Leigh Hunt's Relations with Byron, Shelley and Keats — John Stuart Mill — John Shaqi
Leigh Hunt's Relations with Byron, Shelley and Keats
John Stuart Mill · en
October 30, 1815, in reply to these objections Hunt sent forth this
defense: "we accomodate ourselves to certain habitual, sophisticated
phrases of _written_ language, and thus take away from real feeling of any
sort the only language _it ever actually uses_, which is the _spoken_
language." At the same time he made a few alterations at Byron's
suggestion.[59] And again the latter wrote: "You have two excellent points
in that poem--originality and Italianism."[60] After the _Story of Rimini_
appeared he wrote to Moore: "Leigh Hunt's poem is a devilish good
one--quaint, here and there, but with the substratum of originality, and
with poetry about it that will stand the test."[61] In 1818 Byron's
opinion had changed somewhat:
"When I saw _Rimini_ in Ms., I told him I deemed it good poetry at
bottom, disfigured only by a strange style. His answer was, that his
style was a system, or _upon system_, or some other such cant; and
when a man talks of system, his case is hopeless; so I said no more
to him, and very little to anyone else. He believed his trash of
vulgar phrases tortured into compound barbarisms to be _old_
English[62] ... Hunt, who had powers to make the _Story of Rimini_ as
perfect as a fable of Dryden, has thought fit to sacrifice his genius
to some unintelligible notion of Wordsworth, which I defy him to
explain.[63]... A friend of mine calls 'Rimini' _Nimini Pimini_; and
'Foliage' _Follyage_. Perhaps he had a tumble in 'climbing trees in
the Hesperides'! But Rimini has a great deal of merit. There never
were so many fine things spoiled as in 'Rimini.'"[64]
Hunt had a distinct theory of language based on a few crude principles. As
his practical application of them had its effect upon Keats, a somewhat
full consideration of them is desirable here. The first and most
conspicuous one, promoted by what Hunt called "an idiomatic spirit in
verse,"[65] was a preference for colloquial words.[66] He mistook for
grace and fluency of diction, a turn of phrase that was without poetic
connection and often in very poor taste. In dialogue, particularly, the
effect is undignified. This professed doctrine was a fuller
development[67] of the statement in the Advertisement to the _Lyrical
Ballads_ of 1798: in Hunt's opinion, Wordsworth failed to consider duly
meter in its essential relations to poetry, and while Hunt himself desired
a "return to nature and a natural style" he thought that Wordsworth had
substituted puerility for simplicity and affectation for nature. Hunt's
acknowledged model for the poem was Dryden,[68] but Hunt's colloquial
phrasing, peculiar diction, elision,[69] and loose expansion approach much
more closely to Chamberlayne's _Pharronida_ (1689) than to anything in
Dryden.[70] The following extract is one of many that might be cited as
suggestive of Hunt's _Story of Rimini_: