even beauty, though its connection with them is the paradoxical one of drawing attention to their opposities. It is a truism that many things are best understood and appreciated by a portrayal of contrasts. In this case it is a perception of the congruous that is particularly concerned, and it is implied in the satirist's keen sense of the incongruous.
The satirist has not only these normal obligations, but some peculiar dangers. He is in as perilous a position as Sir Guyon in his voyage to the realm of Acrasia: threatened by the didacticism that besets the critic, the vulgarity and rudeness that prey upon the jester, the prejudice and injustice that warp the opponent, the smugness that undermines the reformer. Moreover, he has his hampering limitations. He is forever confined to the middle plane of life, shut out alike from its sublime heights and tragic depths.
Added to this restriction in range is another in quantity. The nature of satire makes it better adapted for the trimming than the whole cloth. Its rôle in the dramatis personæ of literature is restricted to the minor parts, but this subordination in place does not mean a negligible rank. The untrimmed garment, the all-star cast, these are not desirable even when possible. For the accessory there is also an ideal whose attainment is quite as important as though it pertained to the main substance.
- [Footnote:
"Deride our weak forefathers' musty rule,
Who therefore smil'd, because they saw a fool;
Sublimer logic now adorns our isle,
We therefore see a fool, because we smile."
He concludes that wit is safe only when rationalized:
"Then mirth may urge, when reason can explore,
This point the way, that waft us to the shore."
(Carlyle expresses a similar opinion in his essay on Voltaire.)]
