Boston UniversityOpenBU http://open.bu.eduTheses & Dissertations Dissertations and Theses (pre-1964)1942The literary criticism of Lord Byronhttps://hdl.handle.net/2144/7325Boston UniversityBOSTON UNIViiRSITYGRADUATE SCHOOLThesisTHE LITERARY CRITICISM OF LORD BYRONbyMary Elizabeth Wadsworth(B.S., Boston University, 1942)submitted in partial fulfilment of therequirements for the degree ofMaster of Arts1942ApprovedProfessor of EnglishDigitized by the Internet Archivein 2013http://archive.org/details/literarycriticisOOwadsTTIS L~ ?HITICI3I.! OF LORD BYRCFTntrodMctionf... J'.e relation betv/een Eyrcn's charact literarclia-acteri sties in general.IT. Loci of Byron's Critical Viei-:s.r. Poetry, prose dedications, and letters,^. 7 "-^'^r-Q -r-'-i r"^psons for vrritinr c^:" ticisiii.Ill, Byron's Critic-: 1 Tenets,-yrc"" " . a ITec-cla ssicistPyre RcrriFnticistIlis definition of a poet ?nd his opinion of poetry--His requisites for v.-ritin^- rpc--*-^-/^"i s definition of good dr?na17. Eyroii'o tpinions d ^ ....a. ITis naaner of v/riting and criticizingb. His reasons for his unpopularityc. His lack of kncwl " of the technicalities j^^oetryd. ris opinion of r- ^ and their e'^'^cct cn hine. Annoyance caused b^^ the printer^f. !!ov/ he v/as c " ' ^ by accusatiouo ii-riK-ug. Opinions of . . jh. Opinions of DCIT »^JAXi . Ki s v" 'j. His , .1.V. Byron's criticism of eighteenth- century and earlier , (if it be so) letus h?ve 'speechless reverie', or 'silent reverie',but, at all events, do away the recurrence."'^'Eccol--! hr-^ve mprked some p?ssa^^es with doublereacin^s— choose between them— cut--add—re.iect--or destroy--do with them as you v;lll—T lea\ e itto you and the Committee—you cannot say so-c?lled'a non commltendo. ' . . .Tlae passages marked thus = «,above and below, ^re for ,you to choose betv/eenepithex-s, and ffjch like poetical fumltux-e.'As flashing far *he new voxcano shoneAnd swepo the skies withrmeteors not their own,[lightnings^AHiile thousands throng' d around the burning dome,'T think 'thousands' less flat than 'crowds collected'—but don't let me plunge into the bathos, or riseinto Nat. Lee's Bedlam metaphors. ..' choose ' * or 're-fuse'—but please yourself, and don't mind 'Sir Fret-ful'... you know better than best."^'Till slovv'ly ebb'd the rlava of the wave,cspent volcanicAnd blackening ashes mark'd the Muse's grave.'If not, we will say 'burning v^eve',and instead of'burning clime' , in the line some couplets back, have'glowing' . "^Although Byron was goodnaturedl^/" uncertain of his aestheticqualities, he wouldn't change his opinions, especially v/hen hisfrankness involved what he considered his political integrity.Btc.2. L S: J V, 2613. L J JI, 282. 1813 to Murray4. L 6- J II, 34. 1811 to Dallas5. L J TI, 145-8. 1812 to Holland6. L & J II, 156•"With regard to the politicpl and metaphysicalpcints, I a.ai afraid T c^n alter nothing; but Ihave high authority for my Errors in that point,for even the ASITEID vv'as a political pcein, andvn^itten for a political purpose; and as to rayunlucky op:'niGns on Subjects of i.iore iraporji^gnce,I am too sincere in them for recantation.'"^'^His uncertainty in himself took still another form, for whihe is greatly criticized by those critics wftio are not thoroughlyfainiliF.r with the facts of his life. T am referring to his ar-rogant and aristocratic tendencies v/hich he expressed in variousattitudes. Although he had always been aware of the fact that hVv'as of the nobility, it v/as not until he was eleven that he in-herited the title of "Lord Byron" and the family seat at IlewsteaAbbey. Therefore he had to contend against while at Harrow, notonly the s-'^me misfortuae—his lameness—which had set him apartfrom his other schoolfellows at Aberdeen, but also the fact thathe was a ver;"- young lord. This last was overcome to a great ex-tent, however, since he became famous for his protection of theyounger boys and those less fortunate than himself. He was verysensitive in regard to these two matters which set him apart frothe average boy of his age, however, and when he entered the Houof Lords, he continued to feel like an outsider, and as alwaysduring his life, as a result of his lack of assurance, he wcrrieabout the impression he was making on his companions:"V/hatever diffidence or nervousness I felt (endI felt both, in a great degree) arose from thenumber rather than the quality of the assemblage,and the thought rathgr of the public without thanthe persons within."'Sa. L & J TT, ^6. 1811 to Murray7. L ^: J TJ, 198.:haasecLady Blessington, however, who was anything but s^mipstheticin her opinion of Byron, v.rpote:"Byron is, '^fter all, - spoiled child.This is a ver^'- opinionated st^tpment for a vroman to make v;ho metByron in 1823, just a short time before his departure for Greeceand who used rather good strategy as an excuse for intruding upoilhim, J^ndjthen aft<=r his death succeeded in making her literary re-putation by writing an unsympathetic /ourn^l of her c onversationiwith him. She tells the reader that Byron received a tragedydedicated:"From George—to George Byron." Byron'sejaculation was: "Hov; stupid, how ignorant topass over ray ranki" He then determined not toread it, "for a man c^=pable of com^mtting sucha solecism in good breeding, .. can v/rite nothingv/orthy of being read."*-This is -ri =^xample of the fact that, although Byron v/as aliberal in politics and in favor of freeing all men from thetyranny of oppression, he, nevertheless, used his rank to bolstei]ap his lack of faith in his ovm meritoriousness. For the samereason Byron set forth the following idea when he felt uncertainr,E to one of his liter^^r''' works or when one nf them was criticized.Dut if he Vv'ere speaking or writing against a noble, v;e find theconverse of the idea:"Authors aren't considered as men of fashion inthe circles of haut ton,to which their literaryreputations have given them an entree, unless theyhappen to be of high brith."^^L8.6y Blessington also accused him of affecting a Johnsoniantone, of be:nc^ sententious, and of enjoying ber'n-^ listened to, arl|d8. Bles. 102 9. Bles. 114 9a. Bles. 168rof observing his effect upon the listener. -^^ This v;?s only naturfl,for Eyron needed to feel that he had authority in order to heveconfidence in himself. It vras undoubtedly for a similar reasonthat Byron affected a nonchalance in all his work, a gallantnessand mockery against the plodding, less versatile v/riter v;ho allo^ji/'eda party to buy his opinions and who v.'rote for patronage. Byronv/as in every way, hov:ever, the "antithesis of the hypocrite", asCalv^.rt v;rites,^l for when Byron does pose, v:hich is seldom, hehas convinced himself to a far greater degree than he could everhope to bluff an observing reader. There is much in his lettersand poetry/" expressing his conteiUpt for x,he political and religiojlishypocrite, and those who vacillate from one side of an argumentto another.Byron shouxd never be accused of being essentially arrogant!and misanthropic. He was extremely kind to both men and animalsThe story of his love for Boatswain is viell known. He once wounieda bira, tnen took it home and triea to save its lifef he neverweno hunting again. He subsidized Hunt and his entire family xo||ra long xirne in It»ly rather onj=n nai-o Hunt's feeling's, alt,nou^nhe really disliked tne man who did not have insight enout-^h torealize that his journal v^^as a failure, ne wrote en account ofa thunderstorm in the Alps in his Journal. The guard had v/ajite^to carr^^ his cane, but just as Byron was about to let him, heremembered that it was a "swordstick" , and since he was afraidthat it might attract the lightning to the guard, he kept it hinj-self.-^^ Therefore, although one hears Byron's violent temper ancTo: Bles. 56 lIT Calvert 19 12. L S- J III, 3.^8. 181(cextreme emotionalism v»Rn.ich caused him to fear his future sanity,referred to more frequently th^n his numberless acts of kindnessByron himself v.TOte:"It is strange enough but the ra scaille English, whocalumniate me in every direction and on every score,v:henever thev are in great distress, recur to me forassistance . "13Calvert, v/ho v/rote ^ sympathetic and understanding criticism,said he possessed:"a kindliness pre-eminently protective. . .like Swift,one of those people who are much more popular withtheir valets, their hcu se- servants , and the poor,than with their peers. Supersensitive and affectionatehe gathered a menagerie ab-^ut him because he couldnot be sure enough of the regard of his fellows. "-^4Along vdth his kindliness one should not fail to 'mention hifairness. Murray offered him a thousand g-uineas for the GIACURand THE ERJDE OF AEYDOS, but he refused to t-ke the money untilsales had shov\.Ti the v/orks to be v;orth this price. He neveraccepted money for liis literari^ work until late in his life. Formerly he had commanded the money to be sent to an unfortunatewriter or friend. One of his earliest works h^^c' been criticizedand on Finchot's advice he stopped the republication of FUGITIVEPIECES, and v^.en Rogers reminded him that he was intimate v;ithm»ny of the people he hed harshly satirized in El^rGLTSH BARDS AlTDSCOTCH RE^/IE)'/ERS , he forbade another reprint of that slso. Thisaction shows a reasonable nature that "Pyron is not always creditv/ith having possesijed. Although he v/as always having pecuniarydifficulties, he had Murray send much of the money which shouldhave been his for his pc-^tr;^' to niLmerous acquaintances pnd otherfeTST L & J VI, 133. 1822. 14. CalvertJd{who begged assistance.B3^ron was always restless, melancholy,-nd longed for thelife of violent action denied him because of his lajneness. Heonce v/rote to his friend Hodgson that he v>ras doing "anything tocure" himself from "conjugating the accursed verb 'Ennuyer ' . "-'-^This led him to half hint that some incidents were true in hispoetr;;,^ such as the story of GTACT.TR in the Turkish Tales, for in Lletter to Lewis he v;rote that the reader v;ould wonder at its beifgvrritten if he onlv knew "the feelinfrs of that situation" for itwas "icv even to recollect them". 16;r15. L f J II, 55. 1811 17. L 8: J tjj , 408.16. L & J II, 361. Dec. 5, 1B13. 18. L ^: T IV, 73 cueted fromScull's ri ' ube V/uika iV*^ 5^19. L c?r J ITI, 438 from Gait's LIFE CF LCHD bItRC:p. 345-6.In 1814 he v/rote to Hiss ITilbanke:"'Vhere I shall go, it is useless to inquire.In the midst of myriads of the living andthe dead worlds--st5=rs--systens— infinity—why should I be anxious about an atom?"-'-'^A beautiful literary friendship existed betv/een the youngByron and Sir V/alter Scott, who v/rote an essay on Byron's characin Y/hich he said "the proper language" of Barron's face v/as "thatof melancholy . "12 A similar comment v/as made by the French writStandhal, v;ho gave an account of Byron at Milan. -^^ One eveningthey heard Mayer's ELEInTA sung. Stendhal v:as struck by the ex-pression in Byron's eyes and realized that never before had heseen anything so enthusiastic. He ends this story v/ith the v/ord|^:"Internally, I made a vov/ thft I never would of my ov/n free accosadden a spirit so noble."In 1816 Byron v/rote to Murr-y describing the sensation ofrecovering from fainting, which incidentally showed his state oferd(,cmind at the time. He reported that it \-:as acc-^mp-nied by a tota .loss of memory, and by way of comment, said this state vrould notbe disagreeable, if one didn't recover his memory again.When he finally dedided to go to Greece to aid their causeagainst tyranny, he lost much of his restless melancholy, for hehad at last found a v/orthwhile cause on v;hich to expend his enti:'eenerg3%Lady Elessmgtcn v^rrote'"^ th?t he en^ioyed ridiculing sentime;itand romantic feelings, but that he showed much himself, for hewould sometimes become so emotion?=l th^t his eyes vjculd :^411 v.'ititears. He has often been accused of being an atheist, but throu gh-out his works are sincere and deep feelinr^'s of the mystery andsupernrturalism he felt in the presence of the Supreme "'^inr,and Lady Blessington quotes him as saying:"ZIZ fine object in the phenomena of nature, excitesstrong feelirjgs of religion in all elevated minds,and an outpouring of the spirit of the Creator,that... is the essence of innate love and gratitudeTjO the Divinity. "22In 1*^13, he vrrote to T'^oore: "tenderness is not my forLe."He is re': 'erring to his writings, and this is true to a great ex-tent, for satire most certainly was, in spite of the fact thatsome critics such C-lvert do not agree. (It must be acknow-ledged, however, that B^Ton often v.Tote that something or otherwas not his "forte", such as "prologui sing"23 gnd punctuation.)He had a deep love for both of his daughters, and whileAllegra lived, there is much about ner progress in education, et:.,20"!^ L e.: J TIT, 3S8. 23. L S J jj , 25521. Bles. 7322. Pies. 124rto be found in his letters to his fr: enrs. L^oy Plessinrton men-tions thpt for someti'ne before ids departure for Greece, ne dwel"con"Lxnu?lly on his deep desire to s^^e Ads; ?nd his interest inher is very apparent in his letters, his journals, and nis poetr;In 1817, he wrote to Au^sta:"I must love sometning in my old age, andprobably circumstances v.'ili render thispoor little cr^atui-e ^ilegra/ a greatand, perhaps, my only comfort. "^4If Byron had been able to live v/ith his daughters and act the pa:of a father as he so desired, his life would undoubtedly havebeen much happier and his later poetry would surely have been frrriting. He considered poetryan art or attribute resulting from the passions and thus refusedto look upon it as a profession.-^ Poetry, according to Byron, is"the expression of excited passion, "the feeling of a Former/;orld and future." Poetry finds a useful place in the Vv'orld3cco"*ding to this definition, for "the best of Prophets of thefuture is the Fast."'^Yet he \'ibs fond of v.'riting that all poets are "crazy. . .thou£hfew have the candour to avow it," he "mo^e than the rest," for hisIT L TV, 23S. 1818. 3. L & J V, 18^. 1S21.2. L c^- J V, 318. 1821 to Hoore. 4. L &/J V, 1S9. 1821.ffrankness is proof enourh to him that he isn't in his ''^.t mindHe v/as quoted as saying th?t he hoped his daughter Ada v/ouldn'the "poetical" since it was "enough to have one such fool in afoHiily."^ Byron, v;ho alv/ays in fea^ -'^.sajiity, v.^^ote in1815 that he had heard th^t poets "rarely go mad," so he 'suppose(|.the v/riter meant "that the insanity effervesces and evaporatesin verse . "'^Although Byr^^n acknov/led^ed th?t he found "scribbling;" arelief, since it allowed him to release his pent-up emotions, henevertheless believed .hat if he did net stop, he \;oulc have'frittered avray" his mind before he v/as thirty, ^ for no one shcube a rh;^TTier v.hc c^uld be anythi^.^- better.^ If one's ye?r's can'be better employed theji in sweating poesy, a man had better be aditcher. "-S It annoyed him to see Scott and other great men "wh|^mi'-'ht h^ve ^11 been agents and leaders, now mere spectators...whwould write who had anything better to do?, . . ' Acti ons—actions,'I say, and not vn:'i ting, --le?£t of all, rhjrme. . .v;h?t a worthless,idle brooc it is!"-^'^ He had no great esteem for poetical personespecially women, for they have "so much of the 'ideal' in prsct£ in ethics; "^-'- hov/ever, as author^ ss^s they can do no greatTOhand. ^ Byron soon c?jne to the conclusion that "v/hen once the'Gods make a man poetical', the Devil generall^^ keeps him so."-'-^14In 1813, he wrote to Hiss Hilbenke:5. Bles. 197 10. L P~ J II, 3456. Cal. 81 from Ralph Milbanke's 11. L r^. J II, 34G, 1S13.A3TARTE p. 313. 12. L P- J IV, 201, 1S187. L J III, 248. To Hunt. 13. L r j m,174, 1815.8. L Sr J III, 372, 1?15. 14. L ^ III, 405. L (P- J II, 338, 1813.L (S- J IV, 284,- 1819;.dcs("I by no means r?nk poetr;'- or poets high in the scaleof intellect. This may look like affectation, but itis my reel opinion. It is the lava of the imaginatioiwhose eruption prevents en earthquake. They say poet{never or rarely ?o mad . Gowper and Collins are insteri(jlesto the c ntrary (but Cov/per v/pe no poet). It is, how-ever, to be remarked that they rarely do, but aregenerally so near it that I cannot help thinking rhymeis so far useful in anticipating and preventing thedisorder. I prefer the talents of action... to allspeculations of those mere dreamers of another existence."The poet more than any other person is unable to ^iustlyappreciate the works of those v/ith v/hom he is familiar, thus heshould live in solitude, rendering his presence more desired byits rarity... and be as distinct in their general habits, as ingenius, from the common hero of mankind, -^'^ for:"a man's poetr;^'' is a distinct faculty, cr soul, andhas no more to do with the everyday individual thanthe Inspiration with the Pythoness when removed fromher tripod."-'-^Thus Eyrcn alternates from an exalted outlook on the \:ork oa poet to a more cynic^^l and despairing point-cf-view such asthe following:"As to defining vJhat a poet should be, it is notv/orthwhile, for what ^^^^ they worth? Vfhat havethey done?"17Cn the whole it can not be said that his negative estimation ofpoetry and the poet can be considered either a result of hisromantic or of his classic ideals.Byron also m^de a number of observations as to the end ofpoetry and the effect of literature on a person. V/hen one of hj|spoems '"^s criticized for its philosophy, he asked hi? publisher18if he knew of anyone who had evefr been altered by a poem, for15] ^les. irc16. L J V, 4^9, 1821.17. L e J V, 196, 1821.18. L J V, 47C , 1821.(cthe end of all scritblement v/as only tc emuse.-^^^- He observed th,men go %o a drama, not for the moral, but to be ajnused, since"Plays make mankind no better and no worse . "'^'^Byron had both the TTeo-classic and the Romantic concept ofthe end for which poetr;^r should be v/ritten. ^o book should beconsidered totally bad which has even one reader who has enjoyedit and l^inds pleasure in goino- back tc it nov: and then.^"'" It wasin his opinion, perhaps better to be the author of a work whichwas not too successful, :^or:"A successful work...makes a man a v.^etch for life: itengenders in him a thirst for notoriety and praise,that precluded the possibility of repose; this spurshim on to atter.pt others, which are alv-;ays expectedto be superior to the f: -^st . . . and , in the present dayone failure is placed'as a" counterbalance of liftysuccessful efforts. "22On the otherhkBd, he does, in the following lines find a pi,for teaching in literature:"Two objiects always should the poet move.Or one or both- -to please or to Lmprove.\^/hate'er you ceach, be brief, if you desimFor our remembrance your didactic line."!^^-"...tb-t bard f'^r all is fix\'irho mingles v:ell instruction witn uis wit."-'-^®As in tne preface to his S.ARDA?TAPALUS , Byrun stated that ani;is"Lance oi- i--!]u:''^ In vrriting is oiten a resuxt of ^ f-=ult in tt=rcnx^ec^, not in the aro. Since each poem is v;ritten for a ce;tain effect, Byron believed that the writer should strive for thisffect no matter hov; -^t is produced. However, he should bear inL8a. L ^ J TT, 2?9 , 1810. 21. L &, J II, 364, Dec. 1S13.LRb. HINTS FROM HORACE, 1.303-4. 22. Bles. 265L8c. " " " 1.370 23. Cambridge edition Poetry, p. ^50L8d. " " " 1.531-5LSe. " " " 1.542-3cemind that "like paintings, poems me.y be too hi.r^hly finished . "-^^Some of his observ^=tions v/ere m^=de in beautifully poeticlangUFge, such as the following" on the purple patches to be foun(.in literature:"After all, v;hct is a v/crk— cny--or every work- -but adesert v/ith fountains, -rid, pcrl'^^s s rnrove or two,every day's journey?"-^^Thus he considered it possible for a long work to hf=ve some cull2C"In a long work 't is fair to steal repose."In the course of his criticisms, Pyron lists knowledge re-quisite to the art of v^riting. Since he hsc traveled widely andv/as thoroughly familiar v/ith the customs, traditions, histor^r, a]|idlanguages of v-ricus countries, he had no patience for the write:who remained in his owti country and attem.pted a description of athing which he never experienced personally, Byron consideredthis as unf air to the general reader, who naturally took the autlior'sststements as truth, as itv.'as annoying to the msn who had perso:ialconnections v;ith the thing being discussed. Byron wrote r-^ himself:"I could not write upon pnything, without somepersonal experience ?nd foundaticn, "^^Emotional experience was another of his requisites,"To write so ?=s to bring home to the heart, tlie heartmust have been tried, but, perhpps, ceased to be so.VHiile you are under the influence of passions, youonly feel, but can not describe them, . ."/hen ell isover... trust to memory--she is then but too faithful. '^^Byron fully believed thrt no mpn of poetical te'^pera.ment "can awplda strong passion of so rae kind", for t-:is is the "poetrj'' of life19. L ^- J IT, '^26, :^ov. 17, IS: 13. 24. Medwin, 13320. -!T^"r3 FRCI.: HORACE, 1.570. 25. L J JiJ 25 1, 1316 to I.!co||:*e2G. L II, ceo.^9e LyFe v/cndered v/het he shoulc" hFve leemed end thus have been ^-bleto v.Tite eccurately Fb-^ut, had he lived the mere life c_' a "quiemercpntilc politician, or ? lord in v/aitinr." If one wishes tovrrite vividly, -ne must travel and experience the turmoil of ex-citeraent and passions.-One must "think much and r-ad little to be absolutely origihal,"Fov/ever, ^;'^ron finds this impossible tecause reading is e prere-quisite to the art of thinking. Barron, who had no faith in innaideas, believed that one must reflect much to make his knowledgehis ov.Ti person-lly, which "to a cert?=in degree ' will supply s deficiency in experience and originality. Byron, v:ho was intens(interested in much "^rcm. the past, and v.^ho w^s at the same ti^^.edeeply interested in man, believed that:"The lapse of ages ch angesall things—tirae--rank--the esrth--the b'^unds of the sea—the stars of thesky, and everything 'about, around, and underneath'man, except man himself , v;ho has alv-'a;''S been, andjal-ways will be, an unlucky rascal. "^-^7According to Tfedvan,'"' Byron told him that one who wants tobe a poet should do anything else rather than make verses, butaccording to Byron's ITIIJTS FRCM HORACE:"None rp^ch erpertness vrithout yesrs cf toil."^^This latter agrees with the classical precept stated in Horace'sARS FORTICA, to the effect that practice is necessarj'- for com-petence in VvT'iting.Byron was annoyed throughout his own life by the inaccuracifes28awhich he found in the translations of his works. He stated that27. Medv/in, 290 29. L c^- J V, 7C,182C, I.Ioore28. HI1TT3 FROM HORACE, 1.640 30. Bles. 34328a. L r' J IV, 127, 1818. 