Leigh Hunt's Relations with Byron, Shelley and Keats
John Stuart Mill · en
"I wrote nothing which I did not feel to be true, or think so. But I
can say with Alamanni, that I was then a young man, and that I am now
advanced in years. I can say, that I was agitated by grief and anger,
and that I am now free from anger. I can say, that I was far more
alive to other people's defects than to my own, and that I am now
sufficiently sensible of my own to show to others the charity which I
need myself. I can say, moreover, that apart from a little allowance
for provocation, I do not think it right to exhibit what is amiss, or
may be thought amiss, in the character of a fellow-creature, out of
any feeling but unmistakable sorrow, or the wish to lessen evils
which society itself may have caused.
"Lord Byron, with respect to the points on which he erred and
suffered (for on all others, a man like himself, poet and wit, could
not but give and receive pleasure), was the victim of a bad bringing
up, of a series of false positions in society, of evils arising from
the mistakes of society itself, of a personal disadvantage (which his
feelings exaggerated), nay, of his very advantages of person, and of
a face so handsome as to render with strong tendencies of natural
affection," and declared that his fickleness had been "nurtured by an
excessively bad training." In exoneration of Hunt he said that if
"disappointment and the fervour of a new literary work--which often
draws the pen beyond its original intention--led Leigh Hunt into a
book that was too severe, perhaps too one-sided in its views, he
himself afterwards corrected the one-sidedness, and recalled to mind
the earlier and undoubtedly the more correct impression he had had of
Lord Byron." I, 202-203.
him an object of admiration. Even the lameness, of which he had such
a resentment, only softened the admiration with tenderness.