To nurse that spark, common to the king, the sage, the poorest child⁠—to fan, to draw up to a flame, to “educate” What Is⁠—to recognise that it is divine, yet frail, tender, sometimes easily tired, easily quenched under piles of book-learning⁠—to let it run at play very often, even more often to let it rest in what Wordsworth calls + 

a wise passiveness + 

passive⁠—to use a simile of Coventry Patmore⁠—as a photographic plate which finds stars that no telescope can discover, simply by waiting with its face turned upward⁠—to mother it, in short, as wise mothers do their children⁠—this is what I mean by the Art of Reading. + 

For all great Literature, I would lastly observe, is gentle towards that spirit which learns of it. It teaches by apprehension not by comprehension⁠—which is what many philosophers try to do, and, in trying, break their jugs and spill the contents. Literature understands man and of what he is capable. Philosophy, on the other hand, may not be “harsh and crabbed, as dull fools suppose,” but the trouble with most of its practitioners is that they try to comprehend the Universe. Now the man who could comprehend the Universe would ipso facto comprehend God, and be ipso facto a Super-God, able to dethrone him, and in the arrogance of his intellectual conceit full ready to make the attempt. + 