generally sustaining the translator in his views concerning the
secondary importance of form in Poetry, practically discouraged any
further attempt; and no one, familiar with rhythmical expression through
the needs of his own nature, had devoted the necessary love and patience
to an adequate reproduction of the great work of Goethe's life.

Mr. Brooks was the first to undertake the task, and the publication of
his translation of the First Part (in 1856) induced me, for a time, to
give up my own design. No previous English version exhibited such
abnegation of the translator's own tastes and habits of thought, such
reverent desire to present the original in its purest form. The care and
conscience with which the work had been performed were so apparent, that
I now state with reluctance what then seemed to me to be its only
deficiencies,--a lack of the lyrical fire and fluency of the original in
some passages, and an occasional lowering of the tone through the use of
words which are literal, but not equivalent. The plan of translation
adopted by Mr. Brooks was so entirely my own, that when further
residence in Germany and a more careful study of both parts of _Faust_
had satisfied me that the field was still open,--that the means
furnished by the poetical affinity of the two languages had not yet been
exhausted,--nothing remained for me but to follow him in all essential
particulars. His example confirmed me in the belief that there were few
difficulties in the way of a nearly literal yet thoroughly rhythmical
version of _Faust_, which might not be overcome by loving labor. A
comparison of seventeen English translations, in the arbitrary metres
adopted by the translators, sufficiently showed the danger of allowing
license in this respect: the white light of Goethe's thought was thereby
passed through the tinted glass of other minds, and assumed the coloring
of each. Moreover, the plea of selecting different metres in the hope of
producing a similar effect is unreasonable, where the identical metres