Professor Borges - A Course on English Literature

as I said, real manuscripts of Pope’s, with his corrections. And it is curious to see how Pope sometimes begins to use a poetic epithet. He writes, for example, “the silvery light of the moon,” and then he says, “the shepherds blessed the silvery light of the moon.” And then, instead of “silvery,” he uses a deliberately prosaic epithet: “the useful light.” 11 Johnson relates all this in his biographies, and some of them are so good they should be used as examples. But Boswell thought differently. These biographies of Johnson’s were pretty short. Boswell conceived of the idea of an extensive biography, one that included his conversations with Johnson, whom he saw several times a week, sometimes more.
The Life of Samuel Johnson
, by Boswell, has often been compared to
Conversations of Goethe
, byEckermann, a book that in my opinion is in no way comparable, even though it was praised by Nietzsche as the best book ever written in German. 12 Because Eckermann was a man of limited intelligence who greatly reveredGoethe, who spoke with him ex cathedra. Eckermann very rarely dared to contradict Goethe. Then he’d go home and write it all down. The book has something of catechism about it. In other words: Eckermann asks, Goethe answers, the first writes down what Goethe has said. But this book—which is very interesting, for Goethe was interested in many things, we could say he was interested in the universe—this book is not a drama; Eckermann almost doesn’t exist except as a kind of machine that records Goethe’s words. We know nothing about Eckermann, nothing about his character—he undoubtedly had one, but this cannot be deduced from the book, cannot be inferred from it. On the other hand, what Boswell planned, or in any case what he carried out, was completely different: to make Johnson’s biography a drama, with several characters. There is [Sir Joshua]Reynolds, there is [Oliver] Goldsmith, sometimes the members of the circle, or how would we call it, the salon, of which Johnson was the leader. 13 And they appear and behave like the characters in a play. Indeed, each has his own personality—above all, Dr. Johnson, who is presented sometimes as ridiculous but always as lovable. This is what happens withCervantes’s character, DonQuixote, a character who is sometimes ridiculous but always lovable, especially in the second part, when the author has learned to know his character and has forgotten his initial goal of parodying novels of chivalry. This is true, because the more writers develop their characters, the better they get to know them. So, that’s how we have a character who is sometimes ridiculous, but who can be serious and have profound thoughts, and above all is one of the most beloved characters in all of history. And we can say “of history” because Don Quixote is more real to us than Cervantes himself, asUnamuno and others have maintained. 14 And as I have said, this happens above all in the second part, when the author has forgotten that intention of his to simply write a satire of the novels of chivalry. Then, as occurs with every long book, the author ends up identifying with the hero; he must in order to infuse him with life, to make him come alive. And at the end, Don Quixote is a slightly ridiculous character, but he is also a gentleman worthy of our respect, and sometimes our pity, but he is always lovable. And this is the same sensation we get from the image of Dr. Johnson, given to us by Boswell, with his grotesque appearance, his long arms, his slovenly appearance. But he is lovable.
    His hatred for Scots is also remarkable, something Boswell, the Scot, remarks upon. I don’t know if I have told you that there is a fundamental difference in the way Scots and Englishmen think. The Scot tends to be—perhaps as a result of all their theological discussions—much more intellectual, more rational. Englishmen are impulsive; they don’t need theories for their behavior. On the contrary, Scots tend to be thinkers and reasoners. Anyway, there are many differences.
    So, let’s return to Johnson. Johnson’s works have literary value, but as is often the case, knowing the person and appreciating him gives one much more desire to read his work. That’s why it’s a good idea to read Boswell’s biography before reading Johnson’s work. Moreover, the book is very easy to read. I think Calpe has published an edition that is not complete but contains enough fragments for