Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
On The Impression Of Reality Attending Dramatic Representations.
poreal effects . 'If I shuddered and turned pale at the real spectacle , I do the same at the first recollections ; if I ran with horror from the former , I plunge into company or business to deliver me from the latter . Now , if it be allowed , that my own mind , acting uponltself , without the aid of externa ] objects , be capable of creating an imaginary scene indistinguishable in its effects from a real one , why should not equal power be granted to those artificial methodsin
, which resembling , sensible objects are called in to assist the operations of the fancy ? But , it may be said , no one denies as a matter of fact , the power of recollection and fictitious representation to move the passions , and the question is only , what is necessary to the production of this effect ? Now , since in the case of a recollected scene , it cannot be
a belief of reality ( for no man believes that the event on which he reflects is acted over again ) , why should such belief have anything more to do with the efficacy of fiction ? And this reasoning ( on which Dr . Johnson diffusely dwells ) is just , as far as it goes ; but his error consists in confounding with proper belief , that impression of realitor temporary illusionwhich I conceive absolutely
esseny , , tial to account for the undoubted effects produced by all the various imitations of action . Belief is the consequence of a reflex operation of the mind , by which we are convinced of a truth after examination or enquiry . It is therefore incompatible with the impressions of illusion ; for , as soon as they are examined , they are at an end . We cannot ask ourselves whether they are true , without
discovering them to be false . But it is certain we are often so impressed with a notion , as to entertain no present doubts about it , though it is no object of our belief , but , on the contrary , has repeatedly been detected by us as a falsehood . Dr . Johnson himself , speaking of what he terms the extrusion of Gloster ' s eyes in Lear , says , that it " seems an act too horrid to " be endured in dramatic exhibitionand such as must always
com-, " pel the mind to relieve its distress by incredulity . " Does not this expressly imply , that a less horrid and unnatural action would pass on the stage for real ; and that the usual affection of the mind in dramatic exhibitions is an impression of reality ? Historical increditBy cannot be here meant ; for how are we sure that the story was not truebesideswe read with tolerable tranquillity of facts
; , still more shocking . It must then be the " incredulus odi" of Horace , —a resolution to discard and reject what so much pains us . Horace did not disbelieve that Medea had murdered her children ; but when the fact was represented to him in a visible display , the horror he felt made him refuse to admit it as a true scene . Further to elucidate this idea of the impression of reality as distinct
from belief , let us trace the progress of the imagination from the instances in which it is least assisted by external objects , to those in which it is most so . And , not to dwell upon the conviction of reality attending dreams , delirium , and insanity , where there is probably a physical cause operating on the brain , I shall first consider the case of a reverie , or day-dream .
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
On The Impression Of Reality Attending Dramatic Representations.
poreal effects . 'If I shuddered and turned pale at the real spectacle , I do the same at the first recollections ; if I ran with horror from the former , I plunge into company or business to deliver me from the latter . Now , if it be allowed , that my own mind , acting uponltself , without the aid of externa ] objects , be capable of creating an imaginary scene indistinguishable in its effects from a real one , why should not equal power be granted to those artificial methodsin
, which resembling , sensible objects are called in to assist the operations of the fancy ? But , it may be said , no one denies as a matter of fact , the power of recollection and fictitious representation to move the passions , and the question is only , what is necessary to the production of this effect ? Now , since in the case of a recollected scene , it cannot be
a belief of reality ( for no man believes that the event on which he reflects is acted over again ) , why should such belief have anything more to do with the efficacy of fiction ? And this reasoning ( on which Dr . Johnson diffusely dwells ) is just , as far as it goes ; but his error consists in confounding with proper belief , that impression of realitor temporary illusionwhich I conceive absolutely
esseny , , tial to account for the undoubted effects produced by all the various imitations of action . Belief is the consequence of a reflex operation of the mind , by which we are convinced of a truth after examination or enquiry . It is therefore incompatible with the impressions of illusion ; for , as soon as they are examined , they are at an end . We cannot ask ourselves whether they are true , without
discovering them to be false . But it is certain we are often so impressed with a notion , as to entertain no present doubts about it , though it is no object of our belief , but , on the contrary , has repeatedly been detected by us as a falsehood . Dr . Johnson himself , speaking of what he terms the extrusion of Gloster ' s eyes in Lear , says , that it " seems an act too horrid to " be endured in dramatic exhibitionand such as must always
com-, " pel the mind to relieve its distress by incredulity . " Does not this expressly imply , that a less horrid and unnatural action would pass on the stage for real ; and that the usual affection of the mind in dramatic exhibitions is an impression of reality ? Historical increditBy cannot be here meant ; for how are we sure that the story was not truebesideswe read with tolerable tranquillity of facts
; , still more shocking . It must then be the " incredulus odi" of Horace , —a resolution to discard and reject what so much pains us . Horace did not disbelieve that Medea had murdered her children ; but when the fact was represented to him in a visible display , the horror he felt made him refuse to admit it as a true scene . Further to elucidate this idea of the impression of reality as distinct
from belief , let us trace the progress of the imagination from the instances in which it is least assisted by external objects , to those in which it is most so . And , not to dwell upon the conviction of reality attending dreams , delirium , and insanity , where there is probably a physical cause operating on the brain , I shall first consider the case of a reverie , or day-dream .