Characters from ſuch Perſons as are his Contemporaries, and are infected with the foreſaid Fol⯑lies and Vices.

Agreeable to this, is the Advice which Boileau, in his Art of Poetry, gives to the Comick Poets:

Now I remember very well, that upon the firſt acting this Comedy, it [19] was generally believed to be an agree⯑able Repreſentation of the Perſons of Condition of both Sexes, both in Court and Town; and that all the World was charm'd with Dorimont; and that it was unanimouſly agreed, that he had in him ſeveral of the Qualities of Wil⯑mot Earl of Rocheſter, as, his Wit, his Spirit, his amorous Temper, the Charms that he had for the fair Sex, his Falſ⯑hood, and his Inconſtancy; the agree⯑able Manner of his chiding his Servants, which the late Biſhop of Saliſbury takes Notice of in his Life; and laſtly, his repeating, on every Occaſion, the Ver⯑ſes of Waller, for whom that noble Lord had a very particular Eſteem; witneſs his lmitation of the Tenth Sa⯑tire of the Firſt Book of Horace:

Now, as ſeveral of the Qualities in Dorimont's Character were taken from that Earl of Rocheſter, ſo they who were acquainted with the late Sir Fleet⯑wood Shepherd, know very well, that not a little of that Gentleman's Cha⯑racter is to be found in Medley.

[20] But the Characters in this Comedy are very well form'd to inſtruct as well as to pleaſe, eſpecially thoſe of Dorimont and of Loveit; and they inſtruct by the ſame Qualities to which the Knight has taken ſo much whimſical Exception; as Dori⯑mont inſtructs by his Inſulting, and his Perfidiouſneſs, and Loveit by the Vio⯑lence of her Reſentment and her An⯑guiſh. For Loveit has Yough, Beauty, Quality, Wit, and Spirit. And it was depending upon theſe, that ſhe repos'd ſo dangerous a Truſt in Dorimont, which is a juſt Caution to the Fair Sex, never to be ſo conceited of the Power of their Charms, or their other extraor⯑dinaryQualities,as to believe they can en⯑gage a Man to be true to them, to whom they grant the beſt Favour, without the only ſure Engagement, without which they can never be certain, that they ſhall not be hated and deſpis'd by that very Perſon whom they have done every Thing to oblige.

To conclude with one General Ob⯑ſervation, That Comedy may be qua⯑lify'd in a powerful Manner both to inſtruct and to pleaſe, the very Conſti⯑tution of its Subject ought always to be Ridiculous. Comedy, ſays Rapin, is an Image of common Life, and its [21] End is to expoſe upon the Stage the De⯑fects of particular Perſons, in order to cure the Defects of the Publick, and to correct and amend the People, by the Fear of being laugh'd at. That therefore, ſays he, which is moſt eſſen⯑tial to Comedy, is certainly the Ri⯑dicule.

Every Poem is qualify'd to inſtruct, and to pleaſe moſt powerfully by that very Quality which makes the Fort and the Characteriſtick of it, and which di⯑ſtinguiſhes it from all other Kinds of Poems. As Tragedy is qualify'd to in⯑ſtruct and to pleaſe, by Terror and Compaſſion, which two Paſſions ought always to be predominant in it, and to diſtinguiſh it from all other Poems. E⯑pick Poetry pleaſes and inſtructs chiefly by Admiration, which reigns through⯑out it, and diſtinguiſhes it from Poems of every other Kind. Thus Comedy in⯑ſtructs and pleaſes moſt powerfully by the Ridicule, becauſe that is the Qua⯑lity which diſtinguiſhes it from every other Poem. The Subject therefore of every Comedy ought to be ridiculous by its Conſtitution; the Ridicule ought to be of the very Nature and Eſſence of it. Where there is none of that, there can be no Comedy. It ought to [22] reign both in the Incidents and in the Characters, and eſpecially in the prin⯑cipal Characters, which ought to be ri⯑diculous in themſelves, or ſo contriv'd, as to ſhew and expoſe the Ridicule of others. In all the Maſterpieces of Ben Johnſon, the principal Character has the Ridicule in himſelf, as Moroſe in The Silent Woman, Volpone in The Fox, and Subtle and Face in The Alchimiſt: And the very Ground and Foundation of all theſe Comedies is ridiculous. 'Tis the very ſame Thing in the Maſter-pieces of Moliere. The Mis- Antrope, the Impoſtor, the Avare, and the Femmes Secuanter. Nay, the Reader will find, that in moſt of his other Pieces, the principal Characters are ridiculous; as, L'Etoardy, Les precieuſes Ridicules, Le Cocu Imaginaire, Le Faſcheux, and Monſieur de pouſceaugnac, Le Bour⯑geois Gentilhomme, L'Ecole de Maris, L'Ecole des Femmes, L'Amour Medicis, Le Medicin Malgré luy, La Mariage Forcé, George Dandin, Les Fourberies de Scapin, Le Malade Imaginaire. The Reader will not only find, upon Re⯑flection, that in all theſe Pieces the principal Characters are ridiculous, but that in moſt of them there is the Ridi⯑cule of Comedy in the very Titles.

[23] 'Tis by the Ridicule that there is in the Character of Sir Fopling, which is one of the principal ones of this Co⯑medy, and from which it takes its Name, that he is ſo very well qualify'd to pleaſe and to inſtruct. What true Eng⯑gliſhman is there, but muſt be pleas'd to ſee this ridiculous Knight made the Jeſt and the Scorn of all the other Cha⯑racters, for ſhewing, by his fooliſh aping foreign Cuſtoms and Manners, that he prefers another Country to his own? And of what important Inſtruction muſt it be to all our Youth who travel, to ſhew them, that if they ſo far forget the Love of their Country, as to de⯑clare by their eſpouſing foreign Cu⯑ſtoms and Manners, that they prefer France or Italy to Great Britain, at their Return, they muſt juſtly expect to be the Jeſt and the Scorn of their own Countrymen.

Thus, I hope, I have convinc'd the Reader, that this Comical Knight, Sir Fopling, has been juſtly form'd by the Knight his Father, to inſtruct and pleaſe, whatever may be the Opinion to the contrary of the Knight his Brother.

Whenever The Fine Gentleman of the latter comes upon the Stage, I ſhall be [24] glad to ſee that it has all the ſhining Qua⯑lities which recommend Sir Fopling, that his Characters are always drawn in Na⯑ture, and that he never gives to a young Man the Qualities of a Middle-aged Man, or an old one; that they are the juſt Images of our Contemporaries, and of what we every Day ſee in the World; that inſtead of ſetting us Patterns for our Imitation, which is not the proper Buſineſs of Comedy, he makes thoſe Fol⯑lies and Vices ridiculous, which we ought to ſhun and deſpiſe; that the Sub⯑ject of his Comedy is comical by its Con⯑ſtitution; and that the Ridicule is par⯑ticularly in the Grand Incidents, and in the principal Characters. For a true Comick Poet is a Philoſopher, who, like old Democritus, always inſtructs us laughing.