31. L ^- J V, l-"2, 1^'^21.one v/ho translates or quotes another author should be thoroughlyconversant in the forei^jn tongue, ^or if one doesn't understand £language, he isn't fit to be trusted with even a quotastion. Thisv;as such an irmort^^nt point to Byron, th^t he actualljr paid anItalian a large sum of money for destroying the translation of oiof Byrcn's v/orks. V/hen Schlegel wrote something against him in1821, Byron was furious, and st^^ted that:"There is a distinction betv/een native Criticisms,because it belongs to the nation to ;iudge and pro-nounce on natives; but v/hat have I to do with Germ.anyor Germans f neither my sub^^ecfcs nox^my language havinganything common with the Co^mtry?"^'^Byron erlso entered into the controversy of whether JTature wjmore important to a literar;"- v:crk than v;as art. Unlike the usualRomantic conception, Byron believed that simple ITature won't mak(any kind of artist, "least of all a poet", the most artificial,perhaps, o-^ -11 artists :n his v^-"!^-"- (^rp^nce. Poets must t-ke thibest illustrations from art; for exa.aple, it is more pleasing touse "dagger" rather than "fist" in Antony's speech reading thus:"You all do know this mantle...Look'. In this place rpn Cassius' dagger through.".,17-,- c- f !i^r-f---rn-ppj v-o-'iid have been closer to nature, but lesspoetical, for art isn't inferior to nature in poetrj''. "A High-lander's plaid" is moT'e "Doetical than tatooed savages althoughthey vrere described by ^Vordsworth himself like tne "'idiot in hisglor^r.'" In the L'^TT^ '^C *'^=^^ohn TTurray/ in answer zo Bowles'32. L r J V, ?3733. Letter toe»slir"A great artist will make a block of stone as sublimeas a mountain, and a good poet can imbue a pack ol* cai||dsvrith more poetry th?n Inhabits the forests of AmericaIt is the business and the proof of a r.oet.,.for 'agood "'orkm^n v;ill not find fault v.'ith nls tools,*so away with the "c«nt about, nature". "^^Yet in the TTFTS FPm HORACE he leads us to believe that heconsiders art and nature of about equal value:"...we loathe an artificial strain--Yet art and nature join'd v/nll v;in the prize. "'^^Although he advocated, as did the ITeo-classic critics, thestudy 0^ the ancients, as well as detailed studies of Pope andT^ohnson, he wrote of the poets of his own day:"Cur fp.me will be hurt by admiration and imitati on.V/hen I say our, I mean all (Lakers included),exceptthe postscript ofthe Augustans. The next generation(from the quantity'' ?nd facility of imitation) willtumble and break their necks o^^f our Pegasus who runsav/a:/ v;ith us; but we keep^the saddle, because we brokethe rascal and c^n ride . '•'-'^•-'^Therefore, although he cesi-'^ed the v;riter to employ art and iraitsLion of the classics in his writing, he nevertheless believed, asaid the cl'-ssic critics to p c-^rtain extent, that there was a pl^cefor nature and originality in one's work.One should not be surprised to find Byron discussing varioudtypes of literature throughout hia^vork, --although he once stated^'jhat he wasn't sure whether there were different orders of poetr:,for a poet should be ranked accordinr "to the pov:er o"^' his per-onnance," not b>| the branch cijhis art, i'or "the ::oe"o '..ho execut« sbest is the hir"hest whatever his department. ""^^^ Another reason lorhis uncertainty as to the com.mon sense c-^ ser^'^r»pt: n" poetr^'' into34. HINT3 FROM HOTlACIi] 1.701-235. L " J TV, IIB.35^. T.^ttcr to -^'-^ /r!urra^;7 p. 211types, v:p£ th?t poetr>A is in itself passion, -nd therefore ccesnot systerna tize.'^'"^^ If one v/oulc stop to list Byron's estimationsof the standard types of literature, he v/ould discover an incon-sistency in the poet's hiet^archy of poetr;^?-.Re thought there was a "rank fertility" of nineteenth-centu]po^ts all divided into 'schools of poetr^^,' a category'- which, lilthe 'schools of eloquence and of philosophy,' Ccine into existenc(only when the decay the art had caused the number of its ed-herents to increase,'-'' Although he did not believe there wasexactly "an aristocracy of poets", he did think there was a marke"nobility of thought and of style", which, although open to aillevels, was a vesnlt of talent and of education. Ke realized, heever, that it was difficult to decide what would succeed in theliterary v/orld, and even more so to pass ^-judgment on what wouldn'Ihe opposite of this noble type of writing was the vulgar type, 'sad abortive attempt at all t^'ings, 'signifying nothing,' not de-pendent on low themes, or even low lancnaare, for Fielding revelsDOth.,,your vulgar writer is alv;ays most vulgar the higher thesub^iect, "*^^He disapproved of writing- an entire descriptive poem, for itis one of the "lowest branches cf the art" to be used only as "^nere ornament. ""^^ neither did Byron approve of waiting an entirecomposition consisting of fragments, v^vich h^ ^-lled a "species c::omposition" acceptable once, "like one ruin in a view, but one[\rould not build a town of them.""^-^ Yet he thought that the best35b. Letter to ***/Hurray7 38. Letter to ^^''/JSnrre.^ p. 591:^6. " " " 40.' Letter to **=^^urra^37. L ^ J V, 587. 41. L ^- J 2, 291, 1S13 to Hurray.yedkinfway to present s rcmence was in rainiature."^^It is interesting to note that although Byron deeply admiredItalian types and literature, especially of the past, he nevertheless h-d a deep dislike for sonnets, althou5"h he v-Tote three him-self in the course of his literary career.Sonnets are "the most pulinr, petrifying, stupidlyPlatonic compositions . I detest the Petrarch so much,that I would not be the man even to have obtained hisLaura, which the metanhysical,v:hining dotard nevercould. "43Byron said that he had obsei'ved in the course of his reacins .that nearly f'll parodies manage to give a bad impression of theiiDriginal, although occasional v;orks, such as the REJECTED ADDRESSESTor the opening of the nev: Tyrivi'- Lane Theatre, are exceptions tothe general rule.'^Byron advocated that a ^oet choose a subiect v:hich he iscapable of handling and actions which will be appropriate to the3ub,iect and purpose, for:..."many deeds preserved in history's pagesAre better t old than ?^cted on the stage. ""^^"Dear authors I suit your topics to your strength,And ponder v;ell your subject and its length;For lift your load, before you're quite aware -V/hat weight your shoulders will, or v/ill not, bear."'^^One of Byron's typically Neo-clacsic or eighteenth- centuryenets was that the sub^^iect matt^^r should be consistent as well aappropriate; therefore, chE;racters should be made to use languageconsistent v.dth the end for which they are being protrayed and it'has alwa.vs been Permitted to poes"'''" to have them do this,^^L2. Lecture 14, p. 367 45, fjm^s FRH.! HORACE, l.'^67-813. L J 370, 1813 4^a. " " " 1.59-62a"But if a new aesign you dare essay,And freely v/ander from the beaten v;ay,True to your cherpcters, till all be passed,Trp-^v^ro ccnsistenc^'" ^'rr-^: first xo l.-- -t . "There is little consistency or dependability m the acimow-ledpment or liter?ry pccomulishrnent,however, for he states thatmuch of one's literary tuccess v;ill depend upon the puulisher, aMmuch will depend u^»on luck, for the number ot v-.T^iters is so ,fp:"ea|,that the re^'der^s mind will become "satuiatea" ana "allow manygooa dishes to go av/ay untouched," for one's mind can contain ona certain amount of poetry.^^Byron advocated the use of common sense and the reason inccmDosition , v/hich is a decidedly Neo-clsssic te'idency. He con-sidered it only natural for the usual writer to expect criticismalthough it is, of course, the most difficult thing for him toface. However,Byron ' s adv i c e v;a s that:"The best reply to ?11 objections is to v.Tite better,end if your enemies will not then do you justice, theworld v/i 11. . .there is a saying of Dr. tTohnson's, v/hidKit is as v:ell to remember, that 'no man vv'as ever vixi'Ljlb^ndovm except by himself .' "^^^BA'^rcn then pdvlsed Lpe ""-onn^ "'^n-itpr to vreit a vear oelorepublishing, which he ccnsioerea, ''a f?ir allotment of time ror ecomposition which is not to be Epic," for even Horace's "nonumpremptur " must nave been Intended lor the I.Ii±lennium, or "somelonger-lived generation than ours."^^ One can always delay as51 ^long as he likes in revising, for "books are never the worse l[|ordelay in the publication." '^'"•ron ^ 'anted to carr^^ the rule oflogic to the characters in his literature also, for the v/riter dliould;47. "TFT3 HORACE, 1.179-82 50. L & J III, 56, 1814 to I48. L ^ J V, r82 to Hodgson, 181P. 51, L 5- J TIT, 227, 1815 Hur49. L & III, 4/, 1&14 lu Ke.yliulCb.ooreI<"Eke out ZTiiJ/ acts, T pray, vath mcrt?l man;Nor call a ghost, unless some cursed scrapeMust open ten trap-doors for your escape. "52Although Byron was a staunch supporter of polish, he nevertheless refused to alter and revise his o\m v/crk, for he seemedthink that by so doinp- he v/ould v/eaken his expression, for secothoughts are not best, although the expression may be;^-^ thus hewrote:'•Anything is better than weakening an expression, ora thought, I would rather be as bouncing as Hat.Lee—than v.l shey-washy like—/Galt7."^2One of the most often repeated and most vehemently wordedprinciples throughout Byron's critical material, is his desirefor factual truth and his conteaipt for hypocrisy. In IX^iJ JUAllstated:"I detest all fiction even in song."^^This v/as often reiterated in his letters to his 'friends;"I hate things all fiction; and therefore TT^E lERGIL^^Iand OTIIELLC have no great associations to me: butrierre /T^/EITICE PRESERVED by Qt\-!a^ has. There shoualways be some foundation of fact for the most airyfabric, ?nd pure invention is but the talent of a liniIn his drama he v/cnted tc^iust as near the truth as he coube,5S for"...in scenes exciting Joy or grief.We loathe the action v;]iich eyceeds belief. "5*^GO"Fiction does best v.-hen taught to look like truth."He v:rotc his lIEIvIOIRS, depositing them with Moore so that hfriend could sell than to enhance his financial position afterByron's death. Moore was told to correct the mistakes, for the52. IHNTS ^OM HORACE 1.292-4. 57. I, -'^ J TV, 118, Murra.v 1S17.53. dpi: rVX^ 6, S "8. L ^ J V, 131, 182056. L J i\J, ill7 fLiii'l c-M . 59jL. Dlto. 1D5.54. L 8: r- r,, 140,1807, pigot 59. I-TTITTS FROM HORACE 286-7.56. L J V, 75, 1820 60. " " " 1.537.61. L ^: J III, 263r^'^. L J TV, 218, 1S18.:,o£ r. m55truth WPS his first object, even if it would be et his ov.tl expenfor "opinions are msde to be changed, or hov/ is truth to be got8t?"^^Although he wrote a number of tiir^es that "tact" is the real£panacea of life, being found in proportion to our sensibility,'he nevertheless wanted a clear statement of facts for he disappij|ove(54"insipid, uncuali^'i ed,ccinmon-place compliment."Tn connection with his discussion of Pope, he stated thatethical poetry is the highest t^-pe bee -use it does in verse what"the greatest of men have wished to accomplish in prose." Hisdecision is in ti^is matter similar to Plato's, for he too, belielivesthat poetry should be banished if its "essence" is a "lie."The true poet will reconcile poetry "v/ith truth and wisdom", for"the highest of all earthly ob^jects must be moral truth." Re-ligious poetry, however, is beyond, the scope of human Dower toportray.This advocacy of truth is, T believe, mainly a classicaltenet.This dislike for revision seems to be more a matter ofstubbornness t^'-^r. -^nythinp- else, hr -T-te as late as 1820:"I can't furbish ," and therefore he stated that hecouldn't and wouldn't correct, for "nobody eversucceeds in it, great and small. Tasso remade thewhole of his Jerusalem; but who ever reads that ver-sion? Pope added to the RAPE r^^^ LCCK, but didnot reduce it."Byron carried this prejudice to such an extent that- he dedidedCOhe would rather give his books away than "hack and hev/ them."63. L r J TIT, SI, luoore 1?14.Byron's principle of polish, is, therefore one of the moreflegrent occasions in which his practice did not follow hisavov/ed tenets.Byron v.^ent into great detail when describing his criticalprecepts for the closet drama, for he believed it was fitting th|.tthere should be good pl-ys no'" ^^-^ then, besides Shakespeare ' s.^lie wanted the drama to be ver;/ simple v;ith severely compressedSpeeches where desirable, and to be ^/.Titten in blank verse"broken down ^=s nearly as possible into c.-^minon language . "'^^ Hedisapproved greatly of rant and bombast, for he strongly ad-vocated a dr^^m^^ b-^s^d on cl^rJ^^i^^l tenets, ^nd was struggling toanhave this typfi of "regular drajAa^' introduced into England. Hebelieved the dialorue form of v«friting a story would cause it tobe more interesting, anc h-^ ^'j-^i adamant in the portr^^yal o-r charac-ters as they v/ere in life, not in accordance with the preferenceof the critics. In the preface to SAHDAHAPALUS,Byron stated, athough Derfectly aware of contemporary opinion, his belief that•with any very distant departure frora...Zde uniti ei7> there mayDe poetry, but can be no drama, "^^ He assured the reader th-t hadmired the old English dramatists, out this is an entirely ciffcrent field.^^ His ob.iect v:as a mental theatre.In 1S13 he stated that c medy--w'^ ^ -h , h-' f - ^ ^^-^.^ i^g enjoyednore than tragedy--^ is the most difficult of compositions,'^'-' anchglish society of the nineteenth century was far too insipid foi80the perfect comedy produced Congreve and V'^nbrugh.33a. L P- J T^J, 81, T'^oore, 1814. 67. L ^- 6,"4. L J V, 371-2, IP 21 68. SARDAI^'AFALTTS , p. 550 Cainbrilbge55. L J Vt 39;:^. . 69. L J V. 347'6. L ^ J V, 32, 1820. 69a. L ^' J ITT, ol.70. L J TI, 373, 1813.80. L & J TT, 398, 1814.rAlthough Byron appears to n-ve en^^cyed the performance of acomedy more than that of a tragedy, his ovm dramatic?! vrorks con-sist of elt of as primarily RomantiThus his definition of poetry is premised upon the poet's emotio](^alexperience and capacity. He found a place in some of his criticism,and certainly in 'ic writin;;, for ^^-ture and freedom in form andthought. In spite of all the authoritative didacticism foundthroughout his letters on the subject of literature, he v/rotehimself that the principles of poetr:' '^--n never be settled, sine"they mean nothing more than tlie predilections of aparticular age... it is now Homer, and now Virgil;once Dryden, and since V/alter Scott. .. Shakespeare andMilton have had t'. eir rise, and they v;ill have theirdecline. "'^'^Thus, according to "human opinion", all must "fluctuate" in a"living language."'^^^^ 97. Letter to £'MVTe.:i/ p. 199.95. Bles. 341.96. L J I, ii99.BYRCN'S CFIFTON CP SOI.CE CF JUS OTN 7^.RK"My music h?.s some mystic di ape cons;And there is much which could not be eppj eciatedTn ^n;'^ manner by the uninitiated."Don Juan, 14, 1746."^y""^^.'-'^s not ? good critic of himself, nor : \2 clv.'aysmocest. Posterity has decided that some of the v;orkt> v/iiich hepraised hirhest are the least valuable, such as the PROPHECY OFBAl""^. -^n"" the HINTS ^x^-,,^^^ ^.^ course he did \JTize s vnie ofhis works very rapidly and being anxious to sell them as quicklyas possible, he told I!urray ?s each manuscript ras finished thatit vjps the best wrk he had ever done. Thus it io ucre diii^'iculto judge Byron's criticism of his ov/n work than it is that of ctfierC'-^nternporpries , bee-use it follows bo special trend.He v.Tcte the first two cpntos of OHJLDE HA.RCLD when he v;astvrenty-two, but he seid they were vn:*itten as if by a man older tjianhis passions early, causing an "anticipated melancholy" as a re-sult of "havin^" anticipated life."-^ Thus the x^houghts ot hisearlier pc"'". r-^i-^ +0 r-- - ycipu ten years his seniobecause o"' tneir nuantit^/ of eyperience,pfe f'^'Und thr=t vrritinr "-t^ows a h!>hi-L, iiKo p vr-^man's '^-llanltry,triere ^ r-e miiiions of men \.-;o.. heve \"-±\L'j.i a be ok, duu le^. whohave vrltxen only one."''^ He believed hlnGeli tne "veriest scrib(>-n or^r'o'^.",''"'a tolf^ ' -•^pj ^1^/^ t,'h'~t 1^*^ '""^sn't a ''^'p^v'^n b'^r'^. '"oet*noi- aia np nave any "love or enLnubiasm tor poetry". Taxs maybe a tj'-pe o+' explansoicn that would serve to illustrate the reaspnthat he frequently maintained he v/as going to stop v/riting, butnever being able to keep the resolution, soon began again."Oons dost thou think me of the old, or rather elCcrlyschool? If one can't Jest v/ith one's friends, withwe be f=ceti '"'^ " -r -,^ r-v—o ^c^--'^" ^athi.irT V, 450, aa. 3t-nhcpe's :;g:_yijc:.2, BYHC^/:JA!JA IciLJU, p. 00. H. ' hCH, Cc^lv-ji b)lerirr(frcni--nie. T have tal'en my leave of that stage, andhenceforth will mountebank it no longer. I have had mcay, and there's an end. The utmost I expect, or evsnv;ish, is to have it said in the BJCGPuMT'lA ERITAII^ITCA,that T might perh^s have been a poet, had I gone onand amended...! h-ve flattered no r^jling powers; I havfenever cncealed a single thcu:;ht that tempted me. The/can't say I have trud:ed to the timies nor to populartopics, (as Johnson, or somebody, said of Cleveland)and vAiatever I have gained has been at the expenditureof as much personal favor as possible; for I do believ|never was a bard more unpopular, quod he ic , than mysel T|17Truth inspired "'^"'"^ '^cst; ther^^c^ e his sati:^-'es, although not ver;"playful", founded as they were on tr^jth, have "more spirit/5eing7 written "con amore . " On the other hand, in 1815, he wrctdthat y-----' ^ornedy and a novel, but burnt them both becausethey ran into reality. He found that he could keep more av;ay fromfacts in rh^nTie.-^-^ A "rage" c?=me over him at times until he had tdwrite or go mad, but "as ^ that regular, uninterrupted love ofwriting...! do not understand it."^"*^In 1207, Byron wrote to - friend that he saw his volumes inevery bookstore, auC basked 'ii. secret'' over his lane. Since th(last review of his poetry*- and "A Friend to the Cause of Literatu|e"had recu.ested him to ^'rit'^ ^.C'^<^, he wondered who would not be abard under the circ^Jms orxices , "if ^11 critics would be so pdite'but he realized that this popularity wouldn't last. He admittedthat his "laurels" had "turned" his head, but looked forv/ard tothe "cooling acids of forthcoming criticism" to restore him tonodesty ^geln,'^ A little later, he wrote that it was odd that twcDpposite critiques should come on the same day, and out of the fivepages of abuse, only two lines vv'ere quoted from different poams to3U^:>^":ort their opi'nion. Bj'^ron disapproved of this method of attack.L l"" ^!T, 5S, I.'coro 1£14:G, 1?C7 17. L J J!!, 64, :.:ccre, Icl:chowever, for ''the proper way to cut up , is to c;uote lon^" -pazsa[^eand make then appear absurd, because simple allegation is noproof. But, as Eyron often reiterated, his compositions "spea!:for themselves, and must stand or fall" by their ov;n merit.^"My work must make its v:&y as well as it can; I knowI have everything against me, engry poets and pre-judices; but if the^poem is a poem, it vill surmountthese obstacles, and if net, it deserves its fate."He used the fact that he wrote rapidly as an excuse for the poorpassages:"My poesy is one thing-, I am another. . .My poetry/ is aseparate ^acuity...! can only v/rite vAien the estro isupon ne; ct r^ll other times T sn myself,"nfor v;riting to him was ag.-ny rather then iplecsure.' Yet he v.Totabout the same time that, although vn?iting and comoosition werehabdts ^^"i ^ mind, success er/^ -n"'-"'.^* r^-^f* on were objects of re-moter reference--not causes, but effects,' A fev/ years earlier,hov;ever, he had riven the following reason for his composition:"To v^ithdraw myself from rayself...h?s ever been ray solmy entire, ray sincere motive in scribbling ?t all; enpublishing is also the continuance of the same objectby the action it affords to the mind, which else re-coils upon itself."^nowever, in 1813 when r^\i^,^c uot to publish ZUL2IFA, hestated that it was "physically impossible" not to,-^^ and he told!urr?y to be careful in printing T^-TU^" DA^^' 'O^^n:'^/, bcause he thought well of it as a composition.^" V/aen he heardthat a critic was v-riting an article on one of his works withouthaving ^<^r'r- it, h^^ s-iC it '-'as a,o nnr-'H the better, -^c^ '^-vinr re.kdit, the critic v/ould be much more severe. He observed at this5. L P T, MR, 18C7 to Pigot SS. L J jj 351 Dec. 1813.L ^ - T, 16^, l^C? to Dallas IC. L S~ j J ^IS] 18138. L •• J T^J, 173. 18. L e- ^^^/371.rtime that between his friend Hobhcuse^s prose snd his ovm verse,'the world v/ill be decently dra\m upon for its peper-mcne;' and p|-tience."^^ He had v.^ritten the BTII^'^ '.r-^-.r- in f-ur ctys endthe COHGAIR in ten:"A most hiimiliatlng confession,, as it proves my v;antof ;*udgment in publishing, andjbhe public's in readingthings v/hich cannot have stamina for permanent attentlton.' 9In 1817 he told TTurray that he was thinking of v-riting pros^lv-?.^^c •i-p;^.--.^_^v,t -I^15a viTt, %n introducingliving people, or suggestions v/hich mip-ht oe applied to them.However, some day he mi~ht attempt "a v;ork of fanc:r in prose, de|&-cr:!'^-^^' " r Italian m-nners and of human passions. At that timehe v/as preoccupied, though, and "as for poesy, mine is the dreamof my sleepin'^ napsicns; vrhen they are avjake I cannot spe«=k theilanguage, cnl^^ in their somnambuli.sm, and ^^ust nov' thej"" are notdormant." One must be in love or "miserable" to vmte poetry,biif r'^-o-] '->in amount of tameness in his work, al-though he had attempted to produce poetr^r "a little above the usibalrun of periodical poesy", Byron cid not ha.ve a very hi;-:h Gpinic|iof his readers for he came to the c:nclusion that:"the most stilted parts of the political AGS CFand the most pamby portions of the Toobcnai IslajidersISLAI^ v/ill be the most agreeable to the en-lightened public, though I shall sprinkle some uncom-mon-place here and there nevertheless."^"*After due consideration, he decided that "the nineteenth-centuryvrriters v;ere neither so good nor so bad (taking the best and theworst) as the wits of the olden time."On the otherhand one wonders hov/ he managed to correlatethis statement with the following:"I do not think that any of the present day (and leastof ell, one who has not consulted the flattering siceof human nature) has much to hope from Posterity."He considered his success so ver;^"" singular "in the teeth of somany p^^ "^'.'"^ -r-s" , that he almost ccnclu.r'oc' that pe'-'ple enjo'"-d, . , + - 24bbeing contraui ctec.Bvron never troubled himself with the technical deta:ils ofhis poetry, ^,v;a £1in "what the learned call Anapests", but frankly admitted thatwas "heinously '^"orgetful" of such things as metres."" In a lett^lrto I'.Iurray in 1813, he v/rote: "I am... a sad hand at your x:)unctuation,"^^^- and when he discovered "murmur" to be a neuter verb,changed the llnp to it ^ Gubst^riti ve : "The deepect "^M^^nurlife shall be."'-'-^'^' T^e disliked an author that was "all author",26. mj IIT,S63.l4. T<%^ VT, 164, 1823.J"*, jr- M U M —I M — II _ —ofi4a. i J J,vib,'-'unt,i^a4.24b. U:J IIT, '-^5, 1814,T.Turray, 2Sb. lY, 177, 1817(such s.s "fellows in foolscap uniforms turned up with ink" whoollcv/ecl the princ:''-'' - ^ • Titing.'^'^ He was v/riting onl;^^ for t>.(reader, pnd cared "icr nothing but the silent approbation of thc|ewho close one's book with good humour and quiet contentment."^^Thus he tco^' •'c-Ln indifference," the "interestinf hystericiof the MCRrTNG FCST over some of his poetry which contained poli-|tic-1 implications.