|
[page 249, continued:]
|
|
|
JOEL T. HEADLEY.*
The Reverend
Mr. Headley —
(why will
he not put his full title in his title-pages?) has in his "Sacred
Mountains"
been reversing the facts of the old fable about the mountains that
brought
forth the mouse — parturiunt montes nascitur ridiculus mus —
for
in this instance it appears to be the mouse — the little ridiculus
mus — that has been bringing forth the "Mountains," and a great
litter of
them,
too. The epithet, funny, however, is perhaps the only one which can be
considered as thoroughly applicable to the book. We say that a book is
a "funny" book, and nothing else, when it spreads over two hundred
pages
an amount of matter which could be conveniently presented in twenty of
a magazine: that a book is a "funny" book — "only this and nothing
more"
— when it is written in that kind of phraseology, in which John Philpot
Curran, when drunk, would have made a speech at a public dinner: and,
moreover,
we do say, emphatically, that a book is a "funny" book, and nothing but
a funny book, whenever it happens to be penned by Mr. Headley.
We should like to give some account
of "The Sacred
Mountains," if the thing were only possible — but we cannot conceive
that
it is. Mr. Headley belongs to that numerous class of authors, who must
be read to be understood, and who, for that reason, very seldom are as
thoroughly comprehended as they should be. Let us endeavor, however, to
give some general idea of the work. "The design," says the author in
his
preface, "is to render more familiar and life-like some of the scenes
of
the Bible." Here, in the very first sentence of his preface, we suspect
the Reverend Mr. [page 250:] Headley of fibbing:
for
his design, as it appears to ordinary apprehension, is merely that of
making
a little money by selling a little book.
The mountains described are Ararat,
Moriah, Sinai,
Hor, Pisgah, Horeb, Carmel, Lebanon, Zion, Tabor, Olivet, and Calvary.
Taking up these, one by one, the author proceeds in his own very
peculiar
way to elocutionize about them: we really do not know how else
to
express what it is that Mr. Headley does with these eminences. Perhaps
if we were to say that he stood up before the reader and "made a
speech"
about them, one after the other, we should come still nearer the truth.
By way of carrying out his design, as announced in the preface, that of
rendering "more familiar and life-like some of the scenes" and
so-forth,
he tells not only how each mountain is, and was, but how it might have
been and ought to be in his own opinion. To hear him talk, anybody
would
suppose that he had been at the laying of the corner-stone of Solomon's
Temple — to say nothing of being born and brought up in the ark with
Noah,
and hail-fellow-well-met with every one of the beasts that went into
it.
If any person really desires to know how and why it was that the deluge
took place — but especially how — if any person wishes to get
minute
and accurate information on the topic — let him read "The Sacred
Mountains"
— let him only listen to the Reverend Mr. Headley. He explains to us
precisely
how it all took place — what Noah said, and thought, while the ark was
building, and what the people, who saw him building the ark, said and
thought
about his undertaking such a work; and how the beasts, birds, and
fishes
looked as they came in arm in arm; and what the dove did, and what the
raven did not — in short, all the rest of it: nothing could be more
beautifully
posted up. What can Mr. Headley mean, at page 17, by the remark
that "there is no one who does not lament that there is not a fuller
antediluvian
history?" We are quite sure that nothing that ever happened before the
flood, has been omitted in the scrupulous researches of the author of
"The
Sacred Mountains."
He might, perhaps, wrap up the fruits
of these researches
in rather better English than that which he employs:
Yet still the
water rose around
them till all through the valleys nothing but little black islands of
human
beings were seen on the surface . . . . . . The [page
251:]
more fixed the irrevocable decree, the heavier he leaned on the
Omnipotent arm . . . . . . And lo! a solitary cloud comes drifting
along
the morning sky and catches against the top of the mountain . .
. . . . At length emboldened by their own numbers they assembled
tumultuously together . . . . . . Aaron never appears so
perfect
a character as Moses . . . . . . As he advanced from rock to rock the
sobbing
of the multitude that followed after, tore his heart-strings .
.
. . . . Friends were following after whose sick Christ had
healed
. . . . . . The steady mountain threatened to lift from its
base
and be carried away . . . . . . Sometimes God's hatred of sin,
sometimes
his care for his children, sometimes the discipline of his church, were
the motives . . . . . . Surely it was his mighty hand that laid
on that trembling tottering mountain," &c. &c. &c.
These things are not exactly as we
could wish them,
perhaps: — but that a gentleman should know so much about Noah's ark
and
know anything about any thing else, is scarcely to be expected. We have
no right to require English grammar and accurate information about
Moses
and Aaron at the hands of one and the same author. For our parts, now
we
come to think of it, if we only understood as much about Mount Sinai
and
other matters as Mr. Headley does, we should make a point of always
writing
bad English upon principle, whether we knew better or not. It may well
be made a question moreover, how far a man of genius is justified in
discussing
topics so serious as those handled by Mr. Headley, in any ordinary kind
of style. One should not talk about Scriptural subjects as one
would
talk about the rise and fall of stocks or the proceedings of Congress.
