Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

has, for purposes of self-preservation, made all these various orders of existence sensible of this language. She has impressed certain infallible marks on all her living works, that cannot be misunderstood either by man or beast. They are of no equivocal import, or dubious significancy; they are plain, precise, positive, and infallible. It results, from the indispensible nature of the case, that there should be such external marks, or indications, and there would be a shocking chasm in the works of nature if there was not.

I will illustrate these remarks by a few familiar instances: A dog expresses his joy by the wagging of his tail; and what immediate confidence is created when we see this animal so employed! How different would this testimonial of temper be, were we in the presence of a lion! This is a signal to avoid him at once-it is evidence that he designs to do us injury. Here nature, in these two animals, designates, by the same sign, complacency and resentment. The horse and the cat, although so totally at variance in their formation, habits, pleasures, and antipathies, express their resentment by the same external mark, which is the contraction of their ears. How instantly is not only man, but all other animals, put upon their guard by this language of nature! The eye is a much more extensive medium of communication; it is the mirror of the heart, and faithfully reflects every latent passion. Amongst brutes, what man is se stupid as not to observe the difference between the half-shut orb of content and repose, from the wide glare of alarm and resentment! Without multiplying more instances, thus do these animals repel or attract us by the silent language impressed by the hand of nature on all her works, the existence of which Dr. Johnson denies.

Not only do all animals inherit this language of gesture in common, but they have, in superaddition to this, what I may denominate a local and particular language, understood amongst their various tribes, and intelligible to none else. Thus the purposes of procreation, the sustentation of their offspring, and the mode in which they abandon them to the world, to provide for their own subsistence, when they arrive to what we denominate years of discretion, are carried on by peculiar and infallible

signs and marks; in other words, gestures, which these humbler animals perfectly understand, although they are, for wise and benevolent purposes, incommunicable to other tribes. The nearer those tribes approach to each other in their conformation and habits, the more are they capable of comprehending this language amongst a distinct species; but still, they never can arrive at a complete comprehension, and they would, probably, change their natures if they did.

I think I am warranted by facts in this principle: that there is a universal and a particular language of gesture among all created animals: that if there was not such a medium of communication amongst all tribes, and all different tribes, all living nature, instead of exhibiting that beautiful, distinct, and harmonious variety which it now does, would be thrown into confusion and frightful disorder.

Man, in common with all other animals, has his local language of gesture understood by all animals of his species, civilized or savage, however modified by habit, or broken up into distinct communitics. The extension of the arms, and open hands, significs welcome, persuasion, intreaty; the hand thrown back, and the head retorted, denote aversion and rejection; the bended knce is the attitude of imploring mercy or forgiveness; and the scowling forehead, defiance. Where was ever the grasp of the hand mistaken for resentment-or when did a kiss import revenge and disdain! It is unnecessary to descend to the enumeration of other component parts of this language; such as the side, long look of distrust, the full gaze of confidence; the smile of pleasure, or of disdain; and the pathetic eloquence of tears to express either our joys or our sorrows. This language is found in the great lexicography of nature; it is impressed on every human heart; and it requires no comment to make it intelligible. But as man is a reasonable being, capable of improving his nature, having appetites and passions superior to those of the brute; this language, although universal, is not copious enough to answer the high purposes of his destiny. He has, therefore, invented an artificial language. The difficulty of understanding this is evident throughout the whole process of our existence, from the cradle to the grave. How slowly does the child learn

to comprehend and to utter this mechanical language; and how fully competent is he to understand the language of gesture.

Dr. Johnson's laborious dictionary is itself a comment on the justice of these remarks. So difficult is it to acquire a proper comprehension and expression of this artificial language, that it becomes a distinct study and profession of itself to obtain it, and orators are employed to state our causes of complaint against our fellow men, and to sue at the proper tribunal for redress. They are employed, because their clients have not the command of the language that they have, to urge their claims in courts of justice. I need not remark how celebrated that man becomes who acquires such a mastery; what treatises have been written; how much time has been devoted to its attainment; and how often, without success, after the most painful and persevering effort. I need not remark, that the names of Demosthenes, and Cicero, now so idolized, are historical monuments of the difficulty of acquiring a proper command of this artificial language. I need not remark, that the complaints now so common, of an author's style, are but saying, in other words, that it is next to impossible to arrive at perfection in this arduous study.