^^Byron's letters contain a numb'^-^ ^ references to reviews,V7hich contained "decisions of the invisible infallibles" andtheir effect on himself. He believed that a reviewer should netdirectly oppose a prevailing prrty; however, it may direct or "tijrnav/ay" the currents of opinion,^ Speaking of reviev:ers to Moore ]|(sa: d:"V/hat fellov;s these reviewers are! 'These Lugs cc fea:us all'. They made you firht, and me (the milkiestof men) a satirist^j^ and will end by making Rogersmadder than Ajax."'-'-«e?"^s to the present VvTiter, hov.'ever, thaithe Isst f li_;_j^j'a^it j^Lri. oe ux' ^yrcx^'s sentence should be sufficienito point cut his attitude tovi^ard the didacticism of his yet un-realized newspaper.Eyron had found one pet aversion in his literpry life. Assoon as he began to receive the printer's proofs of his v/orks, h(commenced writing ennoycd letters to Tlurrpy containing many amus:epithets against printers in general.Tn 1813 he \Yrote:"It is enough tc drive one out of one's senses, to seethe infernal torture of words from the oririnal."-'40. Lc"J I, 173, 1808 Dallas.41. Ir^'J T, 198, 1808, Hodgson.33. Calvert 8844. UcJ V, 143.47. L/ iT 3^3 J Tvlurrry]n;(He v;as sure no one h?cl ever been so "misused" as he was by the"devils" ."^'^^ He requested the printer to be mere careful with h:,iv.'ritinj's derlin^T vr'th rel5 --''cnp subjects, t^c-^use in adc'"^^.?singthe Deity, ? blunder may become a blssphemy, and he didn't "chcG|eto suffer such infamous perversions of either his words or his ii|.-tentj ens."He conmanded them not to omit v/ords for it v/as quite "encUr;]|.to alter or mis-spell them," He found an i^ngenuity in the man'sblunders "peculi-r to himself", and if one of the mistckes had r^-nained, Byron "v:ould most, have broken his neck".'^'^'^ It seemed to4-Rhim the "consummation of despair" that a French vTiter should49be translatin-" rc't. and his ovm v/orks.He fo^and it mortify in.';" to be accused of imitation in thel-TAO^TH. "^^e h^^" (3 never S'^en Cr?bbe*s passare and did not m<^-n tofollov; 3cctt any more then in the lyric measure, ''v/liich is 2rey*iilton's, and anyone v/hc likes it." Although the character of h: ;'iT -riT- • b-^d, it ^"^^^ r^"^, dangerous, and therefore Byi onthouf^.ht ids fate and his f eelin^^s v.'ould meet with fev; proselytes,He could not understand why CHILIE HAROLD should be thou::ht to re-semble rAH!.'!"^^,'^-^ v. - -nenticned the ^TACTIH and EH]||D$ABYDCS in this connection. He claimed never to have intentioi|allycopied Gcott, "but If there be any copyism, it must be in the tv/cpoems, where the same versific-ticn is adopi,ed. However, theyBxempt TWZ CCRSATH from all resemblance to a n^/thing > ^^1though Irather wonder at his escape... If ever T did anything origin?l, il|47?. IT, 3CC, 1812, Murr^-.47b. l/^r Tjjj 1B14, "48. IV, 264, laiB.51. IJJ TI, ,^7C, 1813, :50. Ix%J TI, 892, 1813((^ves in -^-^-t^t-. tj^t.(^lq^ --v--^^^ j prefer to the ether Lhings alvreys,after the first week.../lfe considered xhp tnird cento of CH:^IDETAP.^T "-^inr Indi.^'tinct ^-^(^c^ c-^ ^--c^ti'-'^l d.^ r.- Lr + lon" . . ."'^^"^ heI'.^ps "haxf mrc. durin-r the ti:;,^ " :^ us c -mposition. . . "^2^ ElfaLJGIIBARDC—(bating the malice) .. .i s tfte pest" .^^ The last sentence|W8S Vv'ri-LLen m ^ % h-^ - nGx+ --r^^TT-TT i^A-RDS had be-come "that ferocious rhapsocy".^^ -^y. j_322-, he ccnsidered THE MCR''^AI'T'^ a better translation xh^n that from Fulci,and the "besttranslation that ever v.- l:: or v:iii oc raade."^"^^ lie v/anted to do alliiis cv.Ti vn:'itinr independently, oecause, as Lady Mary V/oi-tiey MontaguviTooe GO Pope: "No touchins^ for the good will be given to you, gindthe bad attributed to me.""-^ But as to originality, "all preten-55sions are ludicrous , --there is ncthinr nev/ under the sun."He v/as also accused c:" ^':'ng Goethe's Faust as a .o^."^ for'/Ain^RED. .He replied that he had the v/hole scene of LIAI^FRED befcifleiiiiA, "as if itv;as but yesterday, and could point it out, spot by57spot, torrent and a 11... The devil ..i&y tp^.e "c-^li. '^l.e 7austu^o>.,acrman and English,—I have ta en neither. "^^ He fully believedhat the t:'me v;ould C- .other writings, though not iuimedlately.Since there v/ere so many "divine" poeins , he wondered if it;as nothing to have ^"^^'tten a h^r-- 2 /c:'^:^LDE "^'.^"LD? withoutany "worn-out machinery", for he coulc have spun the thoughts ofthe f-^ur cantos of CHTLDE rAT;CLD into tv/enty if he had only v/ant^dtc ' ' -'^.-make.^^ The Italian terza r^"ma "which always runs ^.i . udh-^n his dramas \v'-ulc! b-^ proferred to tl:i''c, I/r III, 76, Da^ray, 1"^14. 56. IV, 49, LIcore, 1317"3. LfcJ III, Z27, Hunt, 1815. 57. IV, 17 1, 1317|h3a. T^J VT. 64. 1S22. 58. I/J TV, 177. 1817.I, 311, D-11^r J -r T-T ~>'-7 n52. L-V IV, 384, 1313lin, mey h? ve led me intc eicperirsenos, ^rir cr^--cle£cn- ss :ntr ccac « it--or ccnce-*" -'--'-r carelessness— in • * ' '-yr- o_- tve.iob -c^xurewill be prob-ble. . . so V-^t '^FTLDE FA^LD vdll be like the mermai|,f?mily crest, vrth the fourth crnto fcr ? t?:*l thc^^^mto . "^^Although one's intellect sl:.oulc pro£,res£, he hed hao''a aevilishde-l wear end tear of mind and body" in his time, "besides ha-^published toe -nd much."^^VHien Hurray told Byron that hrlf of the third and fourthc?ntos. of e. v/ork v;ere good, Byron ?nsv/ered:"You are vrrcnr;, for if it were it v^culd be the finestpoem in existence. V/liere is the poetry of v;hich onehalf is good? Is it in the Aeneid? Is it Milton's?Is it Dryden's? Is it anyone's except Pope's or Gold-|smith's, of v.'hjch all is good? If one half be good,what v/ould you have more? l!o--no: !To poetry is geneily good--only by "^^its and starts— ?nd you are lucky t^ TV, 168, 1817, Murray.63. L- v"^ V, IC, 18'X64. U:J IV, 51§, Trurr-:v, 13117.65. UJ TV, 80, r-ore."66. Lo-J TV, lie. Hurray, IS17(les the dre^s o:^" '".'^ t v:cS V7rittrn.speech to the sun was the only pert he ppproved of, the rest heiil,"as b^d as bad can be and I v.-nder v:h?t the dev5-l possessed me."A. short t5me later, hov;ever, Il^^TFHJ^ Y;as referred to ss "one ofthe best" of his "misbegotten". This is pretty much Byron's method throu'^hf-^ut all of his self-criticism and there seems to be 4oplausible re? sen for him to continue to change his ..lind about i^omany phases of his work.ITow let us ey-'^.-^'^--' some of his criticism "n^" -"^^'l!^, v/hichwas, for the most part, ver;;;- favorable. D'""^' J^JM^ wat> the satire"well-calculated to cast... into the shade" what "cant of sentimeifttstill remained in England ^s ^ result "'^^^LD,^^ :"c- itv/as "meant to be a little quietly f^ceticuv. upon everything", ancto "laugh at all V'ings, crreat and sm^ll thin<-'s . "^"^ Like CAET,ivhich v;as meant t-^ be a drama, not a piece of argament,'^^ it contained pointed satire, but did not h^^ve any gi^eat didactic purpose,.'/hen told th^'t it ''''as censc^^-^d b;"" '^!=>n-^r "^r-iish conservatives, heexpostulated:"7/hy, Fan, the Soul of such v;r:*ting is in its licence;at least, the Liberty of th-t licence, if one likes—not that one should abuse it."'^lHe considered it one of the most moral of poems, but of couiflseit v^asn't his fault i"*^ readers didn't discover the moral. '^^ He/'/rote -dullness "'^'a ; -•.-^ -sion, and -"^--^ im-pulse, etc.; therefore, he had not written especially for his cor|-bemr)orari'^s' pleasure; so did not :^l-tter their opinions nor their56. L%"^ TV, 110, rurr-y, 1817.7.I/:J TV, 147, 1"17, T^urray.SS.Bles. 352^7C. I/-J VI, '16.71. 1.-'"^''" S—'^y l'"!'^'.73. U:J TV, 285.(iprice. '^^ I>jilness is - .-i,.- 1 .- o.... -1^^^^. v/illacceed i-*"' :t is interesting. He despised the c^nz 0"^the dsy;?nd also, i:^ this pruder:/ Y/ere admitted, one would have to "omiti^lf Aricsto, La Fcr:^ , eare,Eeaumcunt, Fletcher, I.Tas-|singer. Ford, all the Charles II Vvi-iters; in short, s-mething ofincst you have Y'ritten before Pope v.^nlch are vrorth rearing, andnuch o"' Pope H-n---^ ^,"7^Thus the outcry --^^inst DC!! JuAK V7as"pretty c-nt for peoplevmo read Tn^ .to—3, and H0DFP:^C^' wA?^JCT'!, ^nd THE BATH ^JIDE, andDryden and Pope...^" ^curse I refe:^- zne morality of ^hese v/or]and n-rt to -ny pretension of mine lo compete v/ith "chem in anytniilibut ripcortc;"'. "'^•'^ Tne "liutie envicu? knct of p-rs'-n ,)0<^x,s" could- uriey uxe^sed, for time v;oulc snuv: that he ..cs not mista^tenabout this composition of "nondescript and ever vai'^^ing rirne-. "'^'^Byr oS correct "'"n ""^"^ r-'^^^^r^n' ^-ffcn fh^f; ^r.c^' -^r^ one of hmodern critics' - even says his digressir.ns are a result of all hhas to saj'' in his criticism of life,Thr""-'f''-''"^it ^^'^ ''tself, '^^2"^^ is casual and unorganizedcrr'ticism of h:' . composition which he often compares to thev;crk of the Ancients. There is much v/ritten in -the spirit of th|13 . " "^"rt's maxim. . '^• '^ •^^^'" '-ng is a typically amuspassage ir: he comments on the epic characteristics ' s ^ft'orl"I.Iy poem's epic, and is meant to beDivided in twelve b-^oks; each book containing,7/ith love, and v:ar, a heavy rale at s^a,A list of ships, and captains, and kings reigning,Nev7 characters; the episodes are three:A panoramic view of hell's in training,After the style of Virgil and of Homer,So that m.;/ name of Epic's no misnomer.76;.n.("All these thinr s v/ill be spGci:i^ied in time,V/ith strict regard tc Aristotle's rules,The V8de I.Tecum' of the true sublime,V/hich m?V-es so many roets, and seme fools:Prose poets l:*ke blank-verse, I'm fcnc of rh^mie,Good workmen never quarrel v/ith their tools;I've got nev: mythcl' gic?.l mcchiner;<^,'-ndsome supernatural scenery.There's only one slight difference betweenTie and my epic brethren gone before,And here the sdvpntF^^e is my ovm, I vieen(:^^ct that I have ncx, several merits more,Put this will more peculiarly h- ' "<^n);They so embellish, that 't is . ' e a bor^Their labyrinth of fables to thredd through,7/hereas this ctorj^'s actually true."1. 1593-1616 cant- I.The v;ork contains frequent apologies for his viclaticn of thclassical rules, such the follov;ing mock apolofy for netfcllcwin"' the un^'t;'^ tinie:'litre .iiy cncote I.Iuse a liberty must take--Start notl still chaster reader—she'll be nice "'^^ncForward, and there is no great cause to quake;This liberty is a poetic licence,V/hich SOP' -"^egularit^'' may makeIn the :i, and as I have a high senseCf Aristotle and the Rules, 't is fitpr- >- ' ->--^rr-^ , -i^^-, t --^-.y, p bit."1. 953-960. canto I.Althoug"-" ^-^on mentions his digressions and c?. lis himselfback t'^ his sto?-y throughout DON tTJAM, he makes the following-statement near the beginning of Canto T concerning "the reularitjrof his deL^4-;n"r"Host epic poets plunge 'in medias res'(Horace makes this the heroic turnpike read),And then your hero tells, 'v-'hene'er ycu ;'^le'Ce,V/hat went before—by way of episode.That is the usual method, but net mine--lly v:ay is to beg: n v;ith the beg-'nnlng;Tlie regularity of my designForbi^"^:- -l"" '-r-'-r-ipT^- ^-^ f^e \:orst ^innin^,1. 41-52. Canto I.Byrcn vras especially stric" : 4.x_ -^rintln,in this poetry, v-Titing at one tirne to have an 1 replaced by a bbecause "Gulbe^^'az" was a real name, vhereas it . only "nonsensif an 1 vere inserted cf the b,"^^ '^'^^ print '^-c mcce a:even • -crse mistake, hov/ever, for he had v'ritten:"...'Adriatic shore o"" the Bosphorus* instead of theAsia tic l I All this may seem little to yoti— so fine agentleman v/ith your ministerial connections; but itis serious to me, who ajn thousands of miles off, andhave no opportunity of not proving myself the foolyou^ ^^^-'nter makes me."^These are further illustrations of Eyron's call for absolute truihand accuracy in literatu-'-e , as v;ell as an illustration that hehi-..seli attempted to fulfill his requirement.PIHe told Medvdn that it "as as much an epic in the ninetee4thce^tu.-^y, \"ith lov-^', r^li'^icr, ^nd poliit:'^:: -^n^--'- -argument,as the ILIAD had been in Ilcmer's day. It \.'cula be kn :me da^"or the. satire on the abuses of society :^or '-hich it was intended,and net as a osed eulo;-;' ^:ice. Although it \;as voluptuouat times, he couldn't help it, and besides. Fielding was not betAriosto v'as worse, and 3mollett v/as ten times v/orse with his LorcjStrutwell in volume two of t^^— -'-^ _.,-^_,^P2Eyron stepped writing DON tTTL/^r, which he had been writing "1 oDeguile hours o"^^ tri stesse and V'.rretchedn^ss , " hcwev^'^,^^^ai^ly be-cause he was afraid it would lessen his daughter's affection, andtherefore, he wished in 1823 that he had never written a line ofit. T'^evertheless , >^ '^^^i' nt^'^ned that i"^- '"culd live ic--o^ th-n7-TLDIC RAHCLD, even though an Italian woman had said, "Ah, but, JT.^r V, 351, 1-21 82. Ur^T VI, 155, 18^BC. lA" V, 354, 1?21. 83. I.V V, 97, 1S90.1. !Tyd^i,lii, 1G4.noer,would rather h^ve the f^me cf C^^^IOT] "^\"7CI.D "^or three years, th-an immort?llt:- ^'"^^ ---"t'l '.Tiereupc^- " \jcmedidn't enjoy DCF JUPH because it stripped off "the tinsel of sen^y-ncn'p ""'ork contained much scattered criticism concerninrthe Ct^ . maintained ' r ' ^plicity of plot in his ^.iawas intentional, as was the avoidance of rant and the compressioQ-p cT-,er.r'''-r-. s j_n the mo^G p'^veve situations, ''^e attempted to por-tr-'^.y the suppressed passion in l^.AFJZ rather than tlie conr.inineteenth-centurj'- rant.^ Thus his "dra.ma.tic simplicity" v;as"stu^'^* ^-ppp^'". "^fp I'-nt^r^^,?^ 4-^ i-r^a- j-^^ soJeven thcu'^h hisdrj^ma ot successful, because no reform vras i-mmediately triu'''e never v^rote :''cr the actual stage because he wouldn't altI--— -'t- ^-'Tn^^.r ^---.-^ XT.,, +T,^ pit", --'^ time hashcvn that his productions couldn't be adapted to an auaience,Thu^ -^To T?M_,T^^r too x-eruipr,^'5 the time bennr* twenty-rcu[i< ' • - --^cs c'"' --.^---^n^ r:,c. containinr ncthin::; melodra::tic—neither su^'prises, starts, nor trap-doors. T>Teither did it}-)pvf^ Icvf^— "tnp {TrpTid n^f^d? <=Tit a modem 'pi-^ijc' -fhgplay was intended solely for the re-^der, having too regular, toesimple, and too i-cmote an interest foi- the stage. He desired apermanent drama:"My ob.iect is not immediate poT^ularity in my presentproductions, which are written in a different systemfrom the ra^e of the day. But, mark what I say, thatthe time will come v/hen the§e will be preferred tos.ny I have before written,"'^Byron v/as wrong in this instance, of course, for these plays areS4. L: J V, 371-1, 1£21. 88. VI, 25.2r.. L"rr V, 347. 89. UiJ it, 366, 1813.8G. Trdawny, 25. PC. L^.J V, 31^, 1R21, rccre.^- n T r... T \r .. . i an , . ,11biment.",'81on8nphant.eraressentislly uninte^-- -'n-, snd selccm read. His most populardra'na--I.I41\rFRED** by ,.ns followed the classical rules \;hichhe later applied to his vTritirif;,..Tote ' f ollG-..l.i.__ -uixxc,^ ...iiclx c-..x*w:- Iiis .*iuc|hof his critical materiel, alth .erally it is just a reiterj^-ticn of the ideas set forth in his letters:"This journal is a relief. ,jhen I Saa tir£d--as Igenerally am--out comes this, and dcvm goes everytLiinBut I cen't read it over and God knov;s v;hat contradictions it may contain. If I am sincere with myself(but I fear one lies more to one's self than to any-one else), every page should confute, refute, andutterly abjure its predecessor!"Eyron could almost have v;ritten this with his literery criticisirin mind, ^ "^'t, too, is the cutccme of varying m -ods and dis-positions, thus resulting in numerous conflicting opinions.In 1B21 p d'"'in<^ f^i^l v;rot^ ? I'^tter to Pyr-^n to tell himthat hi^ poetry hau inade her happy, oh^ a^jved hia to buru theletter, but as he told Moore, he considered such a letter "bett^[rthan a diploma from GOttingen, ffovj these are the things whichmade one at times believe one's a poet,"^"^ This is thereforewhat Byron would call great criticism. I-Iis regard for this to-ken of admiration illustrates t' - .:3ntimental strain in hischaracter and shov;s that in spite of all he said at times tothe c ntrary, he, nevertheless, had a high regard for the workthat a poet could accomplish in li-^e, as \;ell as a serious atti-tude toward his own v;ork v/hich he was, as a rule, reticent inadmitting.EYHON'3 CHITIGI3M CF SIGT-TTTZEiriH^CIi^'TURYByron's criticisn, e£peci£lly of '•^-kespe- rc- , \-ez net oforthoclox character for his tirne. ViThereas Coleridge v;as lecturinand Lamb was writing essays deifying Shaiiespeare and his works,Byron's point-of-view was not,c^i t:^- •'"-rle, like t>-^ r^r-r^-^nticcriticism vvhich was at that time rene;;ing the nineteenth-centuryadmiration and interest in Shakespeare.A study ^'^ ^•-'n-n's criticism '^"^^kespeere leaves one almoat ? loss to knr- ctl;^'- whpt his ultimate decision of the grea'of English play^^/rirht s v;ould have been, Byron mentions Shakes-peare constantly/- throughout his letters and entire iDoetical workusuplly either deriving a figiare of speech from one of Shakes-peare's pl-ys or characters, or else using Shakes^^'^re—V/liich hedons very fre .,uently--as a ^justification for his c\,'.i philosophyand c nstructicn. The fcllovang is an exam-nle of the typical ma:ner 'f. if^h ''-^^'rcn hrin'^w Sh^kespe^^re * s charrc'^'^''^? I'nto hie ^oet'•'But Johnwicn only ren off, to returnV7ith mam'' other warriors, as we said,Unto that rather somewhat misty bourn,'.Vhich Hamlet tells us is a pass of dread.Throuc^hout Byron's poetr}" he uses different variations of theTr'^ 1 -^•''-]-' -Tj ^riir-- c-v-.^,ppi-, erived frc^ r^.^^^^^r^,'V/hile thus Remembrance bcrrov/s Banquo's glassTo claim the sceptred shadows as they pass.And we the mirror hold , where imaged shlne,^Immortal names, emblazon'd on our line...""Then too, he frequently'- elaborates one thought -^rom Shakespeare5nto almost an entire stanza;"There is a flower call'd 'Love in Idleness',For vjhich see Shakespeare's ever blooming garcen;--I vdll not make his great description less,kn6 beg his British godship's humble pardon,It,est1-J,, uon runi ojix—'L iiv-..i'..!"ii .j^^ s ..1 ' '1 1 ' —III-^" in my e^'treniity of rh^^T^'s divStress,T touch a sinrle leef where he is v;arden;^ir-p^-^ +Vp ""'1 ="nt, I."""^•^^ t o''^ s '3''^'" -ri^p T rt his lp"t"teps in cm'nection v/ixn Lne tne-tre and his.estirnrtion oi conxempcrary actc:Tnas ef'ufei" ne seen Keen es Richard he wpid:"tpjst retumea irora seeing riean in Hicnaxd. By Jove,he is a soull Life--not truth--v;ithout exaggerationor diminution. Kemble's Hamlet is perfect;--but Ham-let is not ITaturo. Richa-^cl s a man; and Ilean isRichard.Y.ean was '^perfecticn" in the part of lago, anc . ^ ^ o.. ^ ..e^.seen an English countenance half as expressive es lago's in theIpst lock in the third act. Byron was acquainted v/ith no " im-;natcrial sensuality" so delightful as goo6 acting; therefore,is fitting there should be good plays, nov; and tlien, besides3hak£ speare ' s , ''^In 1818 he \.T-cte LIurrs.y that he ..as ^^i-g ^^ee CTELLC, onof Rossini's best operas, v/hich had been taken from Shakespeare'play. Byron tl:cu,rht it v/culd be "curiciis to see ir '.^cnice the/enetian story itself represented, besides to ciscover what theyfvill make of Shakespeare in music.Byron v;as sadly disappointed, hov/ever, for a fev; days laterle v.Tote to Rogers:"They ha^e been crucifying OTHELLO into an opera: tlmusic good, but lugijbrious; .but as for the ViTords, a!he:.llthe real scenes with lago cut out, and the greatestnonsense inserted; the handkerchief turned into a bil-let-doux, and the first singer would not black his facfor seme exqLiisite reasons a ' • the preface."^At one time Byron saw a version of . ,:d CLEOPATRA. Vv'ithAdditions from Dryden's ALL FOR LO^/E. This per^^o-^nance v.^as:;;.Don ruc^x 14, "3:,^-- s. lfj hi, i£i4..L^T TT. 335. 1--]-. S» Ur IV, 2C^s.er/. l^J TV, 214.''s.dnirebly [^ot up and v;ell acted--a salad of Shake speai eand Dry6 en. /he ccnsldered Cleopatrs the/epitome cfher sex- -fond, lively, sad, tender, teasing, humble,hau£;hty, beautiful, ^nd devill—coquettish to the la^-t,as well v;ith the *csp' as v/ith Antony... and the ques-tions about Cctavia--it is a v/oman all over,"^'Je may conclude, therefore, that Byron considered Shakespeare ans.ccu^^t? portr-yG"^ cf h''Lman nature.Although oAPuDAk'ArALUS has be'en considered Eyrcn's mostShakespearean play, Tyron himself v.'rote that it would be found'very unlike Shakespeare; and ..o Liuch the better in ...l sense, fcr[ look upon him to be the worst of models, thou^jh tlie most extra-ordinary'- of writers."^ Eyron probably meant that Shakespeare v/as3. bad model to follov; if one were attempting to apply the classical:^-',i.les v;hich Eyron desired. Gait has compared Sardanapalus's:;hrracter to FTamlet's.In 1£2C, Byron v/rote that Shakespea-r^e and Otv;ay had a milliciadvantages over himself, besides the"incalculable one of being dead from one to tv;o centuri bsand having been both born blackquards (v/hich are suchattractions to the Gentle living reader)."-'-^Jyrcn decided that all his vulgarisms v;ere attributed to the cir-jumstances of hie -'" r^--' breeding which deprived him of a goodiducation; and his abundance of obscurities were excused because" le live^ over two h^'TH'^red ^.i^s 'be'^ore Byron's own tim.e, and a©,through no fault 01 u.-c ^^espea'^e ' s c.ti, his terms had becc-me obso-i.ete. Byron, of course, was correct to a certain degree in his 05-icr\i^'" ti ons , fcr n^-rly the same f'^in-" Is e'^'^"*"'?ssed toca;^ in suchi. manner as to give a more democr-'tic interpretation than Eyron' s,TI, 31C-2G. 11. Bles 335^. V^-.J V, 323, 1321. 12. Bles 338He tcld Lsdy BlcssiiT^'ton t'-'-t "h-kespeare ov/ed half hispopularity tc his lov; origin:"which, like charity, covereth a multitude of sins vd.tlthe multitude, and the other half tc the remoteness cithe time at v/hich he v;rote from our owi days. . .V/ith t\such good excuses, as want of education, and havingVv'ritten ahcve tv;o-hundred years before our tim^e, anywriter may pa'ss muster; and when to these is added thehaving a sturdy kind of low degree, Vvh.ich to threeparts of the community in England has a peculiar 8ttrc||c-tion, one ceases to vroncer at his supposed popularity;I say supposed, for who goes to see his plays, and whcexcept country parsons, or mouthing, stage-struck,theatrical amateurs, ^^-d thera?"-'--'-Towever, f^vom the few passages which have been ojio"-ed from thelany in Byron's letters concerning his oT:)inions of English per-formances, we are certain that Byron himself was one w' "ent tozee ShJ^kespeare* s plays v.^en he had the opportunity. Byron vras-Isc one Yiho had re^d them thorougi^ ly , for ^s v^e have mentioned,lis v.'orks are replete v/ith qpot-tions , direct references, and ide|^s'rem all of Shakespeare's vrorks, including the poems v/hich arelievGr read today by the average person. Thus we do not need Lady?leEsington' s remark that she had rarel^'" met eni'one as versed inShakespeare's v/crks as Byron, -'-^ for us tc realize that Byron wash +''- f^r"''' . .^oea'^e '^"Hr"',-""^ , '^'^a-n f-^r^-p-'r ^-p th-"t '^(^ criticise!th'::espeare because '^e cbt-ined as much pleasure as a ehild v/ould13rom astonishing and hexing the English in this manner.Ssint'^-'^'^^T'.''