A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 3 (of 3), Modern criticismSaintsbury, George
History
A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 3 (of 3), Modern criticism
Saintsbury, George
Criticism -- History; Literature -- History and criticism; Literature, Medieval
a note to object to the opposition of Poetry and Prose at all, and to
the regarding of the former as synonymous with metrical composition.
Then he asks what a poet _is_: and answers himself at great length,
dwelling on the poet’s philosophical mission, but admitting that it is
his business to give pleasure. He anticipates the objection, “Why, then,
do you not write in Prose?” with the rather weak retort, “Why should I
not add the charm of metrical language to what I have to say?” A little
later comes the other famous definition of poetry as “emotion
recollected in tranquillity,” with a long and exceedingly unsuccessful
attempt to vindicate some work of his own from the charge of being
ludicrous. And the Preface ends with two candid but singularly damaging
admissions, that there _is_ a pleasure confessedly produced by metrical
compositions very different from his own, and that, in order entirely to
enjoy the poetry which he is undertaking, it would be necessary to give
up much of what is ordinarily enjoyed.
[Sidenote: _The appendix: Poetic Diction again._]
There is an appendix specially devoted to “Poetic Diction” in which
Wordsworth develops his objection to this. His argument is curious, and
from his own point of view rather risky. Early poets wrote from passion,
yet naturally, and so used figurative language: later ones, without
feeling passion, imitated them in the use of Figures, and so a purely
artificial diction was formed. So also metre was early added, and came
to be regarded as a symbol or promise of poetic diction itself. To which
of course it is only necessary to register the almost fatal demurrer,
“Why, if the early poets used figurative language different from
ordinary, may not later ones do so? or do you mean that Greek shoemakers
of Homer’s time said _koruthaiolos_ and _dolichoskion_?” Again, “How
about this curious early ‘superadding’ of metre? Where is your evidence?
and supposing you could produce any, what have you to say to the further
query, ‘If the metre was superadded, what could have been the reason,
except that some superaddition was felt to be wanted?’”
[Sidenote: _The Minor Critical Papers._]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account