Reconciling Johnson's Views on Poetic Justice

Reconciling Johnson's Views on Poetic Justice Joan E. Klingel University of Colorado at Colorado Springs Despite Samuel Johnson's being called "the critic who knew what he wanted," he has been accused of wavering on a number of critial issues, most notably poetic justice.1 We can cite passages, particularly in his Shakespeare edition, where he champions poetic justice; we can also turn to remarks where he seems to say the exact opposite with equal conviction.2 Perplexed by the apparent incongruity of his statements, Johnsonians have concluded that this is simply another example of his arguing both sides of a question.3 But such conclusions "where nothing is concluded" leave us in a quandary: was Johnson taking perverse delight in teasing his ,readers, or was he — poor fellow — thoroughly confused? Undoubtedly neither. Our failure to resolve this quandary lies in our committing a critical sin of omission. That is, as Donald J. Greene and M. H. Abrams reminded us long ago, Johnson's "piecemeal" method of presenting his positions necessitates our "gatherfing] together all that he said on a particular subject and then see[ing]to what extent 1.John Bard McNulty, "The Critic Who Knew What He Wanted," College English, 9 (1947-1948), 299-303. 2.All quotations from Johnson's Shakespeare criticism come from Samuel Johnson, Johnson on Shakespeare, Vols. VII and VIII of The Yale Edition o/ the Worfcs o/ Samuel Johnson, ed. Arthur Sherbo (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968). He also endorses poetic justice in Rambler 4 and in the "Life of Rowe"; see Samuel Johnson, The Rambler, Vol. Ill of The Y*ale Edition ofthe Works ofSamuel Johnson, ed. W.J. Bate and Albrecht B. Strauss (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1969), pp. 22-23; and Samuel Johnson, The Lives of the English Poets, ed. George Birkbeck Hill (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905), II, 69-70. Hedismisses poeticjustice in his "Lives" of Addison, Milton, and Gay; subsequent references to the "Lives" are to the Birkbeck Hill edition, cited in the essay as EP. 3.For example, Robert D. Stock, Samuel Johnson and Neoclassical Dramatic Theory: The Intellectual Context ofthe Preface to Shakespeare (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1973), p. 119, says: "Throughout his life Johnson seems never to have decided finally whether art should copy life realistically, or improve it at the expense of verisimilitude." A similar conclusion is reached by William Edinger, Samuel Johnson and Poetic Style (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977), pp. 171, 185. 196ROCKY MOUNTAIN REVIEW the contradictions can be reconciled."4 No one has done this with regard to poetic justice. And this is especially surprising because some of the preliminary "legwork" has been done for us. Joseph Epes Brown has collected several of Johnson's remarks about poetic justice for his compilation of The Critical Opinions ofSamuel Johnson.5 Moreover, W. J. Bate, in his groundbreaking The Achievement of Samuel Johnson, provided a valuable clue for elucidating Johnson's position when he pointed out that "his undeniable attraction to it [i.e., poeticjustice] . . . does show a rather pathetic tug toward wish fulfillment."8 But we have unaccountably ignored these clues; consequently, as recently as 1976, Arthur Sherbo examined six of the relevant statements from the Johnsonian canon and dismissed them as "curious."7 If, however, we follow the methodological advice of Greene and Abrams and extend the suggestion of Bate, we reach an unmistakable conclusion: guided by the casual relationship he posited between poetry's empirical basis (the imitation of nature) and its concomitant affective and didactic powers, Johnson endorses poetic justice when natural, credible, and thereby instructive characters affect his emotions. But he relinquishes the need for observing poetic justice when the characters involved are so natural that they fail to affect or instruct the reader. To a degree, then, Johnson takes the traditionally objective standard of poetic justice and "subjectifies" it. At the same time, however, the affective argument for poetic justice is in perfect accord with his objective criteria for literature; for characters that fail to mirror nature can neither please nor instruct. 4.M.H. Abrams, "The Truth About Dr. Johnson," rev. of Samuel Johnson's Literary Criticism, by Jean Hagstrum, Kenyan Review...