passages the Author curtails instead of enlarging on the original?
On that point we are agreed: the Author does so in order to avoid
lengthiness and ambiguity,--two faults which are inadmissible in such
matters, especially the latter. For if lucidity is to be commended in
all literary works, we may say that it is especially necessary in
narratives, where one thing is, as a rule, the sequel and the result of
another; where the less important sometimes lays the basis of the more
important; so that, once the thread becomes broken, the reader cannot
gather it up again. Besides, as narratives in verse are very awkward,
the author must clog himself with details as little as possible; by means
of this you relieve not only yourself, but also the reader, for whom an
author should not fail to prepare pleasure unalloyed. Whenever the
Author has altered a few particulars and even a few catastrophes, he has
been forced to do so by the cause of that catastrophe and the urgency of
giving it a happy termination. He has fancied that in tales of this kind
everyone ought to be satisfied with the end: it pleases the reader at
any rate, if the author has not given the characters too distasteful
a rendering. But he must not go so far as that, if possible, nor make
the reader laugh and cry in the same tale. This medley shocks Horace
above all things; his wish is not that our works should border on the
grotesque, and that we should draw a picture half woman half fish. These
are the general motives the Author has had in view. We might still quote
special motives and vindicate each point; but we must needs leave
something to the capacity and leniency of our readers. They will be
satisfied, then, with the motives we have mentioned. We would have
stated them more clearly and have set more by them, had the general
compass of a Preface so allowed.