as some have supposed it, a prudent step of the painter not to strive to represent the sorrow of a father on such an occasion, which must be above all representation, should be rather considered as a sacrifice on his part to the forms of beauty, in only depicting that in which beauty as well as dignity could be maintained; but that which he could not, in compliance with the rules of beauty, represent, he left to the imagination to guess.

However, modern artists have enlarged the aforesaid limits in their representations, and extended their efforts at imitation to all visible objects in nature, of which those which are beautiful, form but a small part; and have conceived that as nature itself generally sacrifices beauty to higher purposes, in like manner must the artist allow beauty of form to yield to expression and truth: and never follow beauty farther, but rest satisfied that in realizing the latter, he has made a deformed object of nature, a handsome one of art. But even allowing these ideas to remain undisputed, still the artist must, in some measure, be restricted in representing the expressions of the mind, and never fix upon the highest degree of expression in any human action. The reason for this is as obvious as it is indisputable; for as the artist can imitate nature, which is ever changing, in one of her single moments only, and even that single moment can be represented by the painter only from one point of view; therefore, if both the sculptor and the painter wish their performances to be perceived not only at one time, but to be repeatedly contemplated, and to be reflected upon for a long interval of time, it must

be obvious, that the single moment, and the single point of view of that single moment, in the imitation of the catastrophe, can never be chosen too prolific for the fancy of the observer, and that that image alone ean be considered as such which leaves ample scope for the imagination. The more the beholder sees, the more he must be able to add to the parts of the object represented; the more he fancies, the more must he imagine to find in the work.

But in considering any effect whatever, in all its various degrees, we shall not find one single moment less favourable in effecting the former object, than when the utmost extreme of such an effect in nature is represented; for beyond that is nothing more, and to shew to the eye the uttermost is to clip the wings of the observer's fancy, and to force the imagination to occupy itself with weaker images beneath the representation, as it is impossible for it to overreach the impression produced on the senses by the representation, the perceivable plenitude of which the imagination dislikes. When the sculptor represents Laocoon as sighing, our imagination is able to hear him crying out; had he represented him as crying out, the imagination would not be able to advance a step higher, or to descend lower, without changing the whole into an uninteresting scene. Our fancy would then either hear him but sobbing, or perceive him already dead.

Further, as the single moment of the effect obtains by the representation of the artist an immutable durability, it is certain that the former ought not to express such as cannot be conceived by the mind, except as transitory. All those phenomena, to the nature of

as some have supposed it, a prudent step of the painter not to strive to represent the sorrow of a father on such an occasion, which must be above all reprcsentation, should be rather considered as a sacrifice. on his part to the forms of beauty, in only depicting that in which beauty as well as dignity could be maintained; but that which he could not, in compliance with the rules of beauty, represent, he left to the imagination to guess.

However, modern artists have enlarged the aforesaid limits in their representations, and extended their efforts at imitation to all visible objects in nature, of which those which are beautiful, form but a small part; and have conceived that as nature itself generally sacrifices beauty to higher purposes, in like manner must the artist allow beauty of form to yield to expression and truth: and never follow beauty farther, but rest satisfied that in realizing the latter, he has made a deformed object of nature, a handsome one of art. But even allowing these ideas to remain undisputed, still the artist must, in some measure, be restricted in representing the expressions of the mind, and never fix upon the highest degree of expression in any human action. The reason for this is as obvious as it is indisputable; for as the artist can imitate nature, which is ever changing, in one of her single moments only, and even that single moment can be represented by the painter only from one point of view; therefore, if both the sculptor and the painter wish their performances to be perceived not only at one time, but to be repeatedly contemplated, and to be 'reflected upon for a long interval of time, it must

not in that moment when she actually murders her children, but at some minutes previous to the murder-at a time when motherly love still struggles with jealousy. The artist makes us but anticipate the catastrophe that ensues, and our imagination outstretches every thing which the painter could have exhibited to us relating to that horrible moment. But so far from blaming the painter for representing Medca to us in a moment when the struggle is undecided, we rather wish it would have remained so in the real occurrence, that the combat of the passions had either remained undetermined, or at least had lasted sufficiently long for time to subdue her rage, and at length insure a victory to maternal feelings. As to his Ajax, Timomachus does not represent him when he is raging, but sitting down, exhausted after having performed his mad deeds, and forming the design to kill himself; and this is really the raging Ajax, not because we see him in a rage, but because we perceive that he has raged, because we are forcibly struck with the magnitude of his previous rage, which we conjecture from his being now driven to despair by shame, of which he himself appears to be sensible; in like manner as we perceive the violence of a storm by the wrecks and corpses which are thrown on the shore.

As to Poetry and the extent of its efforts, without at present entering into an examination how far the poet can succeed in describing corporal beauty, this must be considered as indisputable, that the whole of the immense region of perfection is open to his imitation; that the imperceptible covering under which he makes an accomplished object to appear beautiful, is but

which we think it essential that they can only for one moment be what they appear to be, all such phenomena, whether they produce an agreeable or a horrible effect, obtain by the permanency which the artist gives them, such an unnatural appearance, that with each repeated contemplation their impression becomes weaker, and we are at last either disgusted or shocked by the representation. La Metrie, who has been represented by the painter and engraver as a second Democritus, laughs at the first sight; but if we look at him often, the philosopher appears like a fool, and his laughter like a grin. It is the same with the representation of one crying out with pain, &c. The violent pain which forces a man to cry out, either subsides soon, or it destroys the suffering object. Although, therefore, the bravest man may sometimes cry out, yet he does not do so incessantly, and it was owing to the seeming continuity produced by the imitation of art, that the artist was prevented from representing Laocoon as crying out, although it might not in any way have injured the beauty of the form, and it would be the same if it had been allowed to the artist to express a state of suffering without a beautiful form.'

Among the ancient painters, Timomachus seems to have best chosen the moment of the utmost effect in his representations. His raving Ajax, his infanticide Medea, were much admired paintings. He represented them so that the observer had to imagine the utmost, but not to behold it; he chose such moments as we do not necessarily connect with the idea of being of but of transitory duration. He represents the Medea,