But what needs more? Aristotle writes the "Art of
Poesy;" and why, if it should not be written? Plutarch teacheth the
use to be gathered of them; and how, if they should not be read?
And who reads Plutarch's either history or philosophy, shall find he
trimmeth both their garments with guards {73} of poesy.
But I list not to defend poesy with the help of his underling
historiographer. Let it suffice to have showed it is a fit soil for
praise to dwell upon; and what dispraise may be set upon it is
either easily overcome, or transformed into just commendation. So
that since the excellences of it may be so easily and so justly
confirmed, and the low creeping objections so soon trodden down
{74}; it not being an art of lies, but of true doctrine; not of
effeminateness, but of notable stirring of courage; not of abusing
man's wit, but of strengthening man's wit; not banished, but
honoured by Plato; let us rather plant more laurels for to ingarland
the poets' heads (which honour of being laureate, as besides them
only triumphant captains were, is a sufficient authority to show the
price they ought to be held in) than suffer the ill-favoured breath
of such wrong speakers once to blow upon the clear springs of poesy.
But {75} since I have run so long a career in this matter, methinks,
before I give my pen a full stop, it shall be but a little more lost
time to inquire, why England, the mother of excellent minds, should
be grown so hard a step-mother to poets, who certainly in wit ought
to pass all others, since all only proceeds from their wit, being,
indeed, makers of themselves, not takers of others.
Pages:
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79