Conjectures on Original Composition by Edward Young

Conjectures on Original Composition primarily attack the subject. Young distinguishes' originals' from 'imitations' the former far better than the latter despite the former is fewer in number.

The ancient could not choose because since they are the first, they have no prior models to follow but be original whereas the moderns have the choice to make which models to follow. If they choose the right, they can raise to the level of their ancestors. The less we copy the renowned ancients; we shall resemble them the more because we tend to be more authentic. It is within human reach to match and even surpass our predecessors.

Young makes a distinction between ' genius' and 'learning'. "A genius differs from a good understanding, as a magician from a good architect: that makes his structure by means invisible; this by the skilful use of common toils".

Learning without genius follow rules and models: it condemns the natural unaffected graces and nontoxic inaccuracies and shackles the liberty, which is the supreme glory of genius. Genius is characterized by “unperceived beauties, and unexampled excellencies", which are outside the "pale of learning's authorities and laws". Young further distinguishes between 'adult and infantine' genius. But the suppression of genius deprives of the liberal arts of the advantage the 'mechanic' arts enjoy and of progressing beyond their predecessors.

Moreover it fails to cooperate with Nature, which makes us all originals, declines productivity in quality while increasing it in quality. Young says that the powers of the moderns are equal to those of the ancients, but they are not properly extended. We cannot underestimate modern poet's potentialities. There is no reason for us to surrender ourselves in thoughtless praise before assumed superiority. “Imitators and translators" go in for that kind of thing.

Young cites Shakespeare as a genius equaling the greatness of the ancients, but repudiates Johnson for being overloaded with learning. He says that Johnson was a stranger to the pathos, numbers, expression, sentiment and every other dramatic cheat, strove to make amends for it; as if a saint could make amends for the want of conscience ; a soldier for want of velour.