44-644: (Redirected from London Review ) London Review has formed the title or partial title of a number of periodicals, some of which lasted only for a short period. These include: (1775–1780) London Review of English and Foreign Literature , founded by William Kenrick (1782–1826) European Magazine and London Review (1809) The London Review , edited by Richard Cumberland (1829) The London Review , founded by Nassau Senior and Richard Whately (1835) The London Review , founded by John Stuart Mill and other philosophical radicals, merged into The Westminster Review
88-465: A A New Dictionary of the English Language , where he indicated pronunciation with diacritical marks and to divided words according to their syllables ; it was meant as a response to James Buchanan's Linguæ Britannicæ Vera Pronunciatio – the only pronouncing dictionary at time, which Kenrick censured for its Scottish origin. In the same year, on 20 November 1773 his comedy The Duellist
132-579: A "Universal Register Office", a planned center of advertisement of jobs, goods for sale, and other items. If this was not enough, Fielding started a dispute, just a few months before, with Philip D'Halluin, a former employee who established the competing "Public Register Office" in King Street, Covent Garden , who hired Bonnell Thorton, a friend of Smart, to attack Fielding and Hill. However, Hill had previously aided Fielding in this matter. Later, Hill attacked both Fielding and Smart, 13 August 1752, in
176-546: A "paper war", a long-term dispute with constant publication of pamphlets attacking other writers, between the various authors on London's Grub Street . Although it began as a dispute between Fielding and John Hill , other authors, such as Christopher Smart , Bonnell Thornton , William Kenrick , Arthur Murphy and Tobias Smollett , were soon dedicating their works to aid various sides of the conflict. The dispute lasted until 1753 and involved many of London's periodicals. It eventually resulted in countless essays, poems, and even
220-590: A Parodi-tragi-comical Satire , a parody of Macbeth in which the weird sisters circle about their cauldron, throwing in contemporary novels, periodicals and pamphlets. The play was banned by the Lord Mayor, however, "as it was to have been perform’d at the Castle-Tavern, Pater-noster-Row, on Thursday, February 13, 1752, but Suppressed, by a Special Order from the Lord-Mayor and Court of Aldermen." (see
264-459: A doctorate at Leiden University (although other sources maintain he went to a Scottish university) and appeared for the first time as a pamphletist in 1751 where he wrote, under the name of "Ontologos", The Grand Question debated; or an Essay to prove that the Soul of Man is not, neither can it be Immortal. In typical fashion, Kenrick forthwith provided an answer to this question proving the reverse,
308-460: A famous Surgeon, who absolutely cured one Mrs Amelia Booth, of a violent Hurt in her Nose, insomuch, that she had scarce a Scar left on it, intends to bring Actions against several ill-meaning and slanderous People, who have reported that the said Lady had no Nose, merely because the Author of her History, in a Hurry, forgot to inform his Readers of that Particular. Hill was not the only one to attack
352-594: A favourable though brief review (in June, 1762) of "The Citizen of the World". Kenrick published his translation of Jean-Jacques Rousseau 's Julie, ou La Nouvelle Héloïse in 1761. In spite of the fact that he substituted throughout the name of Eloisa for that of Julie ( a matter of no importance to the reader , as he wrote ), the work was a success and enjoyed six reprintings up to 1776. In 1765 Kenrick published A Review of Dr Johnson's new edition of Shakspeare : in which
396-428: A high degree. But I found him a bluff, hearty little man, full of spirits and cheerfulness. He said devotion was not natural; that is to say, the devotion of the heart; that fear made people use ceremonies but did not inspire true devotion. He said he had a pronouncing dictionary almost ready, by which he hoped to fix a standard, as the varieties of pronunciation among people in genteel life were very few. He said he taught
440-517: A man from Aberdeen to speak good English in six weeks. He said his great difficulty was to get him to speak at all. He told him, "Sir, you don't speak at all. You sing." Kenrick's most successful work, reprinted in over 20 editions, was a courtesy book published in 1753 under the title The Whole Duty of a Woman; or, A Guide to the Female Sex, from the Age of Sixteen to Sixty, &c. , but the author
484-408: A manner, that his reputation was neither extensive nor lasting. I remember one evening, when some of his works were mentioned, Dr. Goldsmith said, he had never heard of them; upon which Dr. Johnson observed, "Sir, he is one of the many who have made themselves publick, without making themselves known.". Falstaff's Wedding , a comic sequel to Henry IV, Part 2 , written in imitation of Shakespeare,
