Arrows of the Chace, vol. 2/2: being a collection of scattered letters published chiefly in the daily newspapers 1840-1880Ruskin, John
History
Arrows of the Chace, vol. 2/2: being a collection of scattered letters published chiefly in the daily newspapers 1840-1880
Ruskin, John
Authors, English -- 19th century -- Correspondence; Letters to the editor -- Great Britain; Ruskin, John, 1819-1900 -- Correspondence
SIR: I do not doubt, from what I have observed of the general tone of
the criticisms in your columns, that, in candor and courtesy, you will
allow me to enter protest, bearing such worth as private opinion may,
against the estimate expressed in your last number of the merits of
Mr. C. Patmore's new poem.[154] It seems to me that you have read it
hastily; and that you have taken such view of it as on a first reading
almost every reader of good but impatient judgment would be but too
apt to concur with you in adopting--one, nevertheless, which, if you
examine the poem with care, you will, I think, both for your readers'
sake and Mr. Patmore's, regret having expressed so decidedly.
The poem is, to the best of my perception and belief, a singularly
perfect piece of art; containing, as all good art does, many very
curious shortcomings (to appearance), and places of rest, or of dead
color, or of intended harshness, which, if they are seen or quoted
without the parts of the piece to which they relate, are of course
absurd enough, precisely as the discords in a fine piece of music
would be if you played them without their resolutions. You have quoted
separately Mr. Patmore's discords; you might by the same system of
examination have made Mozart or Mendelssohn appear to be no musicians,
as you have probably convinced your quick readers that Mr. Patmore is
no poet.
I will not beg of you so much space as would be necessary to analyze
the poem, but I hope you will let me--once for all--protest against
the method of criticism which assumes that entire familiarity and
simplicity in certain portions of a great work destroy its dignity.
Simple things ought to be simply said, and truly poetical diction is
nothing more nor less than right diction; the incident being itself
poetical or not, according to its relations and the feelings which
it is intended to manifest--not according to its own nature merely.
To take a single instance out of Homer bearing on that same simple
household work which you are so shocked at Mr. Patmore's taking notice
of, Homer describes the business of a family washing, when it comes
into his poem, in the most accurate terms he can find. "They took the
clothes in their hands; and poured on the clean water; and trod them
in trenches thoroughly, trying who could do it best; and when they
had washed them and got off all the dirt, they spread them out on the
sea-beach, where the sea had blanched the shingle cleanest."[155]
These are the terms in which the _great_ poet explains the matter.
The less poet--or, rather, man of modern wit and breeding, _without_
superior poetical power--thus puts the affair into dignified language:
Then emulous the royal robes they lave,
And plunge the vestures in the cleansing wave,
(The vestures cleansed o'erspread the shelly sand,
Their snowy lustre whitens all the strand.)
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