What, permit me to ask, was the opinion of Demosthenes on this point, who had laboured with so much emphasis for the mastery of this artificial language? When he was asked what were the three essentials of an orator, he replied, action, action, action. In plainer phraseology, he told us that gesture, the language which the Deity had made intelligible to every heart, was the great and the only essential in oratory. With all his command of his own noble and native language, he tells us that this is to perform only a secondary and subsidiary part. He tells us that the language of words is only valuable to an orator, as it serves to give more nicety of detail to the stronger, more impressive, more universal, though, unfortunately, not so copious language of gesture. This is strictly and philosophically correct. Let this principle be tried by the test of experiment.

I will suppose that an orator, with a countenance lightened up by smiles, tells a most moving tale of distress: his veracity is suspected; and why? He may pronounce this oration with the most moving accents, and the words may be such as Demosthe

VOL. II.

4. M

nes himself would have uttered. His veracity, is suspected; because the language of gesture, or nature, contradicts the testimony of his tongue. Demosthenes and Dr. Johnson differ essentially on this point. The doctor maintains that the great language of nature is to be superceded by the use of his ponderous dictionary.

I know it may be thought that I have put an invidious interpretation on the doctor's words. Unless they mean this: that tears, smiles, and frowns, are merely to be classed in the catalogue of nature's redundancies, and do not import pleasure, distress, and indignation, I confess I am utterly at a loss to discover any meaning whatever. To interdict them from the use of an orator, is distinctly to say, that they are incapable of moving his audience, for if they do have this effect, it forms an unquestionable principle of his art to manage them adroitly.

In opposition to the doctor's hypothesis, I will venture to contend, that it has been from the neglect of this language that so few orators are capable of affecting us deeply. Who has not heard of Garrick; and who that has heard of him will forget the countenance of Garrick? It was his plastic physiognomy which gave an utterance and, let me add, an eloquence to his feelings beyond the power of words to convey. He made it his peculiar study to watch every gesture of his fellow men, as they were portrayed on the countenance, by the predominant passion; and this language he was able to imitate. This was Mrs. Siddons's forte also. She studied and she copied the language of gesture; and the effect was electrical on the hearts of her audience.

I am perfectly convinced that our orators pay, by far, too much atttention to mere verbal language, and overlook these obvious properties. It appears to me very plain, that if an orator can seize these subtle properties of nature, denominated gesture, and can felicitously apply them, the possession of this art will be an infallible guide where to lay the emphasis, where to be impassioned, where to vary his tones, and, in brief, to comprehend all the subsidiary parts of eloquence. I think it impossible too, that the study of gesture can operate otherwise than this, unless we are disposed to contend for this paradox, that nature is incapable of dictating the proper tone and emphasis to express her own passions.

It is no wonder that the science of gesture has been so often anderrated, notwithstanding when we observe how this powerful engine has been managed in the hands of an orator. It is conceived to be a sort of ponderous accompaniment to a feeble, cold, monotonous pronunciation; and from legitimate gesture it thus degenerates into the most despicable grimace. The countenance is formed by the studied phraseology of the lips, and appears as an idle and insignificant auxiliary, where it should take the foremost stand. Many of us have seen what this silent language is capable of doing in the character of Cooke. His frowning visage was the precursor to the gathering storm which was about to thunder from his lips, and every word gave to that gloomy physiognomy a dreadful expression. Whatever was left untold by the features, the tongue explained; it filled up all the vacancies of passion, and in this horrid harmony consisted the true celebrity of Cooke. Now will it be conceived, that when this actor was master of a cast of features so suitable to the character, that he would not, of course, give to the words their proper emphasis? This results from that indissoluble connexion established by nature herself. On the other hand, it is by quadrating gestures and physiognomy to our cold and measured habits of declamation, instead of giving speech its emphasis, from them, that both the one and the other are deprived of the power of affecting us. Dr. Johnson seemed to imagine, that the venerable old grand-dame, Nature, did not understand her own language, and was bound, out of reverence to him, to study his dictionary.

To contradict the opinion of Dr. Johnson, and to maintain the preeminence of gesture to speech, is not, therefore, so paradoxical as it might appear to be on a superficial view of the subject. It is, after all, only to maintain that the simple and universal language of Nature is superior to the laboured refinements of Art; to a language always unstable, subject to all the whims and caprices of Fancy, and rarely understood; it is but to maintain that just ascendancy which the hand of Nature has preserved in all her works, and which it is the prerogative of Art to imitate only. If we go further than this, we shall pass the bounds which Demosthenes himself assigned to eloquence, and we shall

« ZurückWeiter »