The treatment of nature in English poetry between Pope and WordsworthReynolds, Myra
History
The treatment of nature in English poetry between Pope and Wordsworth
Reynolds, Myra
English poetry -- History and criticism; Nature in literature
The English essayists, notably Addison and Pope, were early exponents
of a freer style of gardening. In “The Tatler” (August 31, 1710)
Addison laughed the tulip mania out of court, and lightly set aside
“the best ordered parterres” as of less charm than “a spot of daisies
or banks of violets.” Slight as it is, this preference for the wild
flower over the garden rarity, for fields and hedgerows over the
choicest plant embroidery, strikes a new note in the garden literature
of the eighteenth century. Two years later, in “The Spectator” for
September 6, 1712, Addison gave an account of an imaginary garden
evidently made to his taste and far enough removed from the formal
garden. The irregularity and wildness of his flower-garden, the
wandering rill that runs “as it would do in an open Field,”[541] the
trees and shrubs growing freely, are what he prides himself upon.
The whole picture is a plea for the “beautiful Wildness of Nature”
as against “the nicer Elegancies of Art.” But Addison’s strongest
utterance, and the one in which the theoretical side is most fully
discussed is in “The Spectator” for June 25, 1712. In contrasting the
works of Nature and Art, Nature is throughout given the preference.
There is something more bold and masterly in the rough careless
Strokes of Nature, than in the nice Touches and Embellishments
of Art. The Beauties of the most stately Garden or Palace lie
in a narrow Compass; the Imagination immediately runs them
over, and requires something else to gratify her, but in the
wide Fields of Nature the Sight wanders up and down without
Confinement, and is fed with an infinite variety of Images,
without any certain Stint or Number.... Our _British_
Gardeners, on the contrary, instead of humouring Nature, love to
deviate from it as much as possible. Our Trees rise in Cones,
Globes, and Pyramids. We see the Marks of the Scissors upon
every Plant and Bush. I do not know whether I am singular in my
Opinion, but, for my own part, I would rather look upon a Tree,
in all its Luxuriancy and Diffusion of Boughs and Branches than
when it is thus cut and trimmed into a Mathematical Figure; and
cannot but fancy that an Orchard in Flower looks infinitely more
delightful than all the little Labyrinths of the most finished
Parterre.
Pope followed up this attack in a wittier fashion in “The Guardian”
(September 29, 1713). He, too, prefers “the amiable simplicity of
unadorned nature” to “the nicer scenes of art.” Only people of the
common level of understanding are, he thinks, “principally delighted
with the little niceties and fantastical operations of art,” while
“persons of genius .... are always most fond of nature.” His chief
attack is on sculptured greens, and he gives a sarcastic account of
a town gardener who was so skilful that he could cut “family pieces
of men, women, or children,” and who had for sale the most elaborate
greens. His catalogue was as follows:
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