But I do recommend some game as a part of
recreation. As long as I could see to play and sufficient tennis, I enjoyed
immensely the game of real or court skill, a very ancient game, requiring activates
as well as some pride, because for the first time, at any rate in the recent
history of the game, an amateur is champion of the sometimes criticized for
paying too much attention to games. Football is a national game of America as
well as in England but I do not suppose that either you or we think that our soldiers
fought any worse in the war of having been fond of football. I put games definitely
as a desirable part of recreation, and I would say: have one or more games of
which you are fond, but let them have any rate in youth be activity of the
whole body, as well as skill,
Sport shall be mentioned next. I have had a
liking for more than one form of sport, but an actual passion for salmon and
trout fishing. Salmon fishing, as I have enjoyed it, fishing not from a boat
but from one’s feet, either on the bank or wading deep in the stream, is a
glorious and sustained exercise for the whole body, as well as being an
exciting-sport; but many of my friends do not care for it. To them, I say, as
one who was fond of George Meredith’s Novels once said to be man who complained
that he should not read them, ‘why should you?’ if you do not care for fishing,
do not fish. Why should you? But if we are to be one equal term and you are be
one the same happy level as I hav3e been, then find something for yourself
which you like as much as I like fishing.
Football is a national game in:
At the time Jane Austen’s novels
were published – between 1811 and 1818 – English literature was not part of any
academic curriculum. In addition, fiction was under strenuous attack. Certain
religious and political groups felt novels had the power to make so-called
immoral characters so interesting that young readers would identify with them;
these groups also considered novels to be of little practical use. Even
Coleridge, certainly no literary reactionary, spoke for many when the asserted
that “novel-reading occasions the destruction of the mind’s powers.”
These attitudes towards novels help
explain why Austen received little attention from early nineteenth-century
literary cities. (In any case a novelist published anonymously, as Austen was,
would not be likely to receive much critical attention.) The literary response
that was accorded to her, however, was often as incisive as twentieth-century
criticism. In his attack in 1816 on novelistic portrayals “outside of ordinary experience,”
for example. Scott made an insightful remark about the merits of Austen’s
fiction.
Her novels, wrote Scott, “present to
the reader an accurate and exact picture of ordinary everyday people and
places, reminiscent of seventeenth-century Flemish painting.” Scott did not use
the word ‘realism’, but he undoubtedly used a standard of realistic probability
in judging novels. The critic Whately did not use the word ‘realism’, either,
but he expressed agreement with Scott’s evaluation, and went on to suggest the possibilities
for moral instruction in what we have called Austen’s ‘realistic method’ her
characters, wrote Whately, are persuasive agents for moral truth since they are
ordinary persons “so clearly evoked that we feel an interest in their fate as
if it were our own.” Moral instruction, explained Whately, is more likely to be
effective when conveyed through recongnizably human and interesting characters
than when imparted by a sermonizing narrator. Whitely especially praised Austen’s
ability to create character who “mingle goodness and villainy, weakness and
virtue, as in life they are always mingled. “Whitely concluded his remarks by
comparing Austen’s art of characterization to Dickens’, starting his preference
for Austen’s.
Yet, the response of
nineteenth-century literary critics to Austen was not always so laudatory, and
often anticipated the reservations of twentieth-century literary critics. An
example of such a response was Lewes complaint in 1859 that Austen’s range of
subject and characters was too narrow. Praising her verisimilitude, Lewes added
that, nonetheless her focus was too often only upon the unlofty and the
commonplace. (Twentieth-century Marxists, on the other hand, were to complain
about what they saw as her exclusive emphasis on a lofty upper middle class.)
In any case having being rescued by literary critics from neglect and indeed
gradually lionized by them, Austen steadily reached, by the mid-nineteenth
century, the enviable pinnacle of being considered controversial.
How would you describe the synonym
of the word “Verisimilitude”?
