FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32  
33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   >>   >|  
ay from purely aesthetic standards? Again, consider the case of Keats. For us the facts of his life must color almost every line he wrote. How are we to determine whether his sonnet, _When I Have Fears,_ is great poetry or not, so long as it fills our minds insistently with the pity of his love for Fanny Brawne, and his epitaph in the Roman graveyard? Christopher North has been much upbraided by a hero-worshiping generation, but one may go too far in condemning the Scotch sense in his contention: Mr. Keats we have often heard spoken of in terms of great kindness, and we have no doubt that his manners and feelings are calculated to make his friends love him. But what has all this to do with our opinion of their poetry? What, in the name of wonder, does it concern us, whether these men sit among themselves with mild or with sulky faces, eating their mutton steaks, and drinking their porter? [Footnote: Sidney Colvin, _John Keats,_ p. 478.] If we are reluctant to sponsor words printed in _Blackwoods,_ we may be more at ease in agreeing with the same sentiments as expressed by Keats himself. After a too protracted dinner party with Wordsworth and Hunt, Keats gave vent to his feelings as follows: Poetry should be great and unobtrusive, a thing that enters into one's soul, and does not startle or amaze it with itself, but with its subject. How beautiful are the retired flowers! How they would lose their beauty were they to throng into the highway crying out, "Admire me, I am a violet! Dote upon me, I am a primrose!".... I will cut all this--I will have no more of Wordsworth or Hunt in particular.... I don't mean to deny Wordsworth's grandeur and Hunt's merit, but I mean to say that we need not be teased with grandeur and merit when we can have them uncontaminated and unobtrusive. [Footnote: _Ibid.,_ p. 253.] If acquaintance with a poet prevents his contemporaries from fixing their attention exclusively upon the merits of his verse, in how much better case is posterity, if the poet's personality makes its way into the heart of his poetry? We have Browning's dictum on Shakespeare's sonnets, With this key Shakespeare unlocked his heart. Once more _Did_ Shakespeare? If so, the less Shakespeare he. [Footnote: _House._] Did Browning mean that Shakespeare was less the poet, as well as less the dramatist, if he revealed himself to us in his poetry? And is this our contention? It seem
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32  
33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Shakespeare
 

poetry

 

Footnote

 

Wordsworth

 

contention

 

feelings

 
unobtrusive
 
grandeur
 

Browning

 
subject

beautiful

 

attention

 
startle
 

retired

 

flowers

 

throng

 

highway

 

beauty

 
unlocked
 
fixing

Poetry

 

enters

 
prevents
 
dramatist
 

revealed

 

crying

 

personality

 
teased
 

posterity

 

uncontaminated


acquaintance

 

contemporaries

 

violet

 

sonnets

 
Admire
 

dictum

 
merits
 

exclusively

 
primrose
 

dinner


steaks

 

graveyard

 

Christopher

 
epitaph
 

Brawne

 

insistently

 

upbraided

 

Scotch

 

condemning

 
worshiping