^ T-'T'i^+p +''~^t ^r"-'*'''"'^ c „,-', '^'^'Hcluded[.hat Byron feared Shakespeare -/-s more powerful than himself in'^ creation ^'nd re-lization of nis char^^^cters. Goethe's words,ccordinr to Sainte-Peuve , ''ce:"'He vroulc h?ve liked to deny it: the elevation sofree from egoism irritsted hin; 'he felt vjhen near itthat he could not display hiiTiself at ease. Tie neverdenied Pc-oe, because he did not fear him; he knewThus Sainte-Beuve concluded th^^t Byron desired Fope and tne Nec-clj^psics to c^T^T'c'^o c-Q fbcs-t P'lr-prn vouid nave been the firstand or.''" " "-'cul^r st'^e , for "the --'^ -^ -^tsv^all" v;ould shut cut 3h-l:espeare' s ^reat flc^ire from si^ht. xjIi-cut the aid 1:^9.^ hovev^^r, '^u-kesppare vrould be supreme "cau si] tgByron to be only seccnd.-^'^ This explanation only points cue cga :.nthat Byron had a great regard for Shakespeare's genius. The paS'sages in Byron's letters, hov/ever, skow that he praised Shakespeiiirehighly, and that almost the only aristocratically adverse remark|are a result of Byron's attempts to set up a classical, closetdr-ma.V/hile Byron v;as in London, he knew Sheridan and often spentthe evening in the same group of people. He considered Savage's^^^^ 3HSRIDAI: best, and observed that;"The life of such a man may be made far moreamusi '"'^ " " 'e had been a V/ilberforce. "'-^Byron Sheridan a fascinating talker) ccnsicerin,^. hisv/it "Saturnine" and Gometin"s zavr-c.-^Sa qj^^ y-Qip±r2p^^ cJqeric ' ". ,,.'.,:k "yron r eiiic.^'^i^cd;'I all v-rite;!:?G were equally sincere, it v;oulc beludicrous."Pie upheld his friend's character as . j no worse than thaof other c'^ntempoT-a-'^ies, fo^ rne could only \ +he'co'litioner Fox, anC the pensioner Burke, at> a laan of priiiciple15. U:J IV, ^:39, 181^^ IS. DET;.._ ^ i L' >>i oo* j viev.'s r:.rxCl './-".'th ncne liiiiexit, xor ne beat t'lerrx all out e.nC out... in : j.! "/le ever c.lo^...^^"'vVhatever Sliericlan has done or chosen tc do has been,par excellence , alv:ays the best cf its kind. He hasvv-ritten Uie best comedy (serirrL FCR 3au:DAL) , th-drama (in m^^ mind, far before that 3ir Giles's .". :4the BT^IGAR'S CrERA) , the best farce (T"^ CPJTTC--iui^only too -'^-'^ for a farce), and the best address(IXIjrLCC." GA^RICr)>snd, to crov.-n ell, deliveredthe veri' be^t Oration (the f?mcus li'Z'j;' ":) everconceived . ^, ^,,^m1cheridan burst into tears upon hearing this eulov-,y. Byron vj-rctemt if they were tears cf pleasure, he would : r have said •'these fev/, but most sincere, v;crc,. ' . \:- -./ritten the ILIr^Dr made his ov.-n celebrated rillLirriC. 'At the t5me Ryrcn vas on the "Drury Lane Gornrnittee, Sheridannd Ccn^reve were xi. a.onger , Byre: .^iL.cx-^^ . A^c..^.''as decent a v/rit^ as need be, and Ccngreve no v/orse thanMrs. Gentlivre /T''^ ^ 17QS7.ijyron concluded, tlierefore, that it isn't decency but stupidityh?t makes the f^ood ivi^yr^r^nl-^ ' ^, hov/everbout Sheridan' s v;ork, lie is usHa^-iy mentioxied in connection v/it'onversation and social characteristics.Although Eyrcn praised Tope and the :\Teo-classical style cf1he eighteenth-century, he followed its principles in only hisatiricpl work and his drama, for his lyrics are decidedl^'" <^motioi|al,-lag-inative , and otherwise typical cf the romantic poetr theineteenth centur^^. In spite of this fact, however, Byron main-pined that Pope and Goldsmith we^e the only per-^ect English poet;hus being the only safe models to follow. Since al:nost all of17L7. L&ST IV, 239L8. I/:J II, 377, I.-^ISTO TA.T J T^19 a. I/:J IV, 427ope's "^^cllcers prcducec: "be^"-.'.'^Byron considered this sufficient pre at he V8.s correct.Byron wrote three essays for periodic?ls as a result of at-tacks upon Fope's schc-1. Or- - these letter.,, --^ +0- -fnRavenna, February 7, 1821, vjas in ansv;er to Eov;les' STRICT^T-rs CKT'^IIi; LJi^E ArT) ^:TRT'^W^rZ ' . '^-^ither Byron nor his friend Hell-house . approved of Bov/les' edition of Fope; therefore, it v;as sati-rized in ^I^^OLISH EAHDS A^D SCOTCH HEVTE'.'/IIRS . Byron concluded th^-he v'ould "not ^o',;les t'^'^ injustice of judging his character bythis edition, i." he hcc prepared the vrcrk heedlessly. Tt vas ou'side of Bov/les' field of literary criticism to bring Fope's pri-vate life intr 'ork. T'" ^--rr^. —iliing to believe3ov/les a good raan--"aL^ost as good as Fope, but no better"--he30uld have tcld a much better stor^.'' about Bcv;les on the man^s ovviiauthority. ^ ^^'^ "prof' . levity", to v.-hich Eov;les objected, v;£ sous,political,-nd ^c^tical c-nt thp c-^^nd "primum mobile" of theInrland of his day.Bov.'les had addressed his Iin^AHIi^3LE PHTTv'^CIFLES PCETRY toCampbell in 1819. "^--r'^n +''-oii.ght the^^ "'•^'^d -remained unansv/ered be-cause Campbell was evidently astounded by this title, v;hich "wasthe most arrogant ever prefixed to a vo1i:utip." Therefore, Fjrronlimself proceeded tr r'--^^Tf.r the'". ^r-?^-^ ^1^^+ '^-n^ipbell«'ship of the line' had derived all of its poetry from 'nature'r-^sther than 'art'. Byron thought the poetr;^/ of the ship de^endec^lot on the vaves, for the 'ship of the line' conferred its-.try u^rn the ^"^tr-r, f^i.is h'^i r'ht en"' n;" ther'rs. V/e kncv' "to ourLess the tone O"*^ Pope than of his age. Byron considered religiIcost", becFuee the 'i?ny cV^scripticnc i:-: -.^ + -«-r^ th-t parts ofniature are poetical. Since the v;ater would be lacnotonous v.'ithoulthe ship, the latter ^ives it poetr:/ also. "Did Mr. Bowles everraze upon V^- sea?" --ron aslzeC. - st':^:i at w^c ..c.o .acrepoetical \."ith or without a ship t' ' . its monotony. suggetteclrm SlilR'/R^C?" as an exam-^le of a poem wherein both the storm andthe bo't were intercb / , 'lu^ '"'out the vessel What should v.'ecare for the tempest", \;hich would cause the work then to becomeonl^'' riescriptive poetry. wpy c~ -^ointin^' out his authority tcspeck on such matters, liyron ii'c.ve a lonr digression on his ex-perience v;ith the s;-- . "V/crdsv/orth, who made a poem about a wast-ing-tub and a blind bey", is as ?-:-^^^ ?s himself f^T + ^'n^r-^old beat, keel up'wards, wrecked u^jcn the barren sane', is apoetical object,^y^'^cn asked whPt ":-^^—.z f,-c "oetry in ima,v;e r-'^ t'-e ":.icrb]eivastc 6f Tadmor" in Grainger's CDE TC SCLII'^TDE. Since the wasteis like all other wastes, it is the msrble of FaLmyra which makeithe poetry?- of the poem Just ? s it does ' " " ' place. It is notthe spot in nature, but the art of the temples and shipv/reckswhich ""icld pntiouc and modern ^^c^t-- . "r-^ f^is re- sen, Byron -ways opposed removing ruins to London fr^iu ^thens, for althoughthe ruins themselves were Just as poetical in London, it causedAthens to be l^;ss so, "T^ke av;ay Stonehe .^.^ ' . jalisb'^^y -'lair,end it is nothing more than Plounslow-heath, or p.ny other unen-closed down...' Therefore, the Pantheon and Laocoon are ?s pc^t:-cal as Ilont Aetna, since they are "direct manifestation.: . andFnd presup-.:csg poetry- in their very ccnceptlcn." Pyrcn aohed thireader tc decide for himself v;hether -poem on them written byhe 'neturals' such as './ordsworth ?Jid Southey, v;culd be morepcetiC'-l "^' an "the c^mmonv/est f e-book" , " ^r the ground interestsfor example, in Vir£;il, because it will be Rcine, not because itis "Evander's rijral domain". Byron co-isidered the most strikingmp;-;e in ^^ay's ZLI]— ' ("the cornerstone of his glory), to beshapeless sculpture". Eyron had a hi£:h regard for the art ofsculpture, conGiderinr: it mere poeticFl then n.-ture, for it atteriptsto represent ideal beauty and subliiTiity.Since landscape painting embodies artificial imagery, it, tcjois superior tc -^c ^.-''."i^", since the artist, instead of givinga literal copy, eoi.ipounds his work from, the best of much materialA'hich he has observed. Therefore the beauties of neture should.-.r-^o-Tio 2.;^' c,^T^o^t-.f-nd combined r ^ -"''t.Byron did not consider Dante's DJ'^/I}yE CCV.EBY or Tasso'sT^RUSALEI' D^LTY^lID epics. Byron was v.Tcng iffheu he said Dante h^ucalled ' ^cem the "DF^"^'" '^^I'^k", because Dante had reallylamed it only the CCI.I'.IEDIA. Byron, like Aristotle, crnsideredbr8T:edy the "Hir-inpst t/'^oe of l^* ter?tur<^. """^cwev^r, even f^ou.^hOj^jl utver V.TCLG li':, icy, inincr ple.ywrights such IiU<-,h^o and^enton should not be ranked above him. TTot even Ctway and Ro'.;e,'/ho Wc s one thc> nest S'lcc^^ssful d'^^^mati st c,shc''"'ld b^ r-ted5S highly.The only reason that Pope was not as popular in the nineteen||thlentury ^s in V-'^e ei'"hteent''-^ "'+.ury , was because o"^ +"~^c o)oetry and his statement ab^ut stooping to the truth. Instea^ of•stooping", he should h^ve written "rose", according to E^a"on -.vhoIIconsidered moral truth es portrayed in ethical poetry the highestof Fll earthly objects. Eov:les accused Pot^p of be-' . ;=^p1ous ofPhilli-r, h^i+ ^-cord5-- r-,.^.--^-^i-^g^,_ anythiu^ enviableabout Phillipio, it coulc hardly be his "despicable pastorals",therefore "Pope couldn't hj=ve envied Phillips any more th^n hec"^^"^ - "-sted, Thecbr:,::, or Smedley" . Bjrrcn looked uponPore's poetry - '.he Book of Life","'^ for "v/ithout canting andyet v/ithout nerlectinf religion, he has assembled all that a goopnd grept man can gather tot-;ether of moral v.'isdrm cloathed in cq|i-suinate beauty." Eyron found that not even Shakespeare was quot£0 -".U'^'!'^. "'if'^ r'^-^'^r'ence to li:^'=^ " " s T^^e^ but the er^'-i tcr '^ov'levas "so like the Devil quoting Gcripoirp," that Eyron wished hevere doing his quotinr in his proper place, i.e., the pulpit."5dlie-1 f»^.'tificial " ^ lid apply to Pope,"'' for he had been one of thprincippl inventor.' ^-^^rn crard ening. No "^o-^t ever admiredn^'-^^' ' - '-etter ' "'-^n had p0j_.£. " Byron quoted'7-lpole's statement th-t Pope had formed ICent's taste for layingc\Tt [jvonnr'.s. The Prirce of "'ales' gprden ':'.'ss c^^i <^ri "^rom Pope'sp''-;::enhai'n. In the cne-hundred and seventy- third number ofV\e ^JAr:DTATT, Pope first criticized, both in prose and in verse,"/artoii's 'LGSAY maintained that lope r-ye s " ^ ^;irst andbpst rules and obse'i^v^tions on prchitecture j=nd gf^rdening. (Ttn^ni stations of xhe rcm-ntic trend.) Therefore Pyron considerit "-^ shame" to hear Lhe L^ke ^'nd Cockney -poets cr-^^in^ uu'L--"t'^e,1. LirT^.V;V .j2.:p^;3. U.J V, 585^2. Second Ict"^--latter in e v/ilderness of bricks and inort?r"--abouc "'Nature* anpPope's 'artificial in-door habits'"."' He could amply a^uote Pop24 hfor tributes to nature such as no modern poet ever approached.It would be a thousand years before there v/as another Englishv/riter as great as Pope.The Reverend 7/. L. 3ov/les ansv/ered Byron's letter with TJCLETT^S TO THE RIGHT IIONOtjRABLE LORD BYRCN, written "more parti clh-larly on the question whether Poetry be more irmaediately indebt^to yfiiat is sublime or beautiful in the 'Jorks of IJa .;.-\,, _r the'£crks of Art?"-^ He said he quoted Byron's poetr^,^ in his artic!in the QTJA^.TERLv as illustrations of his pr-'nci-leG which Byronncv; disa^jproved. n ::g&j £hculG|De considered 'according,- to iL6class", and Pope, because of his health, knev.- more thoroughlyartificial li^e than nature. 3tcr':hcn--= - --oetical fromitL tr: ..itions and uncertsin ori^.i.i,-n^ the desei't because ofits solitude. He reminded Byron that he neve- '2 the works ofArt - -^-e n-t -:^oetic^l, '^ut th^t "the sublime anc -,:orksof IJeture v/ere, per _se, abstractedly , more sol Hajs the air ofItaly, Milan, ptc..' ^'s recollections?. . .If'--VT" \at I distinctly laid dcv.-.., or, hr .^..^ r^.... o.^efirst propositicno, remembered th , our book v/ould not havebeen so,,.-i.t I c.^^^rot concede f^et ?ny -^'nst-^nce hav^ ) -t-c;.;_ ^ Coitions,'' ci.*^ he fcuuv^ his'principles of poetical critic: '. .s 'invariablein CO':"' secuence cf nny "yron's r nts.^aphs"stericl for the lollowinp- "^, v.ll, CT^I^FLY R'^LA"^"^'^"^" ,^ -Arranged by_Ernest Rhys, 1897, :,'- "l? Tren::,frtlbiiI1II.(Byron was the onl^' author to defend . . -. "sl cnarc.cteruntil Dlcr,^el:'s ar-'.i^^c in the ' .-^r-^—j^ Julyi3ince Disraeli mentioned Byron's otation of one of Bowles'lines fro~'n the SF!^"?!? OF D"^3?r^''TTy, Bvron t.^oh th? s ch?ncc tcv;rite his seccxid letter, '..^^icli \;£.s net pxi'^^j-^-.-^C u.ioil j—o-v. , licv;-ever. Bov/les condemned ELCI3A TO A". for it alone . cS suf-I'^a,--+ " --'^ ^^css li centi^^usne ss , P""^ " "^C-indstrong passion in tris poem as v;ell ?s in FALAI.ICI^ AIID nliCI li^,out the licentiousness \;as only a "'grand peut-etre' accci'dingtc +''^^- t-^"^-' t'"'- +-'-o,crj't th^^^ ri-: '^rcsness -x. .^e found/v'hatsoever. Byron considered Pope's delicacy at its highest in5ILrT3A, since he did with the facts of the case v-hat only the'b^st and purest ^ets" could have C^...<^,"Ovid, Sappho (in the Ode called hers)--all that v;ehave of modern poetry, sinks i^J-o nothing comipared^d-th him -^'n this production. .. ^'-'^ ViPnen v;e have throvviithe ?nc' the fire there will be time to de-nounce t. c - .^oui ns. . .there is more real mischief andsapping licer.t^' sness in a single French prose novel,in p Lloravia:- ^ i, or a German comedy, than in allthe actual pottry that ever was d or poured forthsince the rhapsodies of Orpheus. , sentimentalanatomy of Rousseau and Hadame de 3tagl are far moreformidable tlian any quantity of versc..they sap theprinciples by reasonine* upon the passions, v/hereaspoetr^/" i s in itself passion, and docs not systematize.n.^T^^-,-,r^-^'^'^ 'c -1,^, e +1--- f;!- " ns of Homer.'cpe's tr- nslation '.'-s the only one which had not disappointeddm*, for it had more of Homer's spirit th?n ?11 the other tr^..;^-ations put together. Tope'^ ^"^ '^ t-.- '" rc' ' -"^-'.^ theriginal, but with all Govrper's scholarship, ti:':ie, trouble, and927. U-J V, 4^9 29. U^J VI, 21228. V, 582 30. L-.J VI, 21328a. Blcss5nr'ton, '"38 31. A'^^'^^f"^^^, ^ 3nR.blank verse, it is not HoraeT' or "even Co\\n?er". '.'.Hien a child,i^yron h'=d ref=d Pope's vnf^. rapture, pnd "children ^ve not thev/orse Judges of their c"..i_ Icn-^i -'ge lie cc'ild not succee':" " :) reading Cov.per's version even with the aid of his mature intelle ;t,for he found it imDOSSIble and \vond<=r.^d if anyone had ever r'^acit. lope v/as a "tolerant yet steacy' Catholic, v;hereas Co perwas "the most biggotted and despondent sectar;^'- that ever anticipc.tedda:^^n ' t '"•'n to ''•^i^i r,^!"*^ ^'-^ r-*;^,'^ ^ _ ^ ^r- ^'-r ••'p.s c good ^.an , andlived at a fortunate time '-cr his works." Thus Byron v/as guiltyof calling attention to, and underlining, personal characteris-Although he did not presume to say that Pope v/as as high apoet ^s. Shakespeare and TT-ilton, he vjotiCptq^ vh-t vrould beccir.e"of English poetry in general" if Pov/les's opinions agj=inst Popehold good for other T)oets also. He "loved and honoured" the"illustrious -nd ^inr*? v-lled" Pone far more than the "tr^^shy singlejf the crc-/u ci 'wchcolc;' and upstarts", --ho pretended to rival,Dr even surpass hirr . ^rd for others, and no selfish feeler g,:cul^"' -nr-pvont him from rpj=lizin^ that the nineteenth century wasthe "declinin.r age of English poetry". The depreciation of Fope'/as the Worst si,gn o:^ the bad taste o^ the times. It would beiron 3h==kespeare ?^nd Hilton, than ^ tnis smooth and ' c-n-^'"'V undermin'nc o^' t^e •T'onut- tion of the most perrect English^Oi^t, in which field he considereo mm unequalled.Pyron considered a de?=d l^n^-i?=r^e tne """.ost, living- o-^ hii^'^ntIftMr.ce,ti H-H. j^^^ ^-^-^ ish literature v.^ere 1.0 ue lost, he thourntnpx one who v/isned the ejjic and tragedy to remain, "might wishfor f^e preservation of Shakespeare and IT^'lton; "but the snrvTvinVvori.^ ' retain Fope fro.-a the »»re:.':, let tx^c r^.wU o^.^-..,because Fope "is the moral poet of all civilization". Therefore3yvcn h'^^es rill sO'iietim^. fi^ "national jjcct o"^ m?nk:*nc-Zsince7 he iti onl^'' poet tiiat never shocks; tiie only poeLwhose faultlessness has been made lis reproach." There v/as greav^-'-"^"" ^r-d c' "^i Pope's work • - --h did not consist in Justtijc melody, since foreigners fdniire his v/orfc in tr- nslation.According to Spence*^-'- Fope never flattered anybody for^^oney. Eyron thought that at the time of the D^^^'CIAD princeswould have been just as proud to pension Pope as peers wouldb^en to promote.him. P'-'-rcn v/as v;ronc, however, for Fope\at. A/ery unpopular \;ith Uie pc^rty in p-vj^'er at this time.B;\rron criticized Bowles' method of criticism, for the lattel^or-' admitted th^t eo-:'= I'v-^ort-nt matorT-^l had not occurred tohim \/hen he wrote his criticism. This, accordr'ng to Byron,s]iov;ed that he was "unfit for his task". This would. not lo\i"erh ' . . .. ...ic'. ' ' n' w ' h,?-:9ver, would if he hadreiaembered the ijaterial, but omitted it intentionelly in orderto detract from Pope's character. All in all, Byron ccnsideredBov;les "susceptible beycn. _^^iv::l^. x authorship", since ireviev; must not be devoted to one man's opinions. However, By-ron decided that he could not dispute "f^crev^r, ^r:'^ c"''^!!" "in a"polite manner", although he is sure Bc\.'les will take iiitc'lcnt f c!" hav:in<^' been silenced. J'^ Bowles had not been so civ .I''r^-ld be ''^^'^ c eticus" v;ith 'r'Eyron v/as very fair, however, ?rid didn't hold this dis-agreement over Fope ? "-^ir.rjt ""^oi/les, "^cr later in thr SF.iae "'^•pr,he v:rote that Eov/les c^u-^^. cOiVipeoc '^.ith the for^../.o^t .lio contemporaries" as a poet, and Eyron pdrnitted thgt his previousopinions rrplnst Povlf^s '.'"^e vr-itt^-'n long befc^*- the publicationof his l^st and best poaii /jfae ilIo3ICITA!R^, and 'that a poet'olast poem should be his best, is his highest praise. "^^V/hen Murr-'- -* n-^.,^-^-r'ed to publish snoth'-r edition F^ c,Byron said it wouiu uo him "credit as a publisher", v.ell asredeem Fope from llr. Bowles, and "the public teste from rapid'^egener?cy . " Byr : n praised Pope in ccnnect- • " -^"^c ^ oner ofEngland, the perfection of literature, and the glory oi thel8ng'J!=ge ."-^Eyron v.'as convinced that Scott, Southey, 'Jordsworth, Ivloore,Campbell, ?nd himself "were all in the wrong, one as much as an-QtT,r.-r"j be5n^ '»?i-nrri ^ \'T'cnrT rcv^ lutl on^r;^.'' poetical S2''stem" ^rcmwhich only Hogers and Cr?.bbe were free. He was sure the pretent?nd the next generations v;ould eventually be of his opinion. "Jhhe cr'T-p^-.-d T'-'^re's, >^5^, -nd some other poems v/ith f-^c::? of Fopraortii ication resulted ''at the ineffable distsnce, in poiat ofsense, learning, effect, and even imagination, passion, and in-v. tv:? en f-^^? I"'* t'^T'- Anne's man, and o-" +- r Lov.eEmpire. Depend upon it, it is ail Horace then, and Glaudian nowamong us; and if T hpc to beg-^n pga-^'n, T v/ould mould myselfaccordingly, Crabbe's the n..,'''^^^_ ^.m-prpctic-ble sub^i ect . . . ' Fone littl'^ suspected that the art of)sinking in poetr; - ild become an object of serious study, endsupersede not only his ovm, but all that Plorace, Vida, Boileauend Aristotle h^r" lr:f^t tr Postc-^ity, cf pr^-'"-,nd the grer'-^copoets in ell neticns, of li^^.emple. "'^'^irineteenth century criticism showed bad teste end huinbug,f^.^ -.-^.-In nrt bei^.'" '^-xr\y a cento V/- tTIEIX Cr, or the SooAY CM MAi:, or the ' nTr:^TAD, ' or anything. tue ^he only reeo^n that someEnglish scribblers abused Pope and Swift v;as because "they them-selves - how to write either proce or verse. ""^-^V/lien the w,)U.uiT^"' supported Tcpc, Pyron exclaimed:"2. T " V, PIC 3^ - V, 5S9^^Tl^T'I'^^, 8 3F. ' ^ TV, 3C4, 1^1^34. L r^- J \Tj^ 219 ' 3Pe. - " ^ V, 14^r, 18P,35. BvncmAyky 6. 40. : '^v. 4:5^S. L " TV, iro^ 1-17 41. L ^ V, IC'l, 1320"It is a Sin, ^r.d e Shpme, -.nd a d? .metion tc thinkt'-?t Pcpe l 1 shculd require it—tut he does. Tho^erniserpble mountebanks of th-^ dry, the poets, disgrace-nd deny Ocd, in runnr'r; • -"^ '^""'^.3£ of Foots, -'nd elTi<5£^yron found not ^ ' - - -~-'--tion, bv:"^ " osublimit- " -^-cter in i T^IE R'lF^ r^THHl LCCr.Dryden's . '^'3, the r^rw. '"^ ^"'^^^TA'S D\Y, ^^nc . _r^^--.^^...-,-:-pe and Dryden th?t couldpossibly be found fr- ' ^^r?ble metres, and Godonl^-- knov's hcv msny -"s of the day, '"itiiouo -binding a tittle+ : ''G none."''^-- It -"as "Pone's pure str==in /v'^'hi cti/scT^r'ht the rapt soul tr charm, "'^^^^.^,,-1-'-•--•- ^..Q^+^y lines of Pope than ir?n:' equal lenfTth of quotation in English poesy, and that inplaces v/here they lepst e^'pect it.'' He used some lines on3rr"^U3, as an exam ' . ' _ of no consequence \;heth€r thesub.' satire or epic, since he v:as talking of poetry andi-r-^^^-^e and art. The images v.^^"^ as follovjs (al-though no linijvi i.ere quoted,". the V ' 0.^ 3ilk.2. Cu^d of AoSls milk.3. The Butter-^1-.The V/h-el.4.5. Bur '.:ith gilded v/lnrs.Painted Chil^ '^ "-t.7. \7hcse Bu z z ..7ell-bred Spaniels.n u-L-.i^^—.9. Sliallov,' strccms ruIC. Fieri d im:-otange-.11. rrom-'tcr . Pu-net squeaks .12. The ^&.r of E\'e.13. FE:v:il^pr tord.42. V, ICC 43a. :^-gli3- pras, 1. lCf-114. Ilalf-frct^:, hPlf-vencm, s-olts ^ ' :elf abroec.15. !^CT zX the toilet.IG. Flatterer at the board.17. .^'xiphibious thin^.18. ITow tri-os a lady.19. ITow stmts a Lex.20. A Chenab's face.21. A reptile all ^r:- -^^zX,2^, The P.abtias.23. Price that licxis the dust.He then quoted the tvo following lines:''Bea .. ^„ _ . : ^5 — --.at nc..^ ..ill trPv.^,V/it that can creep and Price that licks the dust."and asked if the-^^ _^ a line of all the passage withcu+ ' " emost forcible imagery" for his purpose and called attention tothe v?=riety, the im8p:instion, 8nd the poetr:^ of the pscse^e."•There is hardly a line -"hich a painting ' ,ot be .;.£.^e,and i_s. But this is nothing in comparison with his higher pas-sages in the SG3AY C^^ T'Al-T , and man" of his of-«r ^"oems, seriousand comic. There never v;as such an un^iuoL outcry in this v;orlcas that v/hich these Scoundrels are trying against Pope" . . .'^'^^^lie is a '"-'-e^- ^-v/l", ? '"othic Cathedral on ^--nd, anda Turkish kosviue anu all sorts of fantastic pagodas and conven-tickles about him. ^'ould this be a T^eo-classic quality?/ Youm-" '"'=11 Gh-^kespeare and Milton amids, if you :leco., cut Iprefer the Temple o-^ Theseus or the Parthenon to a mountain ofAC.b'trnt brick-work."Since Gifforc ne i^ualified Vvlth the ri^ht'^Pope v/as the greatest name in English poetry,the rest being only barba:^ians.45. Y, 274, 1£21.48. L(f:J V, 27547. Blessington 267(1qualities and turn of mind to vnr*ite a life of Pope, Byron though'46he should, since one vas more necesscr^' than of Jonson. Byronadmi"^''"^'''' t^' L'^c""^ Blessinsrtcn f'^t To^'^ ^..c,- 4.>p o^^Ty ^nthc"^ of\7hoir. ' 3£ Jealous, although no one had discovercc it hecause h(&lv;ays praised him so much that everyone thought he didn't"seriousl:" -'-"'nire" "'"i''". after . 'Someone has explained Byron's approval of Pope on the grouncthat "like likes like, congratulating itself b^^ approving itselfin r^-^- T^^.^.