Mr. Headley has seemed to feel this and has therefore elevated his
manner
— a little. For example:
The fields were
smiling in verdure
before his eyes; the perfumed breezes floated by . . . . . .
The
sun is sailing over the encampment . . . . . . That cloud was
God's
pavilion; the thunder was its sentinels; and the lightning the lances'
points as they moved round the sacred trust . . . . . . And how could
he
part with his children whom he had borne on his brave heart for
more than forty years? . . . . . . Thus everything conspired to render
Zion the spell-word of the nation and on its summit the heart of
Israel
seemed to lie and throb . . . . . . The sun died in the heavens; an
earthquake thundered on to complete the dismay, &c. &c.
Here no one can fail to perceive the
beauty (in an
antediluvian or at least in a Pickwickian sense) of these expressions
in
general, about the floating of the breeze, the sailing of the sun, the
thundering of the earthquake, and the throbbing of the heart as it lay
on the top of the mountain.
The true artist, however, always
rises as he proceeds,
and in his last page or so brings all his elocution to a climax. Only [page
252:] hear Mr. Headley's finale. He has been
describing
the crucifixion and now soars into the sublime:
How heaven regarded
this disaster,
and the Universe felt at the sight, I cannot tell. I know not but tears
fell like rain-drops from angelic eyes when they saw Christ spit upon
and
struck. I know not but there was silence on high for more than
"half
an hour" when the scene of the crucifixion was transpiring, — [a scene,
as well as an event always "transpires" with Mr. Headley] — a silence
unbroken
save by the solitary sound of some harp-string on which unconsciously
fell
the agitated, trembling fingers of a seraph. I know not but all the
radiant
ranks on high, and even Gabriel himself, turned with the deepest
solicitude
to the Father's face, to see if he was calm and untroubled amid it all.
I know not but his composed brow and serene majesty were all that
restrained
Heaven from one universal shriek of horror when they heard groans on
Calvary
— dying groans. I know not but they thought God had given his
glory
to another, but one thing I do know, [Ah, there is
really
one thing Mr. Headley knows!] — that when they saw through the vast
design,
comprehended the stupendous scene, the hills of God shook to a shout
that
never before rung over their bright tops, and the crystal sea trembled
to a song that had never before stirred its bright depths, and the
"Glory
to God in the Highest," was a sevenfold chorus of hallelujahs and
harping
symphonies.
Here we have direct evidence of Mr.
Headley's accuracy
not less than of his eloquence. "I know not but that" one is as vast as
the other. The one thing that he does know he knows to perfection: he
knows
not only what the chorus was (it was one of "hallelujahs and harping
symphonies")
but also how much of it there was — it was a "sevenfold chorus." Mr.
Headley
is a mathematical man. Moreover he is a modest man; for he confesses
(no
doubt with tears in his eyes) that really there is one thing he does
not
know. "How Heaven regarded this disaster, and the Universe felt at the
sight, I cannot tell." Only think of that! I cannot! — I,
Headley,
really cannot tell how the Universe "felt" once upon a time! This is
downright
bashfulness on the part of Mr. Headley. He could tell if he
would
only try. Why did he not inquire? Had he demanded of the Universe how
it
felt, can any one doubt that the answer would have been — "Pretty well,
I thank you, my dear Headley; how do you feel yourself?"
"Quack" is a word that sounds well
only in the mouth
of a duck; and upon our honor we feel a scruple in using it:
nevertheless
the truth should be told; and the simple fact is, that the author of
the
"Sacred Mountains" is the Autocrat of all the Quacks. In saying this,
we
beg not to be misunderstood. We mean no disparagement to Mr. Headley.
We
admire that gentleman as much as any individual ever did except that
gentleman
himself. He looks remarkably well at all points — although perhaps
best,
EXAS — at a distance — as the lying Pindar says he saw Archilochus, who
died ages before the vagabond was born: — the reader will excuse the
digression;
but talking of one great man is very apt to put us in mind of another.
We were saying — were we not? — that Mr. Headley is by no means to be
sneered
at as a quack. This might be justifiable, indeed, were he only a quack
in a small way — a quack doing business by retail. But the wholesale
dealer
is entitled to respect. Besides, the Reverend author of "Napoleon and
his
Marshals" was a quack to some purpose. He knows what he is about. We
like
perfection wherever we see it. We readily forgive a man for being a
fool
if he only be a perfect fool — and this is a particular in
which
we cannot put our hands upon our hearts and say that Mr. Headley is
deficient.
He acts upon the principle that if a thing is worth doing at all it is
worth doing well: — and the thing that he "does" especially well is the
public.
|
|
|
|
|
|