ABSTRACT
To return once more to Shakespear, no man ever drew so many characters, or so generally distinguised ’em better from one another, excepting only Johnson: I will instance but in one, to show the copiousness of his Invention; ’tis that of Caliban, or the Monster in the Tempest. He seems there to have created a person which was not in Nature, a boldness which at first sight would appear intolerable: for he makes him a Species of himself, begotten by an Incubus on a Witch; but this as I have elsewhere prov’d, is not wholly beyond the bounds of credibility, at least the vulgar still believe it. We have the separated notions of a spirit, and of a Witch; (and Spirits according to Plato, are vested with a subtil body; according to some of his followers, have different Sexes) therefore as from the distinct apprehensions of a Horse, and of a Man, Imagination has form’d a Centaur, so from those of an Incubus and a Sorceress, Shakespear has produc’d his Monster. Whether or no his Generation can be defended, I leave to Philosophy; but of this I am certain, that the Poet has most judiciously furnish’d him with a person, a Language, and a character, which will suit him, both by Fathers and Mothers side: he has all the discontents, and malice of a Witch, and of a Devil; besides a convenient proportion of the deadly sins; Gluttony, Sloth, and Lust, are manifest; the dejectedness of a slave is likewise given him, and the ignorance of one bred up in a Desart Island. His person is monstrous, as he is the product of unnatural Lust; and his language is as hob goblin as his person: in all things he is distinguish’d from other mortals. The characters of Fletcher are poor & narrow, in comparision with Shakespears; I remember not one which is not borrow’d from him; unless you will except that strange mixture of a man in the King and No King: So that in this part Shakespear is generally worth our Imitation; and to imitate Fletcher is but to Copy after him who was a Copyer.