^^ himself v.Tote -t itj^vas "better t(err v:ith Pope tlian shine v/ith Pye,"'^^ I do not think Byron v/asusing PoDe as a shield against the criticiam he invoked from hiscontei.ipor.eries . "'^ron probably rdmired Pope's satirical and epi-grernmati C3l v/ork to a great extent, because it served as a modelfor his . ' i- '•^crkj ^nc" !ret the st-nrf^d '"hich he attempted tosttein. He fully rc lized that the status of Pcpc'o v:ork v;ithnany readers v;as such that one who nov/ enjoyed reading him endi.VllO"V/as weak enough t-: deem Pope a great noet,And •'c -p---: —3 :z^t -shamed, to show it."^*^^iTould probably not enjoy Byron's ovm satirical work if it were:iot for its ti:ieliness end immediate interest.Byrcr. - "~ r , ^,'-:"r'c^:^o^e , eti^:'^inp' himself as well as Pope,,;hen he wrote:"...but had none admi-'-ed,7/ould Pope have sung, or Horace been inspired?"-^s<48. 3CCTT A!TD B":'BCII, in POETRY AIJD CHTTTCTSIT TPIE RCmiZ'IGI.!0'^73L'EI3T , edited by Campbell, P-.^re, 77eaver.4^. E:^^L'^3T: ?MIZj3 SCCTC HEVTE',7EH3, l. 1C2OLu L ! Li,1 =-L^ 1I)Because of his keen insight, -refor", ^--r-r- -r-- ^interest v;ould 8lv;ays be maintained in satires and vvorks oftfste PS such, 7/hen it vas a quesf ^-n of taste, P'"-ron's aris-tocratic point-of-view usually prevailed, so that he 'v/as de-cidedly annoyed vrith trivial sub^iects ..hich mirht interest only'"iedlsrs*, and 'Boats', and ''.'/agons!' Chi ye shadesOf Fope and Dryden, ^-^c we come to this?"^^It was, then, Pope's power of words and -^.1 to authority, histaste, and the aristocratic and the classical element surround-ing him that aroused Byron's interest.51. DON J^JAr, 5, 807-852. D^N ,TrJAl^^, 3, 889-90Short criticisms of the authors listed ai-e made in thefoil o\'!±nr v/ork s:Addison - U-,^ JIT, "^^14..'Vristotle - JA.r"Burton - ->^^r—-,1SC7.Chaucer - ^3, 18C7.Dante - LETT".'- X' ^-^ -'-5 Barron 'admired 'his" elassicalsimplicity.Dr^jinmond - BlessineXon, 170.Fielding - I/-J V, i4»y 1821.-^omer - T)CT ^ '-"^_'^o. ^ ^^.263, a quotationbut not th^ - _jTcr^^e - T)Cr JuXii ±, 41-4; 13, 47-8.^'-""ton - DON JuAI-T, 1, ""'t 3, 817-24; L^'TT^R TC JOIB-^ -r'^^^-'ilton and Thomson a '= English dramatists' blank versia^e the be^^cons that shine «^lon^' the deep, out warn usfrom, trie rougn J=nd Da^i-en rocK on vrhlcn they are kindled.(Calver, b6,'T0^.THY 771, k;24.). Religion is beyond humanpov;ers, and religious subjects have therefore failed inall hands except'^Milton' s and Dante's.Johnson - LE^T^R TC DCTI J^JAll, 13, 49-53.Fulci - DCF .TTMI, 4, 43-5.Virgil - ^ 5BYRON'S CRITICISM OF HIS CONTEMPORARIESThe major part of Byron's critical material concerns the workof his contemporaries. It was usually written either as a result of hisreading the latest books or while in a passion against an article in a criticajlljournal or a supposed affront of a contemporary- writer. Since Byron's criticijlsmihanges to a certain extent as soon as he is annoyed with an author, one findslim writing his later criticism of some authors, euch as Rogers, in ?.n entirel sriifferent mood. The request for the latest works of the follovdng authors to)e sent to him in Italy will show the trend of his interest:"...Scott, Crabbe, Moore, Campbell, Rogers, Gifford,Joanna Baillie, Irving , Hogg, Wilson ( Isle of Painsman), or any special single work of fancy which isthought to be of considerable merit," for "have youno new Babe of Literature sprung up to replace thedead, the distant, the tired, and the retired? noprose, no verse, no nothing? no infant Sotheby.,.^le wasn't anxious to receive any "modern poesy" not that of any"female or male Tadpole of Poet Vtordsworth' s, notany of his ragamuffins."Byron considered mediocrity to be the distinguishing style ofliineteenth-century authorship,"^ although the fashion of the day stressed thetwo common qualities, imagination and invention. He found by observation oflis contemporaries that great imagination was seldom accompanied by equaljowers of the reason, and vice versa, so that:"the very circumstances of a man's yielding to thevocation of a poet ou^ht to serve as a voucher thathe is no longer of sound mind,"-^le found no modern poet equal to Pope and Dryden in harmony and the use of theleroic couplet which he greatly admired, for, according to his point-of-view,>nly Rogers, Gifford, Campbell, and Crabbe were proficient in its use.^ Helb. L&J V,64 3. Blessington.lAJ V,373, 1821 .97-.a. lAJ IV, I'^l, iai7,Muri^^. I. Blesb'lngLon 2^91used the following words to describe the new style:5"very, very—so soft and paraby."He rose against the "absurd" cant of his day, the conventional "half and halfprudery"^ which he abhorred.The "Upper Lakers" according to Byron consisted of Burns, Chatterton,and Vfordsworth, whereas the "New Under School" ^.e., the Cockney School, whictie spoke of with contenipty v/as comprised of Bowles, Hunt, and Keats. It istikrd to understand why Byron should include Bums and Chatterton in the samecategory with Vvordsworth, since they not only did their writing in the pre-vious century, but one lived in Scotlrnd, whereas the other did much of hiscomposition in London. He might well have included Southey, Coleridge, andiazlitt with Wordsworth in his "Upper Lakers", since he evidently admired3ums and Chatterton to a certain e^ctent (for he wrote that Kirke V/hite exceptfor his bigotry "surely ranks ne -^t Chatterton ^ho was never vulgar/. . .^and/lis very prejudices were respectable"), whereas he did not, at least in laterLife, care for the work of Southey and Coleridge, and he never would admit tha7lazlitt could even write good English.In 1820 he wrote to Murray:"Vi/hat with the Cockneys, and the Lakers, and the follo?:ers ofScott, and Moore, and Byron, you are in the very uttermost de-cline and degrada-tion of literature. I can't think of it -with-out all the remorse of a mugderer. I ivish that Johnson werealive again to crush theml""I love Scott and Moore, and all the better brethren,' but I hateand abhor that puddle of waterworms. , .in the history line."^He cited Mrs. Hemans' style as an example of the "false, stilted, trast^,+. L&J IV, 474-95. Reply to Blackwood's EDINBURGH liAGAZINE, August 1819.5. L&J V, 753. IJkJ IV, 277 L&J V, 767. L^J VI, 429, 1823 (notes on Byron's 9. L&J V, 18, 1820CONVERSATION IN CEPHALONIA by Dr., ,- V . — —hbItMuir)heterogeneous styles of the day, "which are all bombastic,/being/ neitherEnglish nor poetry. "-^'^ He considered his ov/n style as a bad influence, how-ever, for "no one has done more through negligence to corrupt the language."-^'Then too,"next to the affected simplicity of the Lake School, he dislikedprettiness, or what are called flowers of Doetry; they are onlyadmissible in the poetry of ladies. . .which should always have asprinkling of dew-ge^nmed leaves and flowers of rainbo^v hues,with tuneful birds and gorgeous butterflies," /etc. AlthoughLady Blessington is ostensibly supposed to be quoting Byron, itmust be admitted that the latter oart of this paragraph does notsound like Byron's style/ •'^^^Byron found that the Lake School became "superfine" in its attempt toclear vulgarity, but good birth "saves one from this hypocritical gentility".There were:"two sorts of Naturals;—the Lakers, who v/hine about Nature becausethey live in Cumberland; and their under-sect . . ./the Cockneys/who are enthusiastically for the country because they live inLondon."The Lake ooets, however, do not recognize the Cockneys as belonging to their13set. ^ He could understand the"pretensions of the aquatic gentleman of Windermere to what Mr.Brahajn terms ' entusymusy ' , for lakes, and mountains, and daffodils,and buttercups; but I should be glad to be apprized of thefoundation of the London propensities of their imitative brethrento the same 'high argument'. Southey, V/ordsworth, and Coleridgehave rambled over Europe and seen nature, although they haven'talways used her very well. "-^3Instead of the type of excellent p etry which Pope wrote, Sngl^md nowhad the Lake School:"which began with an epic poem, 'written in six weeks', /JOAN OFARC/.-.and finished with a ballad composed in twenty years, asPETER BELL'S creator takes care to inform the few who will inquire, .,A deluge of flimsy and unintelligible romances, imitated from Scotiand myself, who have both made the best of our bad materials anderroneous system. . .MADOC. , .neither an epic nor anything else;11. author of mODERN GREECE, A ?0M, 1817. 12a. Blessington 26kU, L&cJ V,82,18 ,^0 13. UfJ V, ^8/THALABA, KEHAilA, QEBIR, and such gibberish, written in allmetres and in no language. "-^^The London poets hadn't seen one-tenth as much nature as had the authorof V^INDSOR FOREST, but although they had only seen its "brick", they neverthe-less sneered at Pope. The fact that they did sneer at one of Byron's favoritepoets may have been one reason why he could find no nobility of thought andof style whatsoever "in the mock birds and bards of Mr. Hunt's little chorus.'Therefore Byron was convinced after "calmly considering the subject," tha decline of English poetry was taking place in the nineteenth century, for:"Crabbe is the first of English poets. As I toid Moore not longago we are all wrong except Rogers, Crabbe and Campbell. Therewill be found as comfortable metaphors and ten times more purepoetry in Pope's ESSAY ON MAN than in the EaCURSION."-'-^It will probably not be difficult to understand, therefore, why, exceptfor his special friends, Byron's criticism of aost of the nineteenth-centuryromantic writers is in the main unfavorable, for his preconceived notions ofDoetry almost compelled hi-a to condemn the works before he even opened them.Perhaps we should begin with Byron's criticism of Southey, since he issaid to have been more antagonistic toward the very conventional poet laureateihan he was toward any of his other contemporaries, and as a result, he wroteQore against him. Not only was Southey very conventional and the poet laureatis has been said, but he was also elderly and a member of the Lake School.Although Byron undoubtedly felt some antagonism against kLu for these minor'easons, he nevertheless would admit there was some good in the man's witingmtil Southey did one or two things which left Byron exasperated and full oflatred.In 1813 Byron wrote that he was the "best-looking bard" he'd seen for aong time and to have had his "epic appearance Byron "would aLmost havel4« UtJ IV, 1^. L^J \i, b9i. 16. BIKUN THE PUET by Alderman E.Huntsma|ip. 43. 17. L&J II, 269, 1813 to Webster.15twritten his S/vPPHICS" , -'^ The wordirii? of this sentence shows that Byron was nebTevj fond of the SAPPHICS, for he found Southey's characters very unintsrestin ^.-'-^A little later in the year, however, we find Byron writing that SoutheyIls the only existing "entire man of letters", since "all the others have somepursuit annexed to their authorship." Southey's talents are of the first or-ier, and his prose is perfect. Of course there are various opinions of his3oetry; perhaps as a result of there bein^r "too much of it for the presentgeneration." However, posterity will select, for "he has passages equal tomything." Although Southey has a "party", he has ss yet no "public" except20'or his prose writings, such as the LlFE OF NELSON which is "beautiful". In.815 he spoke of Southey's success:"I have tried the rascals (i.e., the public) \vith ray Harrys andLarTys, Pilgrims and Pirates. Nobody but S/irouthey7 has doneanything north a slice of bookseller' s pudding, and he has notluck enough to be found out in doing a good thing. "2^Byron used the CURSE OF KSHAh^iA as his model for the choruses in HEAVENIND EARTH (1821), thus sho^ving an appreciation of some of Southey's work, al-though in 1811 he had written thus to V^/illiara Harness:"Do read ;iir,thematics—I should think X plus Y at least as amusingas the CURSE OF aEHAMA and much more intelligible. Master Southeypoems are , in fact, of what parallel lines might be-viz. prolongedad infinitum ;vithout meeting anything half so absurd as themselvesIn Byron's little-read satire, THE BLUES, Inkel, v/ho represents Byron,^mploys a typical epithet for Southey:"...yes, ma'am; and a fugitive reader sometimes.On Wordswords, for instance, I seldom alight.Or on Mouthey, his friend, without taking to flight. "^^Byron found "I'VAT TYLER "rather awkward". He wished Southey vrasn't intole-rant , for BjTon hated all intolerance:L8. L&J II, 266, 1813 to Moore 21. L&J III, 169 to idooreL9. L&J II, 255, 1813 to Moore 22. L&J II, 74-5.jU. L&J 11, ^31, 1813 23. lin^ V5-V'/sti22"It is no disgrace to Mr, Southey to have witten WAT TYLER, andafterwards to have written his birthday or Victory odes (I speakonly of their politics ) , but it is something, . for which I haveno words, for this man to have endeavoured to bring to the stake(for such would he do) men who think as he thought, and for noreason but because they think so still, when he has found itconvenient to think otherwise. . ."24Thus we have one of the two major reasons why Byron criticized Southeyso harshly. This point is brought out even more strongly in one of Byron'sDest poems, THE VISION OF JUDGiiENT "suggested by the composition so entitledDy the author of WAT TYLER". Southey* s poem was a eulogy written at thedeath of George III. Southey had published a LETTIR TO THE COURIER, January5, 1822 against Byron, ending with the words:"One word of advice to Lord Byron before I conclude. When heattacks me again let it be in rhyme. For one who has so littlecommand of himself, it yn.ll be a great advantage that his tempershould be obliged to keep tune."I^nd so it did in what is not only one of Byron's most famous works, but alsoDne of the best satires in the English lajiguage. The PREFACE begins in Byron'ypically delightful satirical style:"It hath been wisely said, that 'One fool makes many;' and it hathbeen poetically observed,'That fools rush in where angels fear to tread.'—Pope,If Mr, Southey had not rushed in where he had no business, andVifhere he nevdr was before, and never will be again, the followingpoem would not have been written. It is not impossible that itmay be as good as his own, seeing that it cannot, by any speciesof stupidity, natural or acquired, be wors e . The gross flattery,the dull impudence, the renegade intolerance and impious cent, ofthe poem by the author of WAT TYLER, are something so stupendousas to form the sublime of hinself—Containing the qiiintessence ofhis own attributes.So much for his poem—a word on his preface. In this prefaceit has pleased the magnanimous Laureate to draw the picture ofa supposed 'Satanic School', the which he doth recoinraend to thenotice of the legislature; thereby adding to his other laurels24. L&J IV, 117-18 , 1817 to Murraythe ambition of those of an informer. If there exists anywhere,excepting in his imagination, such a School, is he not sufficient-ly armed against it by his ovm intense vanity? The truth is, thatthere are certain writers whom Mr. S. imagines, like Scrub, tohave 'talked of him ; for they laughed consuraedly.'I thin, I know enough of most of the writers to whom he issupposed to allude, to assert, that they, in their individualcapacities, have done more good, in the charities of life, totheir fellow-creatures in any one year, than ILv. Southey has doneharm to hi:iself by his absurdities in his whole life; and thisis saying a great deal...The way in v/hich that poor insane creature, the Laureate, dealsabout his judgments in the next world, is li-r-)T^ t -r^-^-^r^ 71-- • - <-).-1.1 L.. - ' .. -I.. J .~ ir 1Being therein, although the one loved it for its sympathy endvatchfulness over men's v/ell-be: , 'hile the other felt en av;e ithe "^^'--sencc ^ " + "unexplained gre?tnes£ '^'^•.r comrlete disregardfor minor creatures such as man.B:,T:*on's criticism of Coleridge is both favorable and unfavo-Ureblc. ' . "Syren's early criticism he seems not to have c?r'^dfor Coleridge's poetry, since he c riled him a "manichean /a du&l-istic philOGo^h^ of poesy"'^^ and accused him of attacking Camp-bell's ri.^\^'^"^3 ^'^ -^r^^^ „gi]_ ether pleasurecThe follovdng st^=nza in ETr-LTSII BARDS A:MD 3C0TCTI n^;VJ5V;SRS,v?£ devrted to a satire of Col'^r:^'d''e ' s sub^iect matter in 1811:'*'''^"Shall gentle Coleridge ^z^z unnoticed here,To turgid ode and tumid st^^^nza dear?Though themes of innocence amuse him best,Yet still obscurity's a velcome guest.If Inspiration should her aid refuseTo him v^.o takes a pixy for a muse.Yet none in lofty n^junbers can surpassThe bard v/ho soars to elegise an ass.So well the subject suits his noble mind,He brays, the laureat of the long-ear'd kind."In 1815 Byron apologized for these "pert, and petulant, andih'-^ llov -"c^' -. '^"'^ "'oul'-"' '^ri:--'^^:- ----v^pt f-^e v/antonness and geneLit!''" of many of his attempted attacks.^'^'^In 1815 he was c-^nsoling Coleridge for an unsuccessful atter.''I trust ycu do net permit yourself to be depressedby the temnorarj'- partiality of Vv'hat is called 'the putlie', for the favourites of the moment; all experiencis against the permanency of such impressions. Youmust have lived to see many of these pass av/ay, andwill survive many more--! mean r^ersonall^'A for noetic p||L1v ,I would not insult vou bv a ' -risen. "^^V-:, TT, 7?, l^^ll Harness.R7. L.%T j-T R^^^Mc^son, 18111:7h« L."t'^ TIT, 101- Cni J - — >48. I/. J III, 101, 1815 Col,49. III, 81.T a-pt.tByrcn wps sure thero vre.s never such an opening for tragedyin 1815, so he requested the best ?tuthr ^ 's Coleridge,Taturlri, Sotheh- ^..n.^. .t,^ ^,.+ ^^..+ 1.^,+ + ^^ ^--^n:^.hoped thpt Campbell or Colericpre would write a tragedy, for "therest of 'us youth' have not heart enouph."^^ Byron was sure Keaas capable of expressin- the thought, ^-r- n^_^^- nfnvs which Ccle-|r:d-e had the "power" to dr^w, for since the success of RTa.lCHSE'.'hich nothinp' had equalled for many years, Coleridge should notDe slow in raisin- - -^udience's hc--"^ ^gain.^'Coleridge ' ' ^^ccused Scott of using his CIiRI3TAE^L stanza |n\Y OF TTIE LAST !^:^^"STRFI,. Fot until 1P30, did Scott acknowledgeT^^.,..^,. T...^^ ^+ lo^o^ -^n---^-,- rripde a publiction as early as 1815, it ooes seem strange that a man as uprigh1|as Scott took so long before makin^ his acknowledPTnent. Byron\^rrote t - -* -'^ i^-t.^ — -ogn Qf 3cott was "frank, fair, and war!':rer-rding Coleridge, and he sent Coleridge an extr-'ct from TTTEST^r-F COK'^T^Ti-^ whir-h was ^Iso sinil^r to C^-^.TSTA.^^ , altnourhnot seen the l^tL<^r he+'cre he '"'rote it.'^^"'Byron w^s very f^nd o-*-' CHHISTABlirL.,saying m that hewouldn't !»llow "^np tn ?neer et it, t-r -\ •'•^s ^r'ne ^'^ildpoem". "^^e saia latei- z^^t he praised it oecause ne "thoughtwell (jx it", because Coleridge was in distress and he v/as doingif/hat he could to aid him, and he thought a public avov;al of hisgood opinion would help him v.lth ttie booksellers. '^^^ Therefore,he asked Moore to review him favourably in the EDJTTBTJRC^I :'Traise him W£ll-~cf all things the most f-' "-''icult. "51. UcJ III, 369 51a. U-J III, 2o2, 1815, Hoore.7F^e v/as sorry vAien Jef'^rey criticized this man of v;onclerful talei.ifor it would hurt him in both his raindand his pocket. '^2 iq^issnd ""l'^ originc l " r.:' ''".'^'^t-?.'^^^'^ "'•i'^inel of"a.ll 01 3co"Lt's metrical wc.j.eb vvhich v;ao no Siiiail merit,"" Byr^nQuoted fourteen lines from CITRISTAB^L as an introduction to FAREIn his reply to Blc. ckv/ooc ' s SDIiEIIRGH 1~5 , Byronpictured Coleridge:loyed and predicating /sicj the damnaticn of Mr.Fitt,"and the" desolation of England, in the t\fo bestcoDies of verses he ever v/rote: to wit, the infernaleclogue of — FMiT^H, X"!) 3lA''^-^^'^^^j end the ODE T(T^TE DEPART. ":AR."'/hen Byron was on the " littee of Drur;^- L?=ne The?tre, one f ell'i^v;','^'^ for he hactale./o alth' " : ?,^tc ,' and hac wen a 'v.ell-aierited iiucce^s'Coleridge red Byron by attacking Drury Lane Theatre in his L!for acting BERTR.^.T. B^^ron v;rcte that this v;as "not ver^- gratcfu:nor graceful on tlie ^^art cf the v;orthy auto-biographer"; Ccleridjplay had been poetical but impracticable, so he v^'ill have toccnscTe himself '':^'t''" f ^ r>j--f^-o -i r-i rns frr^^---^^of his and \7ordsworth' s ciociples, at he c.-lied tuein. Byrcai uad^the taunting remark that if Coleridge meant these vrords as anyproof of their merits, Byron could ^.-.^ ' ' :; o .'.i behalf ofJoanna Southcote. '.Yith this Byr n closes his remarks on Coler-idge, for:Idf•'FE:e's5:^. L.5;g IV, 31, Ivloore, 1816 53. ,.^L.::l.iy .:61-3.54. I/'J IV, 90, 1817, rcoT^e. 55. 1^^:^ TV, 136, Hurray, 13175C. U.J TV, 171 :7. irr jv, 172, Turr--^, 1817I1^'He is a shabby fallov:, an>' ^ ' bends cfend after him"."^'^'b "'dn't o'l^te cerry out his intentions, hovever, for Cole-'Vbe ap'pears e^ein in Byron's point""nr: satire:"Explaining metaphysics to t^ie nation—I v.lsh he would explain his Explanation."^^On the v;hole, Byron says very little about Burns, although^n inter'" st - - >^ in 1813 v/hen he ponders over •-''--t ^----•3 •.-o'llclave accorn .lisbed if he had been born a patrician. He woulc un-5'ubtedly heve had more polish, thereby relinguishing his main'orce; he probebl^ ., uld have Vj'ritten Just as much verse, ^"'i''- ' e.•culd have lost his immort=^lity .^^ Since Byron continues the di.2ussion in this vein, it is apparent tbat he believes the power?nd attraction of Burns' verses lies in the fact , that they v;ere;ritten by a man close to the soil who had felt the passions ofLife, but managed to rptJ=in his simplicity and humble Icve oflotural objects.A little later he wrote another elaborate observation on Buiibs"\Vhat an antithetical mind I—tenderness, roughness—delicacy'', coarseness-^rsentiment,sensuality— soaringand grovelling, dirt and deity—all mixed up in thatone compound of inspired clay... It seems strange; atrue voluptuary'- v/ill never abandon his mind to ther;rossness of reality. It is by exalting; the earthly,^he material, the physique of our pleasures, by veil:^'::these ideas, by fcrgetting them altogether, or, atleast, never namingtham hardly to one's ^f;lfjalone can prevent them from dl sgu sting. ""^^T:i t.^c L^^-^^ ^^^-/^o^-^^ T'-r^rav7 p-—,Byron mentions:.h.*t Burns v;a3 often coarse, but never vulgar, ^1 Elsev;here in thesame letter he asks Bowles, in ccnnection with a derogatory stat*^lent about Fope found in a letter, if he realizes t^ what rujn-. .-^W:^, 15-lG 50. UJ 71, ?2C , ^"cv. IC, i:i3:0. ^7, 377, 1P13 61. lA" ¥. 591IIlaging arnong letters might lead, and goes on tc relate his experience?yron saw a collection of Burns* letters which were so "abominabl^^ro>^-j elaborately nr^-^ r't ^—^cn doesn't b'^l'^'cve f^.ey•-^uld be paralleled in tl.e "English IcngUc.ge."'.^at is more strange is, fv t some of these =^re coucheas postscript s to his serious and sentimental letters,to v/hi ch are tacked either a piece of prose, or someverses, of the most hyperbf^lical indecency. He himselsays, that if 'obscenity (using a much coarser vrord)be" the sin against t'-; ^ tt,.-., rjj^^ost, he most r-,- i-i - - - 1 -can not be spved.'"m editor, ho-,."evr^; " uld not be candid tc t'-e:othing vjould have provoked Byron to, if it had net been for theeproci-tion c-^ T ' ^ "^or he is only an "ind- :^ferrnt spectj^tov'.Byron admired ucither f^e men nor tlie poetr^r of the Ccc.uieychool or Uhder-ochool as he called :t. He characterized then byhi^ir ''vul^-'^T'i t."