unreal, he believed already; he had a craving to believe in something
noble, beautiful, and difficult to understand; he was ready, therefore,
to accept the rest of that theory, and to believe that these passing
phenomena were imperfect types and resemblances—imperfect incarnations,
so to speak—of certain immovable, eternal, archetypal realities. All
his later writings are coloured by that theory, though in some passages
the remains of the philosophy of the senses with which he commenced
appear in odd proximity to the philosophy of abstractions with which he
concluded. There is, perhaps, no allusion in Shelley to the _Phædrus_;
but no one can doubt which of Plato’s ideas would be most attractive to
the nature we have described. The most valuable part of Plato he did
not comprehend. There is in Shelley none of that unceasing reference to
ethical consciousness and ethical religion which has for centuries placed
Plato first among the preparatory preceptors of Christianity. The general
doctrine is that
‘The one remains, the many change and pass;
Heaven’s light for ever shines, earth’s shadows fly;
Life, like a dome of many-coloured glass,
Stains the white radiance of eternity,
Until death tramples it to fragments.’
The particular worship of the poet is paid to that one spirit whose
‘Plastic stress
Sweeps through the dull dense world, compelling there
All new successions to the forms they wear;
Torturing th’ unwilling dross that checks its flight
To its own likeness, as each mass may bear;
And bursting in its beauty and its might
From trees, and beasts, and men, into the heaven’s light.’
It is evident that not even in this, the highest form of creed to which
he ever clearly attained, is there any such distinct conception of a
character as is essential to a real religion. The conception of God is
not to be framed out of a single attribute. Shelley has changed the
‘idea’ of beauty into a spirit, and this probably for the purposes of
poetry; he has given it life and animal motion; but he has done no more;
the ‘spirit’ has no will, and no virtue: it is animated, but unholy;
alive, but unmoral: it is an object of intense admiration; it is not an
object of worship.
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