Baudelaire, Charles, 1821-1867; Poets, French -- 19th century -- Biography
Poe's genius has been generally misunderstood. He gave himself to
many forms of misconception: by his eccentricities, his caprices, his
fantastic follies, his natural insolence, his passionate excitations
(mostly imaginary), his delinquencies in regard to morals, his
over-acute sensibility, his exasperating way of exasperating the
general public he hated, his analysing problems that had defied any
living writer's ingenuity to have compassed (as in his detective
stories); above all, his almost utter alienation from that world he
lived in, dreamed in, never worshipped, died in.
And he remains still a kind of enigma; in spite of the fact that the
most minute details of his life are known, and that he never outlived
his reputation. Yes, enigmatical in various points: as to his not
giving even the breath of life to the few ghosts of women who cross
his pages; of never diving very deeply into any heart but his own. Are
not most of his men malign, perverse, atrocious, abnormal, never quite
normal, evocations of himself? From Dupin to Fortunato, from the Man in
the Crowd to the Man in the Pit, from Prince Prospero to Usher, are not
these _revenants,_ in the French sense?
There is something demoniacal in his imagination; for Poe never, I
might say, almost never, lets his readers have an instant's rest; any
more than the Devil lets his subjects have any actual surcease of
torment. Yet, as there is a gulf between Good and Evil, no one, by any
chance, falls into the abyss.
Poe, of course, writes with his nerves, and therefore only nervous
writers have ever understood him. It is Baudelaire, the most nervous of
modern writers, who says of Poe that no one, before him, had affirmed
imperturbably the natural wickedness of man. Yet this statement is a
paradox; a lesser paradox is that man is originally perverse; for all
are not _nés marques pour le mal?_
Poe is not a great critic; he says certain unforgettable things, with
even an anticipation of the work of later writers. "_I know,_" he
says, "that indefiniteness is an element of the true music--I mean of
the tme musical expression. Give it any undue decision--imbue it with
any very determinate tone--and you deprive it at once of its ethereal,
its ideal, its intrinsic and essential character" Where he is great
is where he writes: "I have a pure contempt for mere prejudice and
conventionality;" and mostly where he defines himself. "Nor is there an
instance to be discovered, among all I have published, of my having set
forth, either in praise or censure, a single opinion upon any critical
topic of moment, without attempting, at least, to give it authority by
something that wore the semblance of a reason."
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account