^''" , ?=nd it ^"ps nn th«nr "fin'^r''^" th.^t h<^ found thcimost vulgar ', '"^he grand cistin'^tion of the under forms of theshcool of poets is their vulgarity. By this I do not mean thhe^^ are coarse , hut ' :;h^^bb-''"-P''=ntapl . ' "^1® Tiile under Shelley'snfluence, Eyr^n bec=-:.ie less vehement against Hunt and Teats, -nd'' invited Hunt and his large family to Ttal"'^'It irritated by h'^ ' ''~h^lrcsj Byron paid his exrer noi-J:'':'is children; never-for he=nt to hurt Hunt's feelings,-''e once said ther^ no better niisUti-» •'pi'ter than Hunt vrhen he allo"''ed his senso to prev- il over his^y,^* principles. "nTr-p^-n -K^MTpr* u-tp+ » o -r^i sms -^rtr^^crdinar}/,L^=. I."-.^ V, 591la. l/rj II, 357, Dec. 1S1762. U.J V, 58«f^.?. J/?rJ TV^ 474-Q5tDecause essentially Hunt was not v^algar.^"^ Byron considered him3ll in all an extraordinary character, "not exactly of the preserjt62a3ge." He had talent and great independance of spirit, being eLittle opinionated, however.Bj'-ron felt that Hunt had haJf^ov/er to make RIHINI perfect=is a fable of Dryden's", b^it hf- h^d sacri-^r'ced "his p'e'^'.^'^-:^ and hitaste to some unintelligibit iictioiis of Wcrdsvvorth",I^tcxIdefies him to explain. Byron wasn't the last to discover itsDea^itl '^s » "f^.^n he remcnstr^^tcc: ^'ainct "^.tc v'T'^'r:* w^rus , "^"^-int re-j^liec tip L he wrote, upon principle, anC tuc. '. S-.is 'raacepart of his systemll I then said no more. , , man talks of lUlssystem, it is lihc ^ woman's t-V/:^'^" vr- ^ +i^gr^Italk on."^"Barren c nsidered the thir-d canto of HJTIITTI the -best, for ""uriad excelled z^"^ ' ' - , ' + - -^^ ; c:ception v;a& perfect, and the execution v/as as perfect at. t r^;;;cul.i pdjnit. It had more originality than Eyrcn had yet s^^en InVcen: " " "-""^ same length. The fa-ilts - ' ^-'1- aL ter^^'hey were "mostly verbal " . B^^^ron did make the fcllcwing critic,of them:t^'if to avoiddi'^ficile est .of ep..of as , as- things in a coramon way;:--.r.iuni£ die ere seems at times' sir + '~r' , "65tc have met with in yc: a 1:.\,<3orae time later Bvr-on ^ ined th^t he had given Hunt-earning "of the row his favorite antique Dhr-sec 'Id brinrhim into."*^"^ V/hen B'-'-ron went thr-7 132, 1-14 Hurra-1 C4said he was65. L^v 2k;6, 1815, HuntP T TTT<^/10 ~ ~joing to tFke notes cn the scenei^' for lie ::nc'. ' ' •c-^'. oe giactc • ^--^ - V, ..V ^ . . . beliqrvepyrcii raeent this to be So^'CcStic.Since ""^yr^rn fc^i.nc "cri'—'.^nc?. It^^lianism" in RIHIITI, het'-ld B.mt he ^/.ui„, 1.;;, ck hii^i;'as o berd ap"ainst half tlje f§llov/s on whom vou have:''e praised it to Hurray 'as a ixian of business", but •..er-';t.^lk "as a reader or crit:c", he vrculd sa.y:"there was a veir^r v;onderful and beautiful performance,v;ith Just en:" " ^f fault to make its beauti- - - -^eremarked and ._...rkable, U^'^-Zl there is a sub . , : vjlt.of poetr;^^, v/^ich is a foundation for solid and durablefame" to it."^*^ The poem "is a devilish 'jTod one—quaint, here and there, but vith the substratum andoririnalitv, and v;ith poetrA-- about it, tliat v;ill .^cthe test,^^ Z7oi!7 it is a g'od poem at bottom, dis-fi'gured only by a strange style... He believes hj s tr^:of vulgar phrases tortured into compound barbarisms tbe old Engli sh . "<^7a„\iroore d5d not arree v/ith "nvron about the poem, since he never en-Q'yT C- r" - - ~ ^ ^ r- --.-;-»- ^ ->-.- , T 4- + -• ^. ^ ^ "prO^'' ''pathetic fa.Byron c^npidered T^'^ajvi^thj, ;"",7ith L..^ ;..-cc_^oL::. cf a fev/ capers... ac heavy aNightmare '/'ps ever bestrode by Tndip*e8ti on , "..--ri ' ^ 'jil-, "—1', because he actonly h : t ho: ' -* s v'-rsifi cation of the lattoit " " "__ / the horrors.. ccncetiorjo^.^-^me, fnut'-o pirn Zls7 of great scope for his genius" anv:ill be ver;*/ Arabesque and beautiful."-^TOT^T^, 246 67a. I/.^ tjj,runt, 1-16lA-^ -^TT, 267, TToore. 69. I/J jv, 151, TTurrav, 1-^17:. lA^ ^^^j '^l, ^^v-it, 1^1-^. 71. ipr 69, !^.i>-r^-, 1^1^-7' ^,hcar..t£ cf'•^od, but "the erpressicns buckr? ept here and thei'econsidered "a pretty pl-ce" for its coTn'?o£iti on. ^ In 1814 Byre:told Hunt thJ^t ne found "poetry and thourrht in the oody" of hisivcrk, -nd ^'-:-.^'r"i^ ^ •• ^ . -• ^, in...^h27 pre^- 1'^^'tter , "'^'^ sc Hunt didn^t have occpsicn to be disturbed the8ppropr3>teness 01 the erternpl splendour or nis b^uks, since"they have still moi-e Vathin than v;ithout. "'^'^By 1818, Byron* £ opinion had begun to change, so he criticinore freely, with less concern about hurting feelings. Hunt v.oSstill:"a good man, vdth some poetical elements in his chaos;the Christ-Church Hospital and a Sunday.0 say nothing o-^ the 3-— -:.-^cl, •,;hich. into a nert'^/'r , " ' ^bu+conceit'--PT?3:'rc:i could only say;. ineffable Centaurs that were ever begottenby 3eii-love upon a nightmare, T think *this monstrcuSagitt^n'-' the most prodigious. He is an hones''latan, v/ho hF.s persuaded himself into a belief ^cvm impostures, and talks Punch in pure simplicity of'•~^rt, taking hLmself . . . r Vates ^ " s, or... .isenses, of tbe "^"•"d . , ^^cu h. . ^ ..le- 'shamble abou' . ' -at the his pro 'fessicn, in t.. . v/hc fol^c\.c^ it?... I '11:me . . .He is V-<^ -''-^ one 0-^ usbe curst if he is(but of us he is not) ;;ii0SG corona' ' ould c-:3;cs(2j^i&7 pride might have kept him true, cv-Ci.i h? ^'TT---Lyron ceiiie bac^v to tke epitiiet ^'vulga;' ',cc'ilc net lielp best.v.'ing on the meml this LondcT r ^-r T'^r f— O '"r71ed76'^u^ LGijn liunL is a £;ccd nan,-nd a good fsther--o-^r his Ccles tc all the ITasters Plunt;—and a good hus-nd--see his Sonnet to Mrs. Hunt;—and a gcod frienc-ceo his Epistles to ^ -'v^ppnt people; and a great cox-comb and a ver-^'- vmI: rscn in everythinr" about him. „77has be-s criticized most by Byron, v;ho had stated early in his criticithat he ?bhorred compc^^i'^ p^p-^'f^ets, ' and, course, Keats em--TD,'ed them notoriously, t»^^-c cj... -ly i-i hi o g'- "' ' ---- . -1""or simplicit: riting, v/hereas Keats' sty: . rname::'^^'T"~'n wrote I.^^rr^y in I'^ZC:•There. ' tra wh ci Teats " the lilie upon my^table ... - .-:^e Keats, I ent ..--flay ^.i-^. ?li^'s^^. . .There is no bearinr the drivelling idle ' :I.Iankin."^^''c considered the "poesy of this miserable self-polluter of the9ismled£.1.lUOf '^rpress' .;niCi:as expiated, of Keats' poetry in a letter, he continued;•'I don't mean he Is indecent , but viciously solicitinghis o\'m ideas into a st-te v:hich is neither poetry nci. j .-^^ Drc"'' porlan^^f'' -inr else but a Eedl?Keats \;as prai;^cu in the EDJPin Eyron's annoyed outburst:'0 suitedthe praises of that little dirty blackguard Keatesin the EDIhTBl'^'^H, I shall observe as Johnson did v/henSheridan the actor got a pension: "V/hatI h?s h£ got epension? Then it is time thst I should give up mine IITobody could be prouder of the praises of the EDII^''""than I v;as, or more alive to their censure as I shov;ecin ET^OLTSI! BAHDS AIT) SC^T'"^" RD.^'^ir^/EP.S , etc. At pre son-all the men thev ha\ e ever praised are de^aded b^'' th£insane article. Vlhy don't they reviev/ and praiseSCLCirOIT'S '^t:^TDS TC health? Tt^is bet-^'-- r-^ asmuch pcetrj'' as Johnnjr Keates. "^^t77. h^-J TV, 239, ISIS78. I^r V, ^^4, 1820. 1/ 7, o. 1 Qon77 ^ . T ?' I J.-79 /l-"J V,"96, is20J, 15.--—)I/ J V, 1no=0=- • >II1 IHov;ever, Shelley's Icve fcr Keats, and above all, Keats'esvly ceath softened Eyron's attitude, yieldir-: .5lQer treatmcrfor B:r" alv/ays qu.' .,-x, ..^ -^-inftcjByron said he had "alv/ays been battling v/ith the snake about Kest...th^t idol the Cockney s. He adnrtted he didn't approve olf'eats' poetry or - " ' -"eats' v.'orks fpirl^'-, bepr n'"^" noetr^,^, but he hadn'" --itoet's "depreciation o:Peps", ?=lt>ou^: ^"B.s sure th^^t in spite o-^ f^e "f-nt-stic :^op-peries of his style'' he had promise and his death should be cc.:-idered a loss to English literature, especially since he had c;th'-t ''^e r*^ '~ ratt-^-"^" his style -^t'^r f-^e "'lor':clpssical iHodels. Byron had vrritten a satire against Keats inone of his vrr.rks, but as sec ^rd the nev/s of his death,he v.TOte clf tc t^-— telling him to omit it, '-^ " "-'^couldn't ''war - ith the depd~-p?rticularly those already killed b>Triticisr/' . "YP'TRTCN will be a fine raonuTT=^nt and will keep his"•o^"^'— -u^T.-^^r-v,, "iuotestclc th-t '-T^WC?: ••^roof of Keatfi.l c^enius;_--~rion!' why a man miglit as v;ell pretend tc be riclwho hpd ogie dipinond. 'Hyperion* indeed! Hyperion toa satyr. '•'-^sE:^rcn just couldn't understand this "j^ielcing sensitiveness,""^pnd fjn?='ll3'- concluded that;"he v;ho would die of an article In a revi^:'.. \;cui'^ pro-b^bl^'-.have died of something else equally trivial,s^nie thing nearly happeried to^girke Y.Hiite, vfhc after-3^,^ron devotes stanza LTX of Canto IT 0^ D^^" ^"^JAJI to Keats:^4. T'^edwin, ^.?A"6. If-J V, 331-.??, I'^'^.l'. i/-^P V, 18^185. T/>T TV, 491i'^edv;in, 3G0IIT !I"JCr.n rccts Vvto wp.s kill'd of^' "by cne critique,r^ust ?s he replly promised scmet.'^ing .crrest,T"' ncz Inte Llitfibie, vr'thouu ^reeK:Contrived to t?lk about ^^e ^^uos oi late,Iluch as they mirht have oeen suoposed to speak.T'^or -^ellov'! y^is vras untcv'ard fai-e;'Tis strj=np-e the mind, that very fiery particle,Should let lts<=if be snut'+'*d ou^ by an article.""^ooK Lhe vr^ncf line as a port, end was sooilt bj'' Cock-nefyinp-, and Suburbinp", and versu-xying Tooke's PAITTKECand Lempriere's DTCTJ^'NAHY. . .'^ T would rather he hadbeen seated on the highest peak of Parnassus than haveperished in such a manner. Foor fellowj though withsuch inord-'^-"^ e self-love he would probably h-ve netbeen verjr . i read the review of SI^TDYir theQTT lY. '^l v/as severe -but surely not sc o^ . ere emai..^ .lews in that and other ,-iournals upon o+h-'^rs...^'"u" knov; my opinion of that second-hand schc .- '-"^d T Imovm that P'eats was dead—or that he t.j-iver^.^^ 30 sensitive—I should have omitted ccn^ remarkson his ^oetr^.'", to vrhich T was rrovoke " ^'is attacl-u::cn Pope ZTn AT^ B^AUr.-", 18207pS-^- disappro-bation '-^*s cv.Tx £t"lG 0^ "T-itin^. ""^Byron had once spoken of Jeffrey's nobility in standing upr>nd admitting th had made an error in Judging Byron's poetry'Cnlv a hi crh- spirited mind will ^r-.^rr^-^ ^• + :. censure, or can praisethe man it has once attacked". It shows liberality and a greatsoul, ^or "a little scribbler would have gone on cavilling to theend ' ' — - : had said then that it took a man witl-ccrirage end a noble mind to admit his mista' . ".'/e may now say V:sane :'^or Byr^'^n's behavior as we close the phase his criticisiriByron's critical material on the minor v/riters of this peri:'d much of their v;r: t ' ^ce'^ted £t"le '^f V'^ ei^'ht-eenth century, is favora.ble on the whole. Byron srned hisI/^^ Lo7, jhelley, 1"'21 ?C. IZ-J v, 268, Shelley, 1S21^Ca. U J IT, 4C3, 1''14 01. I/.-" , 322, ITov. 17, 1815sry??.90a•en]''"'LT3H BARDS AI^'D SCOTCH T^.EVTE'AfERS after Gifford's EaVIAD (17e4)end I'AE^^IAD, 1795, two sstires £^^5nst the Delia Cn.Tscen school.Although he -citor the AHTI-JAC^^^'^ • ^ , ""is see;not to have affected B^^T^on's attitude tv/oard him, for he only wr^"cTeffre^ . Cifford I take tg be the nmakers in poetry end prose. ""-^Eyrcn felt t^-+ '^-^^^crd's censure ::i?de .t t^ iT-;-^^cve,;ecoUse:"It is not -^or me to b-ndy compliments vdth my eldersend my betters: I receive your ar^probation withgratitude, and will not return my brass -'^^^--^ ^oldby expressinc-- more fully those sentimen". . -aticFe t- ld ; 1S14 th^t ':ept Gifford's, because he knev; '^ifford would not abuc^e him unle^lsle deserved it, v/hich v«c uld reconcile him to the Justice of the. ... . 93:r: ticism.In 1812, Byron found e long manuscript poem by Lord Brocke,hilip Sidney's friend. Tie sent it to his publ-^'sher t'- ?sk Giffcr||dff it had ever been publieheu, or nfet, ' - ^^thy o ^i cation. ron did not feel qualified "to hazard an opir.'ts merit^;** hen ord' s errccllent edition of T.Tcsaii^er made h£S ' n the 'wTitiiigs c thrt sge as on tl.obe of our cv.:Dallas showed one of Byron's manuscripts to Gi'^ford in 1811.phis hurt '^^'•"f'on's pr^de, beciivSe he nei"^"^ '^"-^'sed cf^. rr* ^-r-ets in^:er to - -' ' "m:'^':'i "'^ord' §7 praise is nothing to the purpose: whathe iay? He could not spit in the f^ce o:" one who h?dpraised -'n ever^r possible -ivay. I must own that Iwish to ' the impression removed from his mind thatI had any concern in such a peltry transaction. Themore I thinly, the more it disquiets me; so I v'j 11 ssyno more about it. It is bad enou-h tc. bp p :^nr>-YY,i c-nste:LdrIv;itncut hsving recourse to such shifts tc extort prsis^'—'^ ' ' ' ensure.Byre ^ great respect, hov;ever, for Giffcrd's criticsl a-Dility; therefore hp s^rit much poetry to hln, hi^.self , asking hiirchcoz'e bet' " ' - . --r,-^ ^.v,^^--.-^.'sound' as the say^ ' learned and all t ; ' . i-.sense.Tt was GiffoiL -r-m "the one liter-1 '^1 nin his life", i.e., to Tcrie and ."^ohnson's t;3rin J "^l ^ s.^yron'ii ^ ' ^ opinic - ----- ^hen he said Scott, Gifford and Moore were the only ''regulars'' heevery knev/, with:"n'-^thing of the Garrison about tT-eir r;nor affectation. . .a£ for the rest... there vras alv/aysmore or less of t> e -^utticr about them--the pen peepiiKfrorn^behind the ear, and the thumbs a little ir":', rso . "^'-5A short tii.ie before Byron's deafr^ he hearc thpt he had beenaccused of writing a satire against Gi.f"ford, since it had beenrrcEL, for he hac a.i"..&yi ccnsicered Gilford his lit-'t in hie PC^TS: ^irstl:', h^^ r.^-'s,\nste"' ' -'^'7 r>!rp^^ --^ract'" " ~ ''rem Smoilett'Tis --le:--- "'^^TDE ^ " . in 1766 and^FJTT^kK^/ CLTITER in 1771--du-crie , 'tis Smollett vrhotaken from Anstey, ^ampbeil's SPECTI'ET'S CF THE BRIT]F'"ETS, 1»19. Campbell nad v/ritten: "The droll andfamiliar manner of the poem is original, but its leadicharacters are evidently borrov/ed from Smollett,^ Secondly, he does not know to v;hom Ccv/per alludes, v/li.en 1:says that there v;a>- one ^Aho 'built a C''urch to Gcd « a:,then blasphemed his name': 1+ 'Deo er ' Vcltalrto vk cm that maniacal Calvinis- ' " . 'f.le... ^ - k: al-ludes, ^c-.p:er's verses :^rom IT v/ere:'ITor k. . .,^cr the " ^ "^"-cends -Built ^-od a church, ' ' k's v;0rd to so "Thirdly, he misquotes and spoils a passa.^-e ^'ran ^xi^„.-Cwpeare, 'to pild refined grid, to paint the lily', etc^for 1:1: ' - rose, and bedevils in mere words thanone the .uctation," /k'CTICES c:" ' --as, IPl^reads: 'Ev -eEder must recall -^b^i- _ of thoug!'tsin his love-songs, tc vrhich an'''' it to suneraCd at ' - " -"k- - ' lot be'''To g-L:^'. I, to paint the rose.To throv; a perf-' " let'.ndp^•ereminded Hurray thatof doin~''ow, Tc:a is a fine fellow; "but heir^ V:. ''-'-zX ' n in/ustice (tc .-i...^..^,,instea(Tom Campbell's slips of f. e pen.rope^ Tc bematter, •''t i* cJ rfrel"over'ocd, bU G iiCor dr1 »/orks, unl~^s aii ccen(t leave the raniE"^,Tcn' s I's ina-'CMrac^'" in portrayin;he"zlThe? secret of Co.upbeii's ue_ccstuTie-n'"" des-^^"-'1P097, et-rennsyl-inrccnrrcv inth'' -? J-th Peninanrnaur. It is notoriouslyt; inds^l.-lcve fci' ever ereeps out, like a snake, to stinganyt^in^ -hi-" even acc"' ' - ^ ^ ^ ly , to stumbleupon it. "101 '- ^ r- \^j^QY^ licj.. hec urate scenermanners, ^"or he felt these mi:^ ' - ±t t:n -Tpvp his critical orinion of C^^.^b- ' '"/There is/ a g:^od deal q-^ taf~^et'fatory phrases, but his v;ork is-C o'f T'-'Hi' s ^re. Lc:^r II, 3w47lST3. U:r V, 25, 1820CI. I/J V, 166, 1R21C'3. U ^-'J,2CC ) I^IC, T'eSa. Lc^J V, n te 25ICC. M.-^ V, 164-1821102. Lt^ --p-^^o c^-'^ ^ ,- „--- - - - -,-I, J,f-nd because of the quantity c'' tie l^st, hr felt that one wouldf".^. Blessinrtcn, 05?IZ-'i^l:. iOH. L^,^ TTT, ICl, 1S14IItwillingly overlook the v.'-nt of stor" ' v/as, after ^11, "sii.-::^et enough". He v^ished Horers v7oulc v^-'tc -rve of +'^"6108vraen Rogers c-me to v.-rite his "HJT'Ar: LIFE (1819), he v;?s un-cSecided V7>iether tc condemn Pyron*s poetry outric^nt or to omit hiA.e• I 1 •»- c ,-^st^^tements for a v/hlle. Thus w'ien "R'^ge'^s told Ilcore he"boT"n ^rith a rose In his lips, and a NiP"h Lincrale sin.rin V--'sentlrnental ^v/addle". Tjnder V-^p. r^ircimstances, h'^vjever, v.'hf^tcould he De e'^rocLPd to say, 'inless he c^osf to ren^^in silent?-;-^1^ nuv/ever, T thinly tM^'t Eyi-on's continued praise dliffRogers, especially to Lady Blessinrxon in 1823, is very ^ood procfthat Byron did not necessarily allov; a personal grudge against arauthor to color the reiuainin:; cr'ticisrn of his works, especiallyp.f the work came up tc Byron's standard:-. He considered Rogers•amongst t>^.- ^'-z-^ q-" 1- 1 ' ^.^^^ and dently -1-ng v;ith •,. a ' of L'oore and hi^:icelf; L'ocre being|:he "lavv'ful son", •: i v/as this time the "illegiti;aate"-T'"t..^ .--as "the Tithonus of)cetry- -i:."iniort-i clrec-uy', while Iloore and himself must wait forheir i;'nnortality.m1£'C3, he told Lady ^_ '- . ; .RY v.'os a "ver^^ beautiful pcem, hamonious, finished, chfste.( ontain/iiig/ not a sir.gle meretricious CT'na'nent. ..-^-^2 j-p -^p -.^^^-s no"*" ^-*::r ^^ hi.msel:^ -09. II, 124, 1E:1;^11. T.^T TV, irv:> 1-1-7-i--i.V-' « I.-.1 ~ !" . ^ 1(II,t> •:.t le?bt, cultivated a vIB^rron use 3' pc ' '^.o an illustratio-- ifierencellljctv;.^eri insoiratici. A/-^rsj tlon, since it v/as "a hortusc cm;. retty "1This criticism apr-cars to be perfectly fair anc absolutelyof the vln^'ictivrnc-cs which is sup,. osed to permeate Byron'scriticiK..:. C3 l ' ' 1" 'as beeneinr" criticized.This critic--"l materl'~.l cn the three n:'Campbell, and Hcge^-s, ere e::a... le^ of Pyrcu'oIcEsical pr-'nciples of the eighteenth century. In tliese poetsP^'ron ^ound th^ taste, r-clish, e"n: rrrar-rn-ti c quality, and satiric;^5lv.-nents of - - - much a proved in the v;ork of Pope andohnson. It is partl:^ these four qualities which set the minor\1 prettiness i. ^i"y> h.. ..'ever, Lxhis o\m poetry, but he excused it in^:^ the above-mentioned Ilec-(|:lessiccl traits t. , ' l..The Irish poet, Thcmas IToore, was one of Byron's best friexidfe.uix.g to Z^ic.x h^ . ..uculiarit:' ^'"^ talents" c<,u\~risinr; unique pcetical, musical, and vocal ' . 'There isothinr Il'oore m^y not dc,he v.-:: 11 1;- - ly sc .ut it."'Although no one equalled L.ccre in com-^ositicn or satire, andertainly no on^ so popular in both, he hadn't dc he co\|ilid,: -noTT"h ^cr -^r.-^- ne else."-^'^'^ Evrc . .et':^.esByron felt cc.nev<=r.46erates. i,tort any other 'w'riter, IToore has been tiic ^.oct4Df the "heert and of women, even if critics believe th ' "representing the v/orld replistic?lly , he portrays it as v;ornen de3:.-"c : . rcc '""c crc " .. lived •^nc' ""^It, . ' - - ..^d/ouGerful po'v/ers axid liiuch vsriety, Byron believes he shculd "v/rite: traged^/.-^^^fond c . ^ " r^^'^: ^-^^'"..^ ^] ^riheart in 1SC3 v;hen he M^es only fifteen, to vhich he alwaysadded the thought:"Ileig'ho. I bel: . . ', ^ t":c inischief I have ever coneor sung, has been ovdng to th?t confounded book c:;CV"''''^ur E •P''"^cn ''T G ^ 1^ "Li "^"v* d v/h"^le "^c •"h^ '"^ix^X '^'XZE'^'^Iil tc di s-To ore and himself."Only think :ur . . . c ft -•the Indian see's, ^ Dc t th' ^nd 1:"thing almost like rc.^ ^ ;,..ity " ' sonethixi^^ vO he wescribblers £r^-"='^>l-^''~ - ^c.^ut ive thcus;:.^-^ ^ilec oli30 well at home.-.-"'nming anc,and asMiblishedwhile we areIn 1S2C '-^-^r - - --lipping, in an over them ore's pc e-:is7 1^'pleased as one, over a French edition)y Op.lignani. The nusic assists his ...'her quavers perplex me upon p?per,"l^CFe su'-^f^sted th^t Moore p?rody ^^TFTS ^Cl" f"o^-?A.c^Bjtl - L..^\_ ^isa^-^-'^-^'^-.tcr hecau.': '' t--cck, instr " ' 2eteched pieces", although they v/ere beau-:i^ul and "quite ..iglish l^'tr^ature. He advised Moor" • " - 1,3tattl",- told hii- "'^ -t^814:o'1 c,3c7, lfl4 "I /I r -r - -r -r-— -r /,ffIIcthe ''only poetical * ince ''the ITor , 7 - ' ,5II teen exheusted; but rrorn the "^est, v/e hpvemscl^^hles-- '"^ose " trived to spoil,r\ e"jut Southeoave t-'.eorevoice ' 1'the public is orientelizirr;''.: ou(iiuin" Byre,151 ^ •iot"Koche-^oetr-'-.Moore, hr^^'ti'ves. "'^""^rn --dim'T^ec' ' „"'er seic"'i b'hl-iTr'^-"'''self , 5t , necessr'""^'" ^r^-r' t.o find fpult,^ z so per:^ectly nuelifi cdor 1^Tn"npred Po- '-^5'ersi-^ir^^tncn) j^^"^'""^ decid-:+ tractive, bu"15nr on ev^'^r^ p"''''e olr^t one kncv^s nc1 in itse^-" ore ,rsptlon equalled his v.-ritirecr>'=c^r'"" tc to nln tb r/, as in this c?se, f^at T''ocre did not ]friend's success v;as important to him,a(3ni-'--"-* ':oore's talents. ^'^'^:n v;ac very fend of LALL". , ""'e liked a "toughtitle", and this one v^as both orthodox and oriental,^""^r-r. ""^ £ c""^^""' +"'"r,t ' ' called sornr rN-^ his ov.n '^rv? "t--l€S",because he thinks they are 'something better". Moore should use"poem" or "romsnce", not FE'^SIAII TALES. , Moore,, hov/ever, claimedth?L ->-T,^rr> -'-t of using "teles", for t""-^- - --t-^- v.-as called"AIT CRIErT.;L 7E".-*-^^ Byron considered LkULA HCOn-T delight-ful " (?lt'^oucrh he did not care for the prcse portions), forT.Ioore he ' - - - 1_ col'^^" : ' : : :' " ^ - ^— ' been in the rainbov;,and the tone of the east "ectly preserved. The poem"will knock up TLDERTTT, '^nd shov; young gentlemen something moregooc Oriental tale."-" ever, in 1823, according to LadyBless5nrton, LALIA "nrc^^ had disappointed him, and h^ thought"Tocre ' " ".ikely be rem-- ^ ' " ' ^ ,;hich wereall perfect.""In 1822, Byre te facetiously to Moore in reference to3LACrYCCX)'3 article c"T thought that you had alvrays allowed tobe a ^oet, even" by the stupid-./ell as theenvious-~a bad one, to be sure—immoral, florid,Asiatic, and diabolically popular, --but stillalv;a;/s a poet, nem. con.". . .consolation (accor-ding to Rochefoucault),to fn^^ ^-^self no-poetised in such good company. im consent"to err with Plato"; and can'a^Gure you verys^'noer'^ly , th^t T Y7culd r^^^ther be r«=cp5vpd'.^•3. L".^ 9, ^"'^ 164. L^.^ -^Yy 77, "'-^^.65. Jy^.r TI, 85 166. L^^'^t jV, 17P.66a. TV, 16^ 167. ^^yn^r-T ^^-.-^ 3..^ i^^yIIa non-poet vdth you, than be crovmed v:ith sll V eb^ys t]p.£ ( : ^ et-uncrOT.m ed ) Lakers in theirsociety . '^^sPyron bec'=rT]e pcqueinted v'ith, and t'ormed an attachment'^OT^T'^^c^e's T'ce'^T'""' '^pt'T.'"' in Ti^'^'ej ^n<^ to it t»p"^;P 5ricvf=^loyal. Tt v-££ undoubtedly the lyrical ?nd senti":ental qualityin the -poetry which 'J^^^von so enToyed, as well as- the fact that£0 hifnly,Scott was undoubtedly B:^rron*s favorite modern author, tiiem*=n who ^' "^'t -it-, tpo'^ t.n^"'' ne liac!' not"^"'""' '' -^^p 1* i^f^-11'to ue jealous of either the xiving or the dead."^"^" 3cott v;as"the superlative'' o-*' B^^ron' £"comparative" lie respectedhim highly a^ & ..16..:, lovinf "manliness of character, ex-treme pleasantness of conversation. . ,^ii<^ good-nature" tov/ardByron himself, "^yron noticed that his countenance, es::^-cially114v/hen ne recited, v/cs very intelligent, Byron f-xuiiit ooLady Blessington that he couldn't easily converse with literary.TiCn, for they seemed to think it necessary to praise his latestwork, and thus he would have to reciprocate, which he foundunsatisfying to b / . .jott, hov;ever, though a giant in literature,was ^mli". / — ---r^-- ::en ; neith^-' o--- ^ - co-ii.j.li-ments, nor in conversation because oi his siixiple,sincere character. There v/as in his society", becauseICS. U.Z IV, 146, 1313 169, Blessington .