The _Epic Poem_ on which I shall ground my present critique, has for its chief characteristics, brevity and simplicity. The Author,--whose name I lament that I am, in some degree, prevented from consecrating to immortal fame, by not knowing what it is--the Author, I say, has not branched his poem into excressences of episode, or prolixities of digression; it is neither variegated with diversity of unmeaning similitudes, nor glaring with the varnish of unnatural metaphor. The whole is plain and uniform; so much so indeed, that I should hardly be surprised, if some morose readers were to conjecture, that the poet had been thus simple rather from necessity than choice; that he had been restrained not so much by chastity of judgement, as sterility of imagination.

Nay, some there may be perhaps, who will dispute his claim to the title of an _Epic Poet_; and will endeavour to degrade him even to the rank of a _ballad-monger_. But I, as his Commentator, will contend for the dignity of my Author; and will plainly demonstrate his Poem to be an _Epic Poem_, agreeable to the example of all Poets, and the consent of all Critics heretofore.

Parodies of Ballad Criticism (1711-1787) — Part 20

First, it is universally agreed, that an _Epic Poem_ should have three component parts, _a beginning_, _a middle_, and _an end_;--secondly, it is allowed, that it should have one _grand action_, or _main design_, to the forwarding of which, all the parts of it should directly or indirectly tend; and that this design should be in some measure consonant with, and conducive to, the purposes of _Morality_;--and thirdly, it is indisputably settled, that it should have _a Hero_. I trust that in none of these points the poem before us will be found deficient. There are other inferior properties, which I shall consider in due order.

Parodies of Ballad Criticism (1711-1787) — Part 20

Not to keep my readers longer in suspense, the subject of the poem is "_The Reformation of the Knave of Hearts_." It is not improbable, that some may object to me that a _Knave_ is an unworthy Hero for an Epic Poem; that a Hero ought to be all that is great and good. The objection is frivolous. The greatest work of this kind that the World has ever produced, has "_The Devil_" for its hero; and supported as my author is by so great a precedent, I contend, that his Hero is a very decent Hero; and especially as he has the advantage of _Milton_'s, by reforming at the end, is evidently entitled to a competent share of celebrity.

Parodies of Ballad Criticism (1711-1787) — Part 20