SECTION 10
#1732765860154528-649: A production called Fun and proceeded to defend Fielding. Charles Macklin followed suit by holding a benefit on 8 April 1752 at the Covent Garden with a two-act play called The Covent Garden Theater, or Pasquin Turn'd Drawcansir ; the play portrayed Fielding attacking the Hill and his followers, the "Town". A pamphlet in the London Daily Advertiser published on 29 January 1752 called The March of
572-406: A series of mock epic poems starting with Smart's The Hilliad . Although it is unknown what actually started the dispute, it resulted in a divide of authors who either supported Fielding or supported Hill, and few in between. Fielding started a "paper war" in the first issue of The Covent-Garden Journal (4 January 1752) by declaring war against "hack writers". In response, John Hill claimed in
616-504: A steady and virtuous direction, might have procured him an honourable place among the authors of his time. Indeed, Kenrick wrote revealingly of himself that he drank spirits ( aqua vitae ), to pen acid ( aqua fortis ): The Wits, who drink water and suck sugar-candy, Impute the strong spirit of Kenrick to brandy. They are not so much out: the matter, in short, is--- He sips aqua vitae, and spits aqua fortis. Paper War of 1752%E2%80%931753 In 1752, Henry Fielding started
660-604: A tactic he often used in order to publicize his productions. One of his first targets was the vulnerable Christopher Smart whose poem "Night Piece" he attacked in the London monthly journal The Kapelion; or Poetical Ordinary, consisting of Great Variety of Dishes in Prose and Verse, recommended to all who have a Good Taste or Keen Appetite in 1750 under the nom de plume Whimsey Banter. In 1752 Kenrick publicly mocked Henry Fielding and Tobias Smollett in his entertainment Fun:
704-424: Is different from Wikidata All article disambiguation pages All disambiguation pages William Kenrick (writer) William Kenrick (c. 1725 – 10 June 1779) was an English novelist , playwright , translator and satirist , who spent much of his career libelling and lampooning his fellow writers. Kenrick was born at Watford , Hertfordshire , son of a stay -maker. He apparently obtained
748-588: The General Biographical Dictionary of 1815 in Kenrick's later years he drank very heavily, a habit which probably caused his relatively early death: In his latter days, his constitution was so much injured by inebriety, that he generally wrote with a bottle of brandy by his elbow, which at length terminated his career June 10, 1779, less lamented than perhaps any person known in the literary world, yet possessed of talents which, under
792-612: The Gray's Inn Journal . Following Murphy, Thornton attacked both Hill and Fielding in The Spring-Garden Journal on 16 November 1752. The Gentleman's Journal issue of November 1752 came out with a quick retort and claimed that those who supported Hill "espoused the cause of Gentleman" and those who sided with Fielding espoused the cause "of the comedian." This essay accomplished little but to polarise both sides even more. Hill then responded to Murphy, and their dispute
836-588: The London Daily Advertiser (9 January 1752) Fielding had met with him prior to January and proposed what would be a fake paper war that would involve London writers "giving Blows that would not hurt, and sharing the Advantage in Silence." Such a meeting between Fielding and Hill to discuss the proposed war is believed to have occurred (if it occurred) on 28 December 1751. It is known that Hill met Fielding for legal business between 26 and 28 December 1751 after Hill
880-640: The Paper War of 1752–1753 ). James Boswell records a meeting with Kenrick on Friday, 3 April 1772: In the evening came a company of literati invited for me: Dr. Jeffries, Dr. Gilbert Stuart, a Mr. Leeson, and Kenrick, now Dr. Kenrick, who once wrote an 18d. pamphlet against me, but principally against Mr. Johnson, though it was entitled A Letter to James Boswell, Esq. Kenrick was quite a different man from what I expected to see. His Epistles, Philosophical and Moral promised seriousness or rather profound gravity; and many of his other writings promised acrimony to
924-604: The Betrayer of a private Treaty could ever deserve the least Credit, yet his Lowness here must proclaim himself either a Liar, or a Fool. None can doubt that he is the former, if he hath feigned this Treaty, and I think few would scruple to call him the latter, if he had rejected it." Regardless of the merits of Hill's claim, a war was soon started: by the third issue of The Covent-Garden Journal , Fielding narrowed his satire upon John Hill. Although Hill, Fielding, Smart, Thornton, Kenrick, Murphy, and Smollett were all involved in
SECTION 20
#1732765860154968-510: The Books and Fielding pretended to be a military leader that would lead "English VETERANS" against those who were compared to characters from the Greek and Roman classics along with those from modern French literature. However, he changed roles on the fourth issue, produced on 14 January 1752, and transformed himself into a "judge". By February, Kenrick joined in and "dramatized" the "Paper War" in