^^3,17C, L-%-^ VI, 28, 1822 113. L^J VI, "4, 1S2^113a, DCy .WT, 15, 1.408 114. KjJ V, 167-8, 1821115, Blessington, 306-7 116. Blessington,^..0ithe was always truthfulHe wrote in 1821:all praise of him fell short. i;"/3cott is7 the v. -.-.aeriul vrriter " the cay.Tlis novels are a new literature in ^ _lves,and his poetry as good as any- -if not better(only on an erroneous system) /we thought By-ron v/as the man who disliked talk of 'systenis£7>—and only ceased to be so popular because thevulgar were tired of hearing 'Aristides . celledthe Just*, and Scott 'the best', and ostra-cized him."-^-^'*His bocks comprised Byron's favorite Treading. Scott was theonly successful genius whom Byron fuund to be equally belovedlieas a man and as an author.Byron was sure o:^ Scctt's inte^rraty in " ' his pc^ccnslcompositions, as has beeii seated in his letter to Ilu.xt, i^nuin his critical reviews. Byron v/rote the follov/ing comparisonof the reviev/s h^^ "'"-tt and ',7ilson of one of his works;"Scott's is the review of one poet on another--his friend; and V/ilson's the review of a poet,to?, on another--his idol ; for he likes mebetter than he chooses to avow to the public,with all his eulogy. T v/as judging from thea-^ticle, "^^or T don't know him personally. '•-'-^'^Byr>- . tl- , . -vie c — ".'^CLD (v^hich he didnot know had been v»nritten by Scott) to be generous at thattime, and therefore gave him mere rrpti'^ic.'ti cn than s'jch aCGixi_t.\. jitlcii tVcx iicd before, lo:" .as not ' uhe mere praise",but the "tact and delicacy throughout" for which he -was thank-^-^T_^IL7a pypon often mentioned t'-;,^t "+'^-t" wa^ :of life.tf-j-.panacea"1 1 "7 JT- T "TT r n '•: 1 Oi C>j.± / • Ijf* t J. / , 1 -a; , -L^ -L^IIP, IJ^T TT Q/" P 1 Ol "7117a. JJ.i IV, G4, ^..x, ,Hurray119. LA^ TI, 4C€, 1314Byron's journal for 1813 cc .3 the follov/ing interest-:bEer''/pcott undoubtedly the monarch of Parnassus,end the most ~ ""ish of bards. T should placePcOt ers next a living" list (I value him moreas the last cf t-:e best school)—lloore and Camp-bell both third- -oo^^t' --- " id V/ordsworth "Coleridge- -the rest ,o-i;r^ 'succeeds there. T lon-^ to read11I22nis n-_nnc e £ , tr cVBI'JOF and T7^ LADYByron feared there vra: - ' ~ " 'and the second c^nto of TTA'' , It -^urel'ItII(willinp- to \r '--^ "-he ^riosto of the ricrth" in C^^^LD!^ HAHPLDcpntc fcn.r, " for "t>^plr l'^p "hiv^lr^r, v'p-^, j^nd love, were8S like as can be" and the Italians greatly'' hcncred A.riosto."Ariosto's in an ocxavti stanza, and Scott's anything hut aStanza", Of course, he didn't intend to call hiixi the "ScotchAriosto, v.'iiich v;ould be a sad provincial eulog^^, but ' wl.eirorth' meaning of all the co^-intries that are not the South . "•^'^'^Byron preferred Scott's novels to hit- _^ ,'.foun. it J cincl t'130anc.1 -Pa-nt ^.^ - ' '.parts of the clLaracters or Sir Mcuiie,as CI. t/i^o of the ^-^ocular portions", ;;ere^ •At the time he re- . /TRLY, he considered i^-interesting noA'Cl he had -vcr ^^c'^^ and l:!':ec' It a3tTTe wrote many letters to Hurray requestin;.aotice en'"''ray, hG»<£\iL.p, iiCVor ooc-ysts, for instead he4- T130. Lf-r IV, 117 J ITurray132. L%'^ TI"^, 117, 1-14, Uu-ray134. III, lie, ISll, !:urrayu.^1. Lf'.J IV, 14':1, 1317, Llurrc;^135. ^11II(follov/inr; sent'Ah I . J o\ these hcme-k^ -t-. . aiterrs.nean v;h:",s •.'Ind, oir^^Yen t --^^ ,no v.lnd at all...^^^ hov; nliv-in', ' 'e them to a few of tae ^t^xxsaticrm^i-tc-, ,ictln"i ' -^'.^-'^^^ -----^-^^ +. .shore J in th: Z Byvr^' -^-2— , ' ^ .gcoG criterion ab ^: ch he loved;navensv;ood' s n.^ .,hir.t"'cn ITor;;:an ; aud Girder, the Cooper, isstyled nov; Gilbert, ar:"^ roh.r.; andhe don't mal^.e enourh c ...rose; hut Dr 1-getty is excellent, and so is Lucy,and the bitch her " ' '-, . .rrpy mahe him . _ . ^ _ .I like no reading so vvell."""In the follo^"in'^ ;r-r-p"j "he ^'-T*cte:'Pceac the cc:iclusicn, "or the fiftieth ti..:e(I read all V/slter Scott's novels at least^ifty t:raes), of the third series of TAL:Z3m L;j:DLC^tD- -grand v;ork--3cotch ?iel"as v;ell-^s great English pcet--v7onderf^ulLienl I long to -f^t drunk with liiin. "-^-''^^Lady Elecri-^--* f-:: ' . „ ^word of praise for Jcott cajxie from Byron '& heart '"^ I tliir..this is obvious fr: : continued praise wh.ich came fro;nT...^^,..,,g pen +vr.r-v-^---" his life. It is grati-f^-'-^'- ^- -modern reader who loves both of these authors to Icnov/ thatByron should h?v greatly appreciated the prose, especialc ^ this man .". + f - rr-. ---r -ealized that(IIIrhe could never conipete ' 7 the sexisaticnal popularity of tLevounger T^oet, who, like hLnself, could cnl, .5 the pleasure?ction, f^^^r-^-'^ " " - tion pnd composition,": '-.t an."~--on v;ere laine all of their lives. Iv: nder if Byron knev; that Scott had quietly, and generouslyste^T^ed aside, g'ivin':'' his usual t}'p>e of v-rrit:^* "i'^ -nd tr^-velysetting out anon;.;^.iously tc create a public for a nei; type ofv7ork to which he was not accustomed. If Bj^ron did knov; this,-r t.''^^t it '-^ooto'^ -r: ^ ^ddltional admiration forhis fri- /ust as the act tu-t Scott, too, was fightin^;against a similar handicap, must have deeply aroused Byron'squa-"'' 4 scotc'H ^.^^ + ^^^ "^yron found in Scott'sv;ork in abundance " historical detail which had always beenhis first love, as v;g11 ^s G-^J=ctl'"' v^hat he had tri^d tc create:cl^ : Tales—the thin " ' ";rthroughout his life, but of necessity, had been deprived o^—sction, romance, chiv-lr;'^,T_cne of Byron's ' st friends in later life.Byron h?d sa " " disliked liter^^ry men except:, _ of the world such as Scott, ?nd T^^r-r.,etc., or visionaries out of it, sucliShelley—your literary,- every-d^y man and-- —- •Byron was ey.treaely loyal to his rrienc;^, and Shelley was hisfriend. Therefore Byron would not write ^ :t his poetry as''-.r-'' -t '+T'T+ n-f^ ''^^ts, fcr '-^-"^-''Z"^, .'-^ ^,.loreover,t^-.-t nearly all B'^ron wrote about Shelley concerned hi'((Individual, v^fhcr- t^-n hi' _ -tq admired Shelley'spcetry, hov'ever, In thpt i+ bpsed on no 'S3''stem', although- ct t'lrt he ur;;!;ed Shelley to tranclete cr niivclear proo^ that he thour-ht well of Shelley's poetical ability.Tn Icl", Southey r^r--? o-'-,-- .•>^ --oblique and shabby manner accoiTline to Byron, who was over.io^^ed'-.^-pn it sold an edition of the R^/fLT 0^ '^SL.^I', -ther-n1 a opcan underst^=:id—T for one.''-^Bv 1R?C, ^^'ron's opinion of Shelle- ^tr^' hs^-" risen"Z3hellev7 has talent and honor, but is crazypjainst reli-^^ion and mor»li tj'". His tra^-Cedyis s^'d Tork"; bux "Lhe suD.'^ect render^ it so.ITis TSL\^T had much poetry ... "^^1He considered the C'^HCT a v/ork of novrer and of poetry.-^As Lady Hlessint'ton S'=id,Byron " — '-^ -^i,---r»''npT--Pt.or, '^nis is again apparent vrhen ne s^io Shelleypossessed "a most oralliont imafrlnation, ouu a total want ofworldly v\risdom. "-^'^'^After Shelley' s death, Byron wrote the follomn£- eulogy:"You v;ere all brutally mistaken about Shelley, whowas, v/ithout exception, the best and leastselfish man I ever knew."-^^It was v.-ell, I think, for Byron to have been the intimate139. U:.J V, 507141. V, 74143. Blessin-ton ^9145. J ^/T, 17514C. U:J lY, 273, 1818142,U.:J V, 2C(Ifriend of a poet v;hom - -•c-l "' ccnsi-'-^-^^ '-i^hly. leygreatly acmired Byron's poetry, and Byron's j-i^"^-lost without the faitl ^ is fellov;-. he neededin crdf : .- - -Maintain hi£ h-'mse'^ . lay feelgratitude - - Shelley 'o ..u.-.:^ ,Just before his death:"Of all men Shelley thou^^ht highest of my talents. "^'^After ccmpariny "^-^cn's criticisms of t^e rno-^-^ inpcrtantmen c " ' ' , ' . L^i^t he liked thcoe l-cjo^ ;.':!0maintained the ITeo-cla£sical standards, or v;ho , like Scott,v:rot ^ " ' '- r -T r. - 1 -:?t,r'- ' ' - nccr^n-^'rx-" c fori' . Thus Pyro:^enjoyed i.cr..;, ' L-ne rar-av;ay in tLiie and place, provided the;'vrere accurate. Re c»11p ' ;tegrity of character, pnd be-^^'T, ' ' "' .'.-v, Uordsv^orth, -• :;.'Goiej'idf.e, who he uthiul interest in liberty forle-clsss ?]n<^lish convent i on^l i sm ,--tvo even being employed.-^rx'woA/i,-- v.c.b cutc^c^^we.. lii ' contempt3 ' and did not sp ich time in seeking,' outprai sewor \ ^ ' . . 'r literature.(BYRClxT'S CRITTGIS'I OF FCREIGN V/RITERSBefore stating B^^rcn's criticism of foreign v;riters, it mig)(itbe well to refer to his general position in world literature.George Brandes believed that a study of Romanticism and nineteenth-century poetry on the continent of Europe should be prefaced by Jistudy of Byron. The harshness, bad grammar, and awkward construtions to be found in his poetry are, of course, less noticeable Intranslation. Because of t:.e love of freedom, the exaltation ofthe grand and most pov/erful and stomy in Fature, and because ofhis wide travels and knowledge of men of many nations, and becauseof his mysteriously veiled Eastern tales, he v/as especially in-fluential in the development of the School of French Romantic pelt;Although Byron may hold no exalted position in English literaturihe is, nevertheless, th^est Imov.-n English v/riter outside of theBritish Isles, except for Shakespeare.Goethe V7as one of the gre-test worshipers of Byrcn's geniusHe didn't think reflection \:as Byron's strong point, putting himin the same category with himself. He said:"!Valter Scott is nothing compared with Byron...The v;onderful glory to ly/hich Byron has in thepresent, and through all future ages, elevated hiscountry/, will be as boundless in its splendour as itis incalculable in its consequences, nor can there beany doubt t'.at the nation which boasts so many greatnames will class Byron smong the f 'rst of thosethrough whom she has acquired such glory. "-^Goethe also believed Byron's imagination to be -'unrivalled;'thus critics were wrong v>,'ho said he copied IMITFRED from FAUST, fcr=.lthough some of the ideas mirht have been appropriated, they hac3ll "passed through the mind of Byrcn and going through thatprocess /S^pn^ become nev^'.. quoted by Viscount Ha.idane in BYKCN .A"TD GCETHE.p.47(The great French critic, Ta:"ne, said E3'"ron "'alone a.nong theEnglish poets vdth his contemporaries. . .gets to the very top ofthe poetic mountain,'"^Therefore it is not strange thrt the writers on the contineij|tborrowed Byron's moods and themes for their poetry also. AlexanderBuchner vjvcte in ETUDE Sm LORD BYRCN in 1874:"C'est Alfred de Musset qui rapelle le plus souventlord Byron par la forme comme par le choix de sessujets."^In the FAHIS JOTIR^'^AL for October 8, 1823, we find from LEIDIABLS BOITEAUX the follov/ing 15nes:"Je n'aime pas F^nelonFi ce pauvre RacineMais J'aime bien lord ByronEt Monsieur Laraartine."Byron himself s-^'id that ever^/ tr^^nslaticn he had seen cf hiwork had destroyed the sense to such sn extent that he could notunderstand how the French and Italians could, still admire hiswork, r ''^ct they did, was to hi'' ^ proof of the mediocr^of modern pcetr^r in these countries. The only possible reasonth^'t he could conceive for their translating his v/orks v/es becausethey thought he didn't like Englishmen,'^'-'This material has been quoted not only to illustrate Byron'^popularity and influence outside of his ov;n land and in variousTiodern tongues, but mainly to confute critics who believe that t]|eonly reason Byron praised Goethe v;as because the latter approvedof him, thus enh?^ ncing Byron's ego. A.lthough Byron was tremendou|lypopular in France, to such an eytent ti^.at French v.T'iters wrote;a. Bles. 17C^h. T. g 5. 4GS.opoems s"b^iit him ancl in imitation o his r^oetry, -^nd finished hisovm unfinished poetry, he v/es not mcuced (as critics woulo hav(as believe in the case of Goethe) to praise French poetry becaus«of this f-ct. Cn the contrar;^r, ho ^'isliked French poetry tre-lendously, considering: it discorcant.Since B^/ron was a member c"' the social circles visited by[adame de StaSl in Engl^^nd , hr -o* this illustrio^T ^-r.^-or^r^— -o-n.before his exile from England, She is frequently mentioned in n;letters, as in the follov.dng xnstance in 1813:'De Staei couldn*t exist v;ithout a grievance, andsomebody to see, or read, how much grief becomes her.llany of his comments are more amusing than of literary iraportancias is the following:"Mrs. Stale--as John Bull may be pleased to denominateCcrinne, 'yavvned' over the humor of Falstaff."'A.1though Byron v/as not particularly interested in her £"reat psy-chclogicrl study of the Gemiaji people, he nevertheless admittedthat it had "fine passages."^ Byron, of course, did not care forthe Germans, and it is perhaps not Ite be v/ondered at that he tolclurray he v;as using DE L ' ALLSI.'IAGIIE as an opiate.^ In 1817 he decided that her CONSTDEHATICNS SQR LA RE^/CLTTTICK FRA^TCAISE wouldremain her best v'ork and would be "permanently historical. "^^^ov/ever, our critic was wrong in this instance, for this invecti\i^;ork, v.Titten mainly to set forth her hatred of Napoleon, has be^practically forgotten in comparison. wath some cf her ether literaryprojects.5. Lemartine L'HC!J!S (A LORD BYRCF) 7. l J "" , "^73, 1813,and LE DERNIER CIIAIJT DU PELERIHAGE 8. L 8- J II, 3£3, '^ov. 181c ore6. L ;73, 1813 to ncore. 9a. :Byron's belief that Ir'tersry v;crks are like deserts withfountains and groves has already been quoted, but he fills cut tl}esame thought in connection v.dth StaSl, for:"In Madame, v.hat v:e often mistake, and 'pant fcr,' asthe 'cooling stream', turns out to be the ' mircA^'e ',but when one finds the beautiful passages the 'waste'is remembered to gladden the contrast."Byron considered her comparison of painting and music very »«elo-quent" indeed.-'-^ However, he found himself at a loss tc knowwhat to say to her by way c-^ compliment on it, unless he could'twist his admiration into some fantastical expression," shewouldn't believe him..-^-^ 7/hereas her society after the first hal:hour had bored him the previous year, by 1S14 he had decided thaher pre-sence v/as "overwhelming- -an avalanche that buries one inglittering nonsense—all snow and sophistr;^.- , "-'-^ yielding a confu13sicn of ideas which never convince, for she "writes octavos,talks folios. "-^"^^ She was the cleverest, although not the most: idagreeable woman he'd ever known, for she declaimed, stopping onl;for breath, and completely overlooked the comments of others.-'-^^Vhen she published her E33AY AGAINST SUICIDE, he v.T-ote to tell'.loore-^^ of the event, for he presumed it would "make somebody si-,himself"; therefore he had not read it himself "for fear the lov|^of ccntrpdi ction" might lead him to try a "practical confutationIn 1S14 he told Murray that although he did not love her, he hacto admit that "she beats all your natives hollow as an authoressand I woiild net say this if T could help it."-'-'^ Thus -we are suine10. L c- J II, 354, 1S13.11. h ^ J II, 354, 1313.12. L J II, 384-, 1813.-|0 pi^p^ ic;o13a. L ^: J II, 320, 1813.14. Bles. 5916. L c?: J II, ?/29, 1813.1^. T. .T T-ry^ 40^^ Milbanke. ISll17. r TTj, 1814.1 Dot,,16Ithat Barron v/as sincere and not striving for effect he disculsedthe French author.V/hen Byron left England after parting vath his v/ife, Madajnede StaSl fiercely upheld him on the continent, Byron v;rote latethat she had confided to I.Tonk Lev/is "v;ith laudable sincerity" thshe defended him through decency because he had n?jned her in asonnet v/ith Voltaire and Rousseau. She v/as referring to thefollov/ing lines from the SOMJET EAKE LEL-IAIlAS"Rousseau—Voltaire--our Gibbon--and De StaSl,Lemanl These names are worthy'- of thy shcre."He once told her that CCHIITME would be called an "excuse fol*violent passions", and it and DELPHT]M^ were "very dangerous pro-ductions" for young women to read. She thereupon told him nobod;j'had done more to deteriorate mo'^als than he. However, he decideth^t '^hf^ r'^p-^esf^nt ed her virtue as dull, severe, and bored. Itis worthy of note th-t in Byron's early criticism, as in EITGLISHBARDS AlTD SCOTCH REVTE"/ERS , he o-^ten lays stress on upholding th|mor-1 ot^---'--/'; in literature.Since Byron had been accused at one time of stealing theopening lines cf his BRIDE OF ABYDCS from Stagl v/ho "borrov/ed"hers from Schlegel, or "stole" them -^'"rom Goethe's '.7ILTIELM J-TEISTElp,he found himself a "third or fourth-hand stealer o" stolen goodsHowever, he didn't ^ead German, so he quotes her lines as the molbtlikely ob^-^ect of his plagiarism.:"C^l les rayons des cieux tcmbent avec amour,rti des sons ench^nteurs dans les airs retentissent,Ou 1.^ vlns douce nuit succede au plus beau ,iour."IB. 181619. Bles. 63The only point of resembl^^nce he sees Is the use of "the new andoriginal v/ords 'Isnd' and 'myrtle*. Fe concludes therefore thatto avoid vsuch chaijrres, he must invent diction-]^?" for himself.This he considers an examole of the liberal spirit of the hyper-critics in England, hut such s b?^d exemple is a "tri^Jimphant re-fu-L?=tion" ^or himself.He cites her as st-tinp Lh^t "all t?lent has a propensityto attack the strcnr". He meditates unat ne has never flatteredann ^"onders if t^is is r proof of nis t^^lent."Byron's letters ere Gutricient proof th?t although ne maynox, h?ve c-red for much of her wcrK, he nevertheless ^"^preci- tedthe t—r-t t'^'-^f "'-^cs '-PC p ccnspicuuus -^'icaire in French li Lei-?tui'e,and possessed literary ability, for at her death in 1817, he v.toto Murray that she v/oulcl "leave a great gap in Society and literture. "21aByron vrt'ote a fev; comments consisting of both adverse and g(fodcriticism of llademe de StaSl's friend, Ben^-^?min Constant. In 18: :3,according to Lady Blessingtcn, he ccnsidered ADCLPHE, a psycholofi-cal liove story which is supposed to be based on a. personal liaisona "very clever 3nc ver;/ affecting story." However, in 1816, hev.T'ote to Rogers that he had read ADCLr-IH and considered it;"a work v/hich leaves an unpleasant impression, but ver;consistent v/ith the consequences of not being in lovew^iich is, perhaps, as disagreeable as anything, excepbeing so. I doubt, however, whether all such liens(as he calls tr.em) terminate so v.^retchedly as hishero and her^^'^i- ' s. "^^This is an example of Byron's inconsistency, and no special reason~0. Bles. 31C. 91la. L J IV, 156can be brought icrtb as the exact cause. However, since Byrcn ito sucl: a great extent, an aL-ncct purely subjective critic, wemay imagine that his ovm personal feelings in the unfortunateyear 1816 may have influenced, this latter criticism,Byron told Lady Blessin ton he hac read only a few linL.^- ofLamartine's poem on him, for:"he cells me... 'Esprit mysterieux, mortel, ange cudemon' , which I call very uncivil, for a well-bredFrenchman, and moreover one of the craft; I v.dsh hewould let me and my v-rorks alone, for I am sure I donot trouble him or his... There are some things in theworld, of whic'"^, like gnats, v;e are cnl^^remindedof t'-ie ex.istence by their stinging us.However, the modern reader will consider Lamartine's L'KCI.'lIviE avery beautiful eulogy to the great French poet's ideal. It israther pitiful that Byrcn, —he -'-r '-V-v^--^ 'cynicism because hefound his life lacking in the acaniration and respect which he sodesired, should have completely ignored the idealistic Lamartinewho had in the poem just cited and in his DEI^'IER CHilHT for CI:IL|t)l!HARCLD portrayed in such beautiful melody his idealistic picMreof the man who to him w-s the greatest English Doet the world ha|&ever known.Byron discussed v/ith Lady Blessington Diderot's fancifuldescription of the manner in which ? poet should set about topicture a v/oman. Diderot had said that the poet sr-cula slip hispen into a rainbow, and instead of sand, he should use the dustrem the v/in£S of butterflies with v.hich to dry the paper. Eyrd^i,who did not consider this as a compliment to a w mna , showed hi£contempt in a typically laconic and somewhat c;;>mical statement:^3. Bles. 317.'This is a concetto v/orthy of a Frencliman. " B^^ron on the other-hand would dip the pen into the heart of a man before he is overeighteen; and the si^hs of adolescence v/culd be found quite suf-ficient to dry the paper vv'ith, for vijomen are best understood byundisillusioned men who believe in virtue. '^'^Eyron found ITontaigne one of the most amusing of FrenchwT^iters, although he v-?s one of the greatest plagiarists that evirexisted. "The perusal of his works is like a repetition at scho(|);that rubbed up the reader's classic! knowledge." Byron enjoyedMontaigne's "quaint" msnner of stating his observations."^""Byron considered "Reynard, a minor writer and author of tineplay LE ."C^^'^.Ti, next to T.Ioliere in the scale '^rench play^.'.Tighfor he hao "written some of the best comedies in any language."'It is unfortunate for Byron's reputation as a critic that he shoj|ildhave praised seme cf these lesser v.T:"iters v/ho employed a tongue\7hich he professed to consider in itself a detriment to the artof writing, v>[hile he at the saune time commented adversely/" on so|ieof the world's most rencv/ned writers such as Shakespeare,Byron commented on LES SAISCN, 1769, by St. Lambert, one ofthe better precursors of French romantic poetrj'^, who had usedThomson, Young, and Grey as models. Eyron decided th-rt St. Lam-|bert was "dead as a man, and (for anything T know to the contrary^)damned, a^r a poet, by this time, ^'''owever, the SEASON'S ^'?ve goodthings, and, it m?y be, some of his ov.ti'.'^V By^on v;as jjust aboutright in this criticism, for the poem is not very interesting, ?||ndit is largely a result cf the influence of t're eighteenth-centuiyM virr,^5. Bles, 311 27. L 197.Greveysve School of English poetry.Byron quoted two "celebrated lines on Fortune" from GorneiliLe ' sPOLY^JCTS, ?s ?n illustration "of the noble Mre v.tiich t.?-' be madof prtificiel imagery," v/hich may be "quite equal to any tai^enfrom ^Ta ture":^^'Et comme elle a I'd'clat du Verre,Elle en a la fragilite.'In both his-nETAGIIED T^^rU'^IITS'^^ and in his letters, ^'^ hespoke of having been compared to Rousseau by several of his ac-quaintances. He thereupon enumerates in an interesting and ba-lanced '":-nner, the d-^'-^^'^er^ncef? '•^ich he thinks exist bet\/e^n theiiiHe is not a philosopher, but his "little v/orld" seems to t..ink him"in a plot against it". "Rousseau v:as a philosopher, but thoughtthe '.'orld vas plotting against him. Moreover, Rousp'^'^m "- 2 -gre-t man, and"the thing, if true, vrere flattering enough; --butI ha\ e no idea of being pleased with the chimera." The read'erprobably v':* 11 decide that h.e v^as pleased, nowever, for no otherreason than that he develops uhe thought to such a great length.Tn the x,hird canto of C^'TLDE ^"'AR'^LD tnere are a number ofstanzas concerning Rousseau introduced by the lines:"Here the self-torturing sophist, wild Rousseau,The apostle of affliction, he who threwEnchantment ever passion, and from woe'7rung overwhelming eloquence. . .yet ne knev;Ho\' to make madness beaMti:^"ul, and castO'er erring deeds and tnoughts a heavenly hueOf words, liKe sunbeams, dazzling as they pastThe eyes, which o'er them shed oears feelingly and fabt.Rousseau's "love was passion's essence" \«nich Iblasted him,fcr it Vv'as the love of "ideal beauty, which hea.