The Collected Works of Ambrose Bierce, Volume 10: The OpinionatorBierce, Ambrose
General
The Collected Works of Ambrose Bierce, Volume 10: The Opinionator
Bierce, Ambrose
American essays; American literature
Mr. Sterling’s critics may at least claim credit for candor. For cause
of action, as the lawyers say, they aver his use of strange, unfamiliar
words. Now this is a charge that any man should be ashamed to make;
first, because it is untrue; second, because it is a confession of
ignorance. There are not a half-dozen words in the poem that are not in
common use by good authors, and none that any man should not blush to
say that he does not understand. The objection amounts to this: that
the poet did not write down to the objector’s educational level—did not
adapt his work to “the meanest capacity.” Under what obligation was he
to do so? There are men whose vocabulary does not exceed a few hundreds
of words; they know not the meaning of the others because they have
not the thoughts that the others express. Shall these Toms, Dicks and
Harrys of the slums and cornfields set up their meager acquirements
as metes and bounds beyond which a writer shall not go? Let them stay
upon their reservations. There are poets enough, great poets, too, whom
they can partly understand; that is, they can understand the simple
language, the rhymes, the meter—everything but the poetry. There
are orders of poetry, as there are orders of architecture. Because a
Grecian temple is beautiful shall there be no Gothic cathedrals? By the
way, it is not without significance that Gothic architecture was first
so called in derision, the Goths having no architecture. It was named
by the Deacon Harveys of the period.
The passage that has provoked this class of critics to the most
shameless feats of self-exposure is this:
Infernal rubrics, sung to Satan’s might,
Or chanted to the Dragon in his gyre.
Upon this they have expended all the powers of ridicule belonging to
those who respect nothing because they know nothing. A person of light
and leading in their bright band[2] says of it:
“We confess that we had never before heard of a ‘gyre.’ Looking it up
in the dictionary, we find that it means a gyration, or a whirling
round. Rubrics chanted to a dragon while he was whirling ought to be
worth hearing.”
Now, whose fault is it that this distinguished journalist had never
heard of a gyre? Certainly not the poet’s. And whose that in very
sensibly looking it up he suffered himself to be so misled by the
lexicographer as to think it a gyration, a whirling round? Gyre means,
not a gyration, but the path of a gyration, an orbit. And has the poor
man no knowledge of a dragon in the heavens?—the constellation Draco,
to which, as to other stars, the magicians of old chanted incantations?
A peasant is not to be censured for his ignorance, but when he glories
in it and draws its limit as a dead line for his betters he is the
least pleasing of all the beasts of the field.
An amusing instance of the commonplace mind’s inability to understand
anything having a touch of imagination is found in a criticism of the
now famous lines:
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