1012-645: The Ignorance, or Inattention, of that Editor is exposed, and the Poet defended from the Persecution of his Commentators . James Boswell reported that: Johnson was virulently attacked by Mr. William Kenrick, who obtained the degree of LL.D. from a Scotch University, and wrote for the booksellers in a great variety of branches. Though he certainly was not without considerable merit, he wrote with so little regard to decency and principles, and decorum, and in so hasty
1056-560: The Lion links various authors involved in the war and is the first to introduce Smart via a reference to his "Mrs. Mary Midnight" pseudonym, although Smart was not yet a participant. However, Smart did begin directly participating in the matter 4 August 1752 with the publication in The Midwife of a parody on Hill's "Inspector" persona. In the piece, Smart responded to Hill's attack on Smart's "Old Woman's Oratory" show and Hill's claim that
1100-549: The Perpetual Motion . Kenrick complained: One species of our predecessor's merit, however, I presume myself at least entitled to, that of perseverance; it being now fifteen years since I first engaged in this undertaking, which I have since pursued with almost unremitted assiduity, and that not only at considerable waste of time and expense, but under the constant mortification of hearing it equally ridiculed by those who do know, and by those who do not know, anything of
1144-532: The best specimens of his poetry. In November 1759, Kenrick (the "superlative scoundrel" ) succeeded Oliver Goldsmith as editor of The Monthly Review . He signalled his advent by writing an outrageous attack upon Goldsmith's "Enquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning in Europe". His vilification was so unjustified that Ralph Griffiths (the publisher) made an indirect apology for his successor by
1188-406: The dispute, not all of them used their actual names; instead, many preferred to use pseudonyms along with attacks under their own name: Fielding wrote as "Sir Alexander Drawcansir"; Hill wrote as "The Inspector"; Thornton wrote as "Madam Roxanna"; and Smart wrote as "Mrs. Mary Midnight". It was under these pseudonyms that various authors soon responded to Fielding's attacks and to Fielding's plan for
1232-520: The following year (1979, current) London Review of Books Topics referred to by the same term [REDACTED] This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the title The London Review . If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article. Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_London_Review&oldid=1030216015 " Category : Disambiguation pages Hidden categories: Short description
1276-461: The matter. In 1772, he published Love in the Suds, a town eclogue: being the lamentation of Roscius for the loss of his Nyky , a direct and scurrilous attack on David Garrick , making explicit charges of homosexuality with Isaac Bickerstaffe against the great actor. Garrick immediately took legal action against Kenrick who was forced to publish a somewhat ambivalent apology . In 1773 he published
1320-435: The only issue of The Impertinent to be produced. Although the work was published anonymously, it was commonly known that it was produced by Hill, and he soon followed up the pamphlet with his 25 August 1752 The Inspector column in the London Daily Advertiser . With the column, he harshly criticized Smart's Poems on Several Occasions . Fielding eventually left the dispute after the sixth issue of The Covent-Garden Journal
1364-577: The other critics are the prosecutors and it is they, not Amelia , that are truly put on trial. The Covent-Garden Journal served Fielding well and he used it in his attacks upon Hill and Hill's supporters in the Journal piece called "Journal of the present Paper War between the Forces under Sir Alexander Drawcansir, and the Army of Grub-street". The work was modelled after Jonathan Swift 's The Battle of
The London Review - Misplaced Pages Continue
1408-452: The pamphlet Habbakkuk Hilding anonymously on 15 January 1752. Although there were many attacks against Fielding's novel, there was some support for the work, and an anonymous pamphlet was written to attack "Hill and 'the Town'" while praising Amelia . On 25 January 1752, Fielding defended his work again by bringing the novel before the imaginary "Court of Censorial Enquiry", in which Hill and
1452-406: The pamphlet in the London Daily Advertiser . With his 25 August 1752 The Inspector column, Hill harshly criticised Smart's Poems on Several Occasions . Although Hill claimed to praise Smart, he did so in a manner, as Betty Rizzo claims, "that managed to insult and degrade Smart with patronizing encouragement." Arthur Murphy responded to this essay, and to Hill, in the 21 October 1752 edition of
