Having already in part answered this objection, as I wish not to impose my opinions as authorities, the rest of my reply I will reserve, till my reasoning shall coincide with the conclusions of the reader. A few observations, however, may not be improper; especially as they will be supported by examples from arts, of which mankind judge less vaguely than of the Belles Lettres.
In observing that nature opens an inexhaustible store for the votaries of Taste, I own that genius, by its warmth and brilliancy, and sensibility, by her irresistible energy, can alone enable an author to infuse his own feelings into the breasts of others. That no degree of knowledge will compensate the want of feeling, I have also allowed. The man to whom nature has denied genius, she has also forbidden to cultivate elegant learning with success. To the man to whom she has denied feeling, she has no less denied the power of judging of the feelings of others. But ought we thence to conclude that genius and sensibility authorize contempt for the aid of experience? What, indeed, is any science and theory, except the result of our own experience, assisted by that of others. Never losing sight of life and manners, true genius studies mankind, nature, the world, and works of great merit, in the same manner as an artist contemplates animate and inanimate creation, and the works of those masters who have most successfully imitated both. Without that imagination, that happy enthusiasm, which stamps on works of fancy a lasting character, the painter and statuary would never acquire fame: yet, how unsuccessful would be their efforts, without an unremitting diligence to acquire
