Question

Read the excerpt from "A Defence of Poetry." Hence the fame of sculptors, painters, and musicians, although the intrinsic powers of the great masters of these arts may yield in no degree to that of those who have employed language as the hieroglyphic of their thoughts, has never equalled that of poets in the restricted sense of the term, as two performers of equal skill will produce unequal effects from a guitar and a harp. The fame of legislators and founders of religions, so long as their institutions last, alone seems to exceed that of poets in the restricted sense; but it can scarcely be a question, whether, if we deduct the celebrity which their flattery of the gross opinions of the vulgar usually conciliates, together with that which belonged to them in their higher character of poets, any excess will remain. This excerpt suggests that poetry is to other art forms.

Answer 1

Answer: superior

Explanation: the way he says that other art forms have never equaled that of poets

Answer 2

This excerpt suggests that poetry is superior to other art forms.

Step-by-step explanation:

The text states that artists in general "has never equaled that of poets in the restricted sense of the term." In this sentence we can already see that the author of the text places poetry as an art superior to all others, an art form that can never be compared with other forms, because it reaches levels like neither music, nor painting, nor sculpture will achieve. The author also states that if we analyze in depth, not even the work of legislators and religious educators is greater and better than poetry and its effects.