as

a sensible object. If there is no impropriety in saying such a man is true as steel, firm as a rock, inflexible an oak, unsteady as the ocean, or in describing a disposition cold as ice, or fickle as the wind; and these expressions are justified by practice; we shall hazard an assertion, that the comparison of a chaste woman to an icicle is proper and picturesque, as it obtains only in the circumstances of cold and purity; but that the addition of its being curdled from the purest snow and hanging on the temple of Diana, the patroness of virginity, heightens the whole into a most beautiful simile."*

“ There is,” says Lord Kames, “evidently no resemblance between an icicle and a woman, chaste or unchaste : but chastity is cold in a metaphorical sense ; and this verbal resemblance, in the hurry and glow of composing, has been thought a sufficient foundation for the simile. Such phantom similes are mere witticisms, which ought to have no quarter, except where purposely introduced to provoke laughter."+

• Goldsmith's Essays and Criticisms, vol. ii. p. 216. Lond. 1798, 3 vols. 12mo.

+ Kames's Elements of Criticism, vol. ii. p. 218, 5th edit. Edinb. 1774, 2 vols. 8vo.

CHAP. XVI.

OF METAPHOR.

One of the most pleasing exercises of the imagination, is that in which it is employed in comparing distinct ideas, and discovering their various resemblances. There is no simple perception of the mind that is not capable of an infinite number of considerations in reference to other objects; and it is in the novelty and variety of those unexpected connexions, that the richness of a writer's genius is chiefly displayed. A vigorous and lively fancy does not tamely confine itself to the idea which lies before it, but looks beyond the immediate object of its contemplation, and observes how it stands in conformity with numberless others. It is the prerogative of the human mind thus to bring its images together, and compare the several circumstances of similitude which attend them. By these means eloquence exercises a kind of magic power ; it can raise innumerable beauties from the most barren subjects, and impart the grace of novelty to the most common. The imagination is thus kept awake by the most agreeable emotion, and entertained with a thousand different views both of art and nature, which still terminate at the principal objeet. For this reason, the metaphor is generally preferred to the simile, as a more pleasing mode of illustration. In the former, the action of the mind is less languid, as it is employed at the very first instant in comparing the semblance with the object which it re

a

presents; whereas in the latter, its operations are more slow, as it must first contemplate the principal object, and afterwards the corresponding image.

A metaphor differs from a simile in form only, not in substance, comparison being the foundation of both. In a simile, the two subjects are kept distinct in the expression, as well as in the thought; in a metaphor, they are kept distinct in the thought, but not in the expression. A hero resembles a lion ; and upon that resemblance many similes have been founded by Homer and other poets. But let us invoke the aid of the imagination, and figure the hero to be a lion, instead of only resembling one; by that variation the simile is converted into a metaphor, which is supported by describing all the qualities of the lion that resemble those of the hero.* The poet, by figuring his hero to be a

* lion, proceeds to describe the lion in appearance, but in reality he is all the while describing the hero ; and his description becomes peculiarly beautiful, by expressing the virtues and qualities of the hero in terms which properly belong not to him, but to the lion. When I

say of some great minister, “ that he upholds the state like a pillar which supports the weight of a whole edifice," I evidently frame a comparison ; but when I say of the same minister, “ that he is a pillar of the state,” this is not a comparison but a metaphor. The comparison between the minister and a pillar is instituted in the mind, but without the aid of words which denote comparison, The comparison is only insinuated, not expressed ; the one object is supposed to be so like the other, that,

а

without formally drawing the comparison, the name of the one may be substituted for that of the other.

A metaphor always implies comparison, and is, in that respect, a figure of thought; yet, as the words in which it is conveyed, are not taken literally, but changed from their proper to a figurative sense, the metaphor is commonly ranked among tropes, or figures of words. But provided the nature of it be well understood, it is of little importance whether we denominate it a trope or a figure.

“ The description of natural objects,” says the ingenious and elegant Mr. Roscoe, “awakes in the poet's mind corresponding emotion ; as his heart warms, his fancy expands, and he labours to convey a more distinct or a more elevated idea of the impressions of his own imagination. Hence the origin of figures, or figurative language ; in the use of which he aims at describing his principal subject, by the qualities of some other object more generally known, or more striking in its nature. These figures of poetry have furnished the philologists of ancient and modern times with a great variety of minute distinctions, but many of them consist rather in form than in substance; comparison, express or implied, will be found to be the essence of them all."*

Although the word metaphor has been confined to the expression of resemblance between two objects, yet it is sometimes used in a looser and more extended sense : it denotes the application of a term in any figurative signification, whether the figure be founded on resemblance, or on some other relation which two objects bear to each other. When grey hairs are substituted for old age, some writers would call this a metaphor, though in propriety of language it is only what rhetoricians term a metonomy; that is, the effect for the cause. Grey hairs are the effect of old

age,

but they do not bear any resemblance to old age. :

Every writer ought to become a painter as far as the subject which he treats will permit him. Our thoughts are susceptible of different colourings: taken separately, each has a colour proper to itself; when combined, they lend each other mutual light and shade ; and the art of the writer consists in delicately tracing their reflected tints.* Of all the figures of speech, none approaches so near to painting as metaphor : 'its peculiar effect is to add light and strength to description ; to render intellectual ideas visible to the eye, by giving them colour, and substance, and sensible qualities. To produce this effect however, a very delicate hand is required; for, by the smallest degree of inaccuracy, we are in danger of introducing confusion, instead of promoting perspicuity. There is nothing in which a fine writer is so much distinguished from one of an ordinary class, as in the conduct and application of this figure. He is at liberty to range through the whole compass of creation, and collect his images from every object which surrounds him : but although he may thus be amply furnished with materials, great judgment is required in selecting them ; for, to render a metaphor perfect, it must be not only apposite, but pleasing, it must entertain, as well as enlighten.

а