1496-466: The production of two more Kenrick plays: The Lady of the Manor , a comic opera with music by James Hook , was the most successful of Kenrick's such works; and The Spendthrift; or, The Christmas Gambol , a farce based on Charles Johnson 's The Country Lasses which was taken off after only two nights. From 1778 to 1779 he directed a translation of Voltaire 's works in eight volumes. According to
1540-440: The show was dead. Hill was quick to respond; he attacked both Fielding and Smart in a piece published on 13 August 1752 in the only issue of The Impertinent . In the work, Hill claimed that authors either write because "they have wit" or "they are hungry". He further claimed that Smart, wears a ridiculous comicalness of aspect, that makes people smile when they see him at a distance: His mouth opens, because he must be fed; and
1584-522: The work; Thornton wrote satires of Amelia in the Drury-Lane Journal . Thornton's satires were first published on 16 January 1752 and included a fake advertisement for a parody novel called "Shamelia", playing off of title of Fielding's parody Shamela . He later parodied Amelia again on 13 February 1752 in a piece called "A New Chapter in Amelia ." Tobias Smollett joined in and published
1628-445: The world often joins with the philosopher in laughing at the insensibility and obstinancy that make him prick his lips with thistles." The work was published anonymously. Some tried to claim that Samuel Johnson was the author and Hill tried to hide his authorship by attacking the essay in the 25 August 1752 "The Inspector" (No. 464). However, he was soon exposed and it became commonly known that Hill produced both and he soon followed up
1672-678: The writers of Grub Street, which brought a quick response. Hill responded twice and claimed that Fielding was planning a fake dispute on 9 January 1752, Smollet attacked Hill's piece on 15 January 1752, and Thornton soon responded against Fielding in Have At You All: or, The Drury Lane Journal on 16 January 1752. During this time, personal works, such as Fielding's Amelia , became targets. On 11 January 1752, Fielding responded to Hill and those who supported his view of Amelia in The Covent-Garden Journal by stating:
1716-466: Was launched at Covent Garden , but lasted only one night. In 1775 Kenrick founded the book review digest The London Review of English and Foreign Literature which ran from 1775 to 1780, a monthly review of 80 pages which attacked most of the contemporary writers and their works, and gave habitual bad reviews to Covent Garden and Drury Lane theatres. The magazine was continued for a year after his death by his son William Shakespeare Kenrick. 1778 saw
1760-536: Was printed in a supplement of the December issue of the Gentleman's Journal . On 1 February 1753, Smart published The Hilliad , an attack upon Hill that one critic, Lance Bertelsen, describes as the "loudest broadside" of the war. The response to The Hilliad was swift: Samuel Derrick responded directly with his The Smartiad , Arthur Murphy criticized Smart for his personally attacking Hill, and Rules for Being
1804-511: Was published in 1760. A heavily rewritten version of the play was staged only for a single performance in 1766, and was revived infrequently. The rewritten version was published in the same year. The Widowed Wife (1767) was better received: it staged for 14 nights and resumed the next season. In 1770 and 1771 Kenrick published two pieces on perpetual motion : An account of the Automaton, or Perpetual Motion of Orffyreus and A Lecture on
The London Review - Misplaced Pages Continue
1848-408: Was published. Although it is quite possible that the first work in the "war" was produced by Smart on 29 April 1751, it is also possible that the origins of the dispute could be traced even further back to Hill's publications between February and March 1751. Fielding's first paper in the "war" was also the first issue of The Covent-Garden Journal on 4 January 1752. In it, Fielding attacked all of
1892-503: Was robbed. Before Hill had revealed this information, he attacked Fielding's Amelia in the London Daily Advertiser on 8 January 1752. The book's title character, Amelia, was involved in an accident that damaged her face, and Hill, mocking the way Fielding described the scene, claimed that she "could charm the World without the Help of a Nose." In response to both the revelation and personal attacks, Fielding wrote on 11 January 1752: "If
1936-517: Was simply listed as "A Lady." Kenrick here assumed the persona of a fallen woman , now reformed, who wants to persuade other women to live a life of virtue. The irony of Kenrick's presuming to improve the moral tone of feminine England has not gone unnoticed: he has been described as "one of London's most despised, drunken, and morally degenerate hack writers in the later eighteenth century." In 1758 appeared his versified Epistles, Philosophical and Moral , an "avowed defence of infidelity" which afford
#153846