Critical Review. W. Simpkin and R. Marshall, 5 series.
55 (1783): 333-4
Samuel Badcock
Standard Name: Badcock, Samuel
Connections
| Connections Sort descending | Author name | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|
| Literary responses | Anne Burke | The response of reviewers was flattering. The Critical characterised Goethe's original as poison and this as a possible antidote, which possessed a power of attraction by the same means, and in a degree little inferior... |
| Literary responses | Lady Mary Walker | The Monthly Review, represented this time by Samuel Badcock
, was not friendly: it judged the text to be so mangled and mutilated that the loss of part of it was matter not for... |
| Literary responses | Clara Reeve | The Critical Review gave the novel little space, but liked its moral intentions and judged it a successful effort. |
| Literary responses | Catharine Macaulay | Many reviewers liked this work. The notice in the Critical Review engaged closely with CM
's arguments here, and renewed its praise of her comprehensive mind and strong imagination. It conceded that her latest work... |
| Literary responses | Anna Maria Mackenzie | The Critical Review gave this novel two sentences of approbation. Critical Review. W. Simpkin and R. Marshall, 5 series. 55 (July 1783): 74 |
| Literary responses | Anna Maria Mackenzie | The Critical Review hedged its bets, finding this novel derivative and somewhat improbable, yet possessing considerable merit in its bold and colourful (if sometimes caricatured) character-drawing and its animated and easy language. In the Monthly... |
Timeline
No timeline events available.
Texts
No bibliographical results available.