A later poet—Coventry Patmore—wrote a far longer line than even these—a
line not only speeding further, but speeding with a more celestial
movement than Cowley or Crashaw heard with the ear of dreams.
‘He unhappily adopted,’ says Dr. Johnson as to Cowley’s diction, ‘that
which was predominant.’ ‘That which was predominant’ was as good a
vintage of English language as the cycles of history have ever brought to
pass.
TO LUCASTA.—Page 163.
Colonel Richard Lovelace, an enchanting poet, is hardly read, except for
two poems which are as famous as any in our language. Perhaps the rumour
of his conceits has frightened his reader. It must be granted they are
now and then daunting; there is a poem on ‘Princess Louisa Drawing’ which
is a very maze; the little paths of verse and fancy turn in upon one
another, and the turns are pointed with artificial shouts of joy and
surprise. But, again, what a reader unused to a certain living symbolism
will be apt to take for a careful and cold conceit is, in truth, a
rapture—none graver, none more fiery or more luminous. But even to name
the poem where these occur might be to deliver delicate and ardent poetry
over to the general sense of humour, which one distrusts. Nor is
Lovelace easy reading at any time (the two or three famous poems
excepted). The age he adorned lived in constant readiness for the
fiddler. Eleven o’clock in the morning was as good an hour as another
for a dance, and poetry, too, was gay betimes, but intricate with
figures. It is the very order, the perspective, as it were, of the
movement that seems to baffle the eye, but the game was a free impulse.
Since the first day danced with the first night, no dancing was more
natural—at least to a dancer of genius. True, the dance could be
tyrannous. It was an importunate fashion. When the Bishop of Hereford,
compelled by Robin Hood, in merry Barnsdale, danced in his boots (‘and
glad he could so get away’), he was hardly in worse heart or trim than a
seventeenth century author here and there whose original seriousness or
work-a-day piety would have been content to go plodding flat-foot or
halting, as the muse might naturally incline with him, but whom the tune,
the grace, and gallantry of the time beckoned to tread a perpetual
measure. Lovelace was a dancer of genius; nay, he danced to rest his
wings, for he was winged, cap and heel. The fiction of flight has lost
its charm long since. Modern art grew tired of the idea, now turned to
commonplace, and painting took leave of the buoyant urchins—naughty
cherub and Cupid together; but the seventeenth century was in love with
that old fancy—more in love, perhaps, than any century in the past. Its
late painters, whose human figures had no lack of weight upon the
comfortable ground, yet kept a sense of buoyancy for this hovering
childhood, and kept the angels and the loves aloft, as though they shook
a tree to make a flock of birds flutter up.
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