^.^ in him existetlice.30. TTor-Rts T.T^T..T X r ^2£ . Ac^e 4, scene 2. 31. L 1, K2S'^. CniLDE ^^RCLD, 3, 1.725-33The character of Julie v;as the ^es^lt this vdlc anc. sv/eet ide^l.Eyron r^^alized that Rousseau's fees were "self-sought'' or Justfriends banished by himself as a result f the suspicion whichruled his mind. He 'vas inspired af^ainst tyTcnny, '^^^^"z'^^^v , vfhen Hiewas in the throes of this disease. '^'^^ Doubtless Rousseau's greav/ork for the cause of freedom v;ould have been reason enough forE^^rcn to have sung his praises.Bj'-ron never knew a v;oman v/ho did not "protect"' Rousseau, no:one v^-.o did not dislike deGraramont, Gil Blc. s, and all the " corned:of the passions", -'hen itvas brouj^ht out naturally. Byron was"struck to a degree" he couldn't "express, vdth the force s'-.Caccuracy" of Rousseau's descriptions, and "the beauty of tliBlrreality. '^^^He knew Voltaire's v;ork thoroughly, and evidently admiredthe character Candide, for he stated in 1B17:"I am a quiet man like_ Candide, though with Scie^hatof his fortune in being forced to forgo my natu"'-lmeekness every now and then.Volt air*'" was to '^"^on:a33"...fire and fickleness, a child,Most mutable in wishes, but in mindA wit as various,—g?y> grave, saje, or wild,—Historian, bard, philosopher, combined.He multiplied himself among mankind,The Proteus of their talents; but his o\mBreathed most in ridic^ile , --which , as the wind,Blev/ where it listed, laying all things prone,--^Hov/ to o'erthrow a fool, and nov; to shake a throne."^In 1821 he commented on Grimm's '^"^""oPaTDEI-XGS thus:"ZGri'TliZ repeats frequently, in speaking of a poet, ora man of genius in any department, even in music...that he must have 'une ame qui se tourmpnts, un espri'32a. L r HI, 335 to AugiJista, 1--.16. 35a. A brief suiT-nary of thtn''U2"nt 01" xne io^i.o\7cantos.36. GHILDE HAROLD, 3, l.r85-94.n,violent.'" If t' is were true, Byron believes he v;ouldbe a poet "per excellenza" for "I have always had uneane, v/hich not only tormentec it sell? but every bodyelse in contact with it; and an esprit violent, v/liichhas almost left me v/ithout any esprit at all."Grimm is an excellent critic and literprA?- historian, however,"His CC^'RESPCirDEJ^CE forms the annals of the literary partof that age of France, wath much o" her politics, and stiLmore of her *way of life*. He is as valuable, and farmore entertaininr than Muratori or Tiraboschi--I had ^almost said, than Ginguene--but tliere we should pause. "'^'^Therefore, although Byr':-n may not have enjoyed the literatu:of France as much as that of other lands, he nevertheless showshim.self t^ be widely read and f-nili-^-" er.-^ur'h with the I'" t^r'-^tur*of the countrj^ to form his ov.tl cosinirns of its value. He wantedto bring home to the English readeijthat one must jjudge a country"by o'-'perience , not entirely by books/Byron lived in Italy for a nural 3r of years. He had notvisited Italy, however, on his first Albanian Tour. Although heoften called the Italian language a "bastard tongue", and imitat:of the Latin, he evidently did not mean this in any derogatorysense, for he considered it the only modern state v.lth a poeticallang'uage.'^'^ He is often quoted as having said thst he intended t(v;rite his greatest work in Italian, and he is known to havecollected :f'olk-sonrs and ballads in both the Greek and Latin lan-guages, Ke did not acquire nocern Itali^^n literature ver;; much,hov;ever, and declared the "Rosa Hatildish school of poetry", I'fcAihad been pet up in Tt^ly, ver-"- ^ffonin^^te ^nc"' "pretty,"Eyron admired the Italian dramatist, '^Ifieri, whose constru(34. L J V, 196, 1821,3?, L J IV, 474-98, Reply to Blackvroodrs Edinburgh Magazine,\ugjst 1""19, to Disraeli,vehrtion was simple and severe.'- In connection v/ith Alfieri's writiiii-,Byron questioned:"What has -poetrir to do with s play, or in a play?There is nrt one passage in Alfis^i strictlypoetical; hardly one in Racine,"'^*" (Although Byron'searlier drama had been very lyrical, in his lateryears Y/hen he was advocating classical standards forplajavrights to follow, he dwelt a good deal upon theimportance of natural dialogue in his plays inparticular, and for the drama in general.)Tn 1^20 "Pyron had decided that the Italians have no tra^-edy, for"Alfieri's are political dialogiaes." '.'/hen a Venetian translate^MAITFH5D, B^^-rcn gave him two -hundred francs not to publish it, foih"Cur modes of thinking and writing are so unutterablydifferent, that I can conceive no greater absurditythan attempting to make any approach between the Englishand Italian poetry of the present day. . .1 am not theleast ambitious of being the sub^iect of their discus-sion, literary'- or personal (which eprpeev to be prettymuch th^ e-n^ t>^-i>^r^, r> z is the case in most countriesThe literature of both Germany and England is Nordic. There-p'cre, since tbey are both the result of the norxh^rn atmosphereand temperajnent , as contrasted ^o "Lhe lii-erature ^""-nce for itli-stf'nce, (which, by ^he way, was so greatl:/ influenced by Nordicliterature in the develoDment oi ILS romantic movement), onemi<^iit n^^tui-all^^ suspect that Byron would be more attr-cted to Geman literature than he had been ^u ohe French, This does not sppear ou be xhe case, hov/ever, for he loathed the Austrians andhad no interest whatsoever in the Germans, ''".ever Goethe, whowas to Byron the greatest German writer, commanded his interestfcr he greatly admired ''JYR'^^vm and FAUST, two tj^picall^?- Nordicpieces; the one co.xtaining the morbid and melancholic subj ectivi|,y38. L ."^ V, 323, 1S21.39. Uedwin, 1C4-B40. L J V, 64. 1820^^^^ j.41. L & J IV, 204-5, 1818 Hoppne: •,f41IT-'S,of £ typically romantic v:crk, and the other being based upon thesuperstition and mystery so pleasing to the Romantic. Byron, haev^r, ^, is illustrated by the fcllovring remark, was often unabl|^to appreciate some cf the things v;hich the schools of German andFrench romanticists made a point of worshiping; for example, heremarked in 1821 that "air replete with Gcctticisms" such as misand "m.izzle", might be fine in the descriptions of Ossian, but a41nevertheless, somewhat tipesome in real, prosaic perspective."Thus since Eyron vr?s not alv.'ays attracted by v;hat mi^ht be considered today the most rom-antic literature of his period, he therefore never found himself "almost falling sick... to get at" tliework of a '^re:''^--'^n v^riter as he believed himself tc be doing v/hilewaiting impatiently for his bookseller to send him one of LTadame41bD'Arblays latest works.Friedrich .Schlegel's ^113"^'^^.^^ ^"^ r:^'"^ATURE (1814) was translated at Edinburgh in 1818. Byron at first could make nothing ofitof it."He evidently shows a great power of v/ords, but thereis nothing to be taken hold of. He is like Hazlitt,in England, v;ho talks >3imTiles--a red and white corruption rising up (in little imitations of moutains uponmaps) , but containing nothing, and discharging nothinexcept their own humors. I dislike him the worse...because he always seems upon the ver^'e of meaning; anllo, he goes down like sunset, or melts like a rainbowleaving a rather rich confusion,—to v/hich, however,the above comparisons do t^c much he-nor,"(Eyron is not forgetting the effect of words even in an un-inspired criticism.) After reacing further, he decided Schlegelwasn't such a fool after all. Byron qualified this statement,hov;ever, b^.-- pointing out that he was referring to Schlegel' s disf41a. L 17G 41b. L ^ r , 1Q13 Lu I?Ul ' r. ^egelcussion of the North. Byron still dislikes the vre.y in v.'hich 3chspeaks of things all over the world v/ith an authority v/hich a ph:losopher v/o^ild disdain, and which a man of common sense, feelingand knowledge of his own ignorance, would "be ashamed to profess."The man is evidently wanting to make aji impression,like his brother, --or like George in the VICAR OF V/AKFIELD, who found out that all the_g-od things had bee:said already on the right side, ^and th erefore7dresse(,up some paradoxes 'upon the virong side--ingenrous , bu'fiise, as he himself says- -to v;hich the learned worldsaid, 'nothing, nothing, at all, sir.'" ^lapter 20/The last sentence illustrates one of Byron's typical methods ofvv'riting his criticisms, i.e., he compares the author's treatmentof the topic v/hich he is discussing with a well-knovm v/ork by astandard author. He v;ent tn to say th^t the learned world, however,had said "something to the brothers Schlegel." Schlegel said ofDante, "that at no time has the greatest and most national of alItalian poets ever been much the favorite of his countrymen.""Tis false I" cried Byron, for:"there have been more editors and commentators (andimitators, ultimately) of Dante than of all their poeiput together. Not a favorite I '"/hy, ttiey talk Dante—v/rite Dante--and think and dream Dante at tiiis momentto an excess, which would be ridiculous, but that hedeserves it... In the same style this German talks ofgondolas on the Arno— a precious fellow to da^'e tospeak of Italyl"In speaking of Tasso, Schlegel said that "individual parts andepisodes c"^ his poem --r-e frequently sung in the gondolas of theArno and the To." He said also that Dante's chief defect was ai'-ant of gentle feelings."Of gentle feelings I expostulated Byron, "--and Fran-cesca of Rimini--and the father's feelings in ITgolino-and Beatrice— and LA FIAI '.Vhy, there is" gentleness irDante bej^ond all gentleness, v/hen he is tender. It istrue that, trepting of the Christi^=n Hades, or Hell,there is not much scope or site for gentleness—but v;h(but Dante could have introduced any 'gentleness' at ai:into Hell ? Ts there any in Twiltcn's? Ko—and Dante'sHeaven is all love, ^nd glory »nd majesty...! havefound out, hcv/ever, v/here the Germaji is right--it is about the VTCA-H OF WEFIELiD," for Schlegel had said hethought It T.0 be the most exquisite miniature romance."He thinks! he might be sure. But it is very v-ell fora Schlegel," for Byron. considered it the "most exquisiof miniature romances.It has been st^=ted that Goethe was a great admirer cf Bj^nronlspoetry, ^^Ithough he s?id that Byron was a mere child in his reflec-tions and philosophizing. Both Byron and Goethe found a fascin8|lngattraction in e^^ch other's characters ^nd throughout their livesmaintained a lively interest in the work of the ox,her, Byron coitisidered Goethe the .greatest genius of the age.^^T'[atthew Y.cnk Lr^-i':' r-^^'c. "nxTcn an oral translation in 1876 oFAlUST, Byron was "much struck" by the worK, and admitted that tfeopening scene of TIA-HFRHD v/as "very similar."The dedication of !^\PJ"^ ^'^JERO was facetiously v/rl^^en toGoethe. He a^uoted Goethe *s words:"that 'in English poetry, gr-eat genius, universal powejh,a feeling of profunditjr, with su'^'ficient tenderness aidforce, are x.o be found; out that altoc^ether these donot constitute poexs ' . I regret to see a great manfalling into a great mistake. This opinion of yoursonly proves that the DICTJOITARY OF TSTI THCU3MD LTJIYMIGLISH AUTHORS has not been translated into German./% BIOGRAPHTC'iL DICTIONARY OF LTVIHG AUTHORS OF GRFATBRITAIi: Aim IRIiL/i^D, ISlo/. You will have to read, ijiyour friend Schlegel' s version, the dialogue in IL'iCB:"There are ten thousand!Macbeth: Geese , villain?_Answer: Authors , sir." /soldi ersT'Nov/, of these 'ten thousand authors' there a re actual|jLy1987 poets, all alive at this moment .. .It is owing toA2. L : J V, 101, 1821 43. L V , 0±c-> •III1this neglect cn the pert of your German translators th;you are^not aware of" the works of '.Villiam V/or(?sworth ,.you do not perhaps know that this gentleman is the gre^est of all poets past—present— and to come- -be sides•;hich he has v^Tritten an "Opus I.Tagnum" in prose JS^'JOADDH'^So^S TO T^n: FRE^HOLDT'P.3 OF 'VESTUORELAIID , 18iS?.His principal publication is entitled P^TTIR B^IL v;hichhe had vdthheld from the -public for one and tl^enty yea:to the irreparable loss of all those \t\o died in the i]terim, and v;ill hpye r\r '--nortunity o"^ ^'^^cing i-^ "^efo:the resurrection."'^'He told Goethe, and quoted StaSl as authority, that his prose wo:7/ERTTTER, \/ould more near^ly go under the category that Goethe hadmade for English authors when he wrote: 'The predominant characttof the whole body of the present En;'"lish poetry is a dis.s:ust andccnte'Tipt for li^e.' However, Goethe's opinions are alv^ays intere,47ing even if not favorable. "Goethe will go do'wn to posterityas the first literary'- Character of his age.""^^The dedication to GARDJ^i^'APALUS was also to Goethe, offeringthe "homage of a llterar^^ vassal to his liege lord, the first ofexisting writers, vi,'ho has created the literature of his ovvn coun'and illustrated that of S^arope ."-rT-r,t,TT7>T^ was also dedicated "to the illustrious Goethe by oneof his hujnblest admirers."In speaking of Schiller, Byron said that the novel ARI/rEIOiAU"46"tc''^"'" ^ r'vnpt r^.-^ 1^ -I m ^ '"^ cTL ''^1^ '"' S youn^",Byron, of course, ccula net read German, therefore his read:was limited to translations, and as a consequence, he was not aswidely read in German literature a s he w?s in the French.In 1821 he read an Italian translation 'by Guide Sorelli ofthe German Grillparzer' s SAPPHO (1819). (ViThile in Italy, Byron44. L e J V, ICC 47. L ^- J V, 36, IC^C..t.t-'S--'e•kir;t-ng4o. L f.*^- «T IV, '^L, l.Iu.ii'c^' iolf.1tghtssic he did nearly all of his reading- i'-. the Italian language, bitit seems a little inconsistent that he should do this after sayiltithat the Italians v/ere the world's worst translators.) Byron thothis "a devil o"^ a name" for posterity. lie did not care very muu'or this translation, since the Italians are the worst translateexcept from the classics, since they "ape" the Latin. However,"with every allov/ance for such a disadvantage, the tragedy ofSAFPHC is superb and sublime. There is no denying it. The manhas done a great thing in writing that play.""^^Thus we have seen in this chapter that Byron's criticism offoreign vrriters was not influenced by his reputation in the countryin question as many critics have maintained. Seme critics alsothinly that Byron's criticism v/as almost entirely an indication o|jfan author's personality as interpreted by Byron, but this couldnot be the case #ith his criticism, of forei^-n witers, for he knlfewvery few personally. Similarly, I can not agree with critics whDmaintain that Byron v;as interested in criticism, only as a tool t|pbe used to depreciate his contemporaries v;hom he believed to behis rivals in the public's favor, for Byron scatters \shortcritical references to non-Snglish writers throughout his letterllsin the same manner that he used in criticizing his British con-temporaries. Since Birvon knev; that he held such an importantplace in the literature continental t^rope, it was only natu-ral that he should show some interest in foreign literature.'I cz J V, 171, 1821.EVALUATION CF BYHOIT A3 A CRITIC"A man must serve his time to ev'ry trece,Save censure, critics all pre ready niade."It v'=>s SvdnbuT'ne v.'ho sf^iC. f^?t Byron's critic? 1 "'CiO.ty vae''zerc, r-- -r.-r- r ^rightful minu^^^us.ntity'' , because his judgmentvas never worth the expense of a thought or of a v/ord."^"Je h«ve seen how personplities in:<^luenced his oDini'^ns, andhovv he --h.ij cF'""'' ^ sy in his criticism by the raced of the raome|it.All of Byron* s v/ork ccnt'-^rns a great deal of his personality;rarely do vre ^ind hin givin-- an cbi'^ctivc oninirn of even an artistvJho has long been dead, for he v/oS nearly alvays sub.iective -ndimpressionistic. Byron iiad considered it difficult not to ^erarv'ith disfavor tne vr^-rks or --^n author v-.-^ioin he detestec!, and he relized his cvrn inability t-- j^udge i.Tipartially , thus criticizinga man more than poeiiic principles.began an attack upon him, never omitting that he had lirst v/aiteiuntil he had been aLtacKeo. Pcr^e, before him, h-^d dene tnis in7hen Byron bee -me most vehement m his derogatory criticisirone ^A^onders if he v/as not being ^iust p li ux.ca liij friends to,reat him kindly. In Moore's private journal, I.Tay 3, 1821, is tha. I/^J V, 517. 6. Lc^iJ TV, 196. TIT* Ig'c. ————=—=—=fcllov'in£' observ-ticn, ho". 'ever:"Looking ?'.r:eiii over his letter in reference to Bowies'controversy. It is emu sing to see through his designin thus depreciating all the present sch-^cl of poetryBeing ^uite sure of his ovm hold upon fame, he con-trived to loosen that of his contemporaries, in orderthct they may fall sv/ay entirely from his side, andleave him unencumlDered , even by" their floundering."^Barron realized, himself, that one of his vrorst faults bothin poetr;,^ in prose, lay in digression. This played a veryimport=>nt part in his poetry and criticism. He vas not onlyguilty of digressions, but of inconsistencies ^^Iso. Shelley saiho -'L^ indecisive, not being able to make up his mind, and Byronhimself confessed he v;as not "famous" for decision.^ Since muchof his V70 s a kind of confessional, vre would expect inccnsistencies to arise. It has been said that ne v.'as "always seekingto get free of himself, and his poetry Is a kind of frig^.tenedoric".*^ L-d7^ Blessin^toTi ''•rote:"In moments of inspiration, vjith his pen in his hand,he would have dared public opinion, and laug^ied toscorn the criticisms of. all the literati , but with reflection c^rae doubts and misgivings; and though ingener?=l he vras tenacious in not chan<^ing v.^iat he hadonce v.Titten, this tenacity proceeded more from thefe^'r of bein^ thou-'^ht to want mental coura^-e, tTian'^•"-i "t onc ' Uc lity itself . " ' ^Calvert's interesting comment follovrs:"As man and thinker, he w as as superricial as, and nomore sincere than, x,he rest o"f^ us. He perversely re-fused to look steadily at the truxh, to see both sideof a question at the same time, to admit mere factswhen tftey were unwelcom'^ to him ... Byron ' g genius \/asresronsiDle lor his terrible s:"ncerlty . "''npT'e seems to be a litLle inconsistency bet^-'^een the first and ^I'^st senx-ence o+" tnis r^pvi^rv!^')^ , dux ^•'e w?ll ercuse Olverx, vrho7. Prn-fpRsor r^ari-od^ . Calvert 3C.8. Calvert, p. 19.le7a. Bles. ±73.Iis one of Byron's most s:y'mpathetic critics, for both are absolutelycorrect. Anyone as sub.iective and as desirous of uli-imate truthviould of necessity be inconsistent.Byron wanted -^ree speech to be prevalent en'.^ugh so that itwould not l:-.ve to c •'^iticiwia. Cclvert considered hisfor fr'-^nk speech the first original contribution to the criticaltvcrr'' ' 's a.T^. "^t '".•^s b^-en said th^t the ^"^cet h?d the hi^he^tf : QTa i £ la s ; -^^ he . ;e s nc t & hypo cr : t e , b e c cu s e hi b £ sp ir a l ^ cn s•:ere those of a good man, even though he could not attein them,r believe thrs is th'"' cc^rpct c^ncVic^ 'n to tc^ drav.m fr-^m hispoetry, ''or one can net re^^cl through that without feeling theTiystic&l idealism and striving for the heights which ultimatelyDecsme one t'^c -^.ain causes "o^ Byron's disillusionment and un-happy stcte in hi^ later years &l. he realized his failure to at-tain his goal.:^n the li ghL v. it Is too bad, I think, that ^-n-onshould have had so many critics V;ho have read his v/orks eaployincLittle c'^ either sjTTipathy or insight, thereby giving the averageepder an entirely vn?ong impression c "":^ron by such supposedly:lever statements as the follov;ing:"Some critics consider him second only to Shakespeare;others put him v;here sensible travellers put themselvdbin the third class because there is no fourth. "-^-^Byron used words effectively- and had acute judgment and in-sight, Arncld, however, considered him. "empty of natter" like th•est of the nineteenth-century roets who v/ere full of creative^nergj'', nevertheless. 12-C. rrc_''essor ^rrnk 'Granger, T^IE ITTAL TI^AT^^CE PYT?.Cn, 91.x\rnold, 614,)11In the preface tc E^'T^rri.AlTA, it is rnaint&inec' thet Byr^-n'sopinions are all interesting either ?s "teauti""''ccmposition" , or as the ideas of an eccentric :ns.- o feerles^l^and v/ithcut reserve v-s in the habit of speaking and v;riting hisinmost thoughts."Both Macaulay and Hazlitt had interesting theories as to wli}Byron began vn'iting liter^r^^ criticism. Accc^'':':ing to Macaulay,although Byron's ver^e hItG lost much ' ^ cuer.^^ which distingiit, "he would not resign, v;ithout a struggle, the empire which h(had exercised over the men of his generation." Thus he acquireda new ambition- -to ^rcra Italy as the leader of the literarycircle in I]ngland as Voltaire had done in France. Macaulay gavethis as the re<'^son for his establishing the LTB^PAL, which was ccnainly to subsidize Hunt rnd his family, however, for Byron rccj-ifor some time that the paper would not be a success. Macaulay a]so claimed that Byron never wrote without some direct or indirectreference to himself, -./hich is probably true, for he was very sutiective. He f-unded an "exoteric"-'-^ or external Lake School to/•;hich all the "^j-ropean verce reader? "h- '""^ ^^-'^d t" s:*t his feetByron said, v;ith more perspicuity, energ^^, and conciseness, "like?^ man of the world", v.'hat V/ordsworth had set forth as a "recluse'According to hazlitt, Byron hc-^d no - -^ n.ions s ov-ii anc;;as interested only in denying other peopie 'out of mere spleenand rashness," thus making a point in his criticism of contradict:cth Bowles and himself.L4. I'acaulay, LCKD BYHCF, 13.L5. " " 36.L6. Hazlitt, POPE',' "-OBD BYRCIT AI^HD BC'L^S . v . 11 ,48^.1".L T-*'"! i" 1 "n I-'-'-- •I ri+ + -i^-T-TT'-i .-^ -TiTTA -Tj T T .'v ^ T-1 T ' -m—m I" ,"1 -pm^ T ^1- —ishednezed.ingLi » .' H- ' -L — '(J--' -ill Li O,. ^ ^ . . ' 1 '.. 1. "J , L ., .J ^ J . t if^ f ^ fArnold Bennett, ' hov-ever, has a good v/ord for Byron the critic:"The v;elrd and even terrible spectacle offered b^'" theSta'"e Society at Drury Lane Theatre, in the allegedshape of Byron's I.TAIJFR'^D , did prove one thinjr--najnelythat Byron v.-as not such a vv'ild fool as he sometimesaT3peared.. .Still , it is the first business of the Stag(Society to experiment, so I do not complain. The scen( rylooked as if it had survived from the first British pef-formance of DTE V/ALPTIRE. Heaven si tot Alps!''3t"' p-tsbury-'-^ did not think -lecessary to say very much a-bout Eyron as a critic, for he v/rote "innumerable contiaSicticnsof critical opinion". He then gave an interesting^ summary of By-ron as a critic, ^^^ritten in somewhat that style that Byron him-self would use for a similar purpose:"JfTh^ innumerable contradictions. . .vjhich shov/ that theyv;ere m.ere '^lashes of the moment, connected not merelyby no critical theor^r but by no critical taste of anyconsistency, flin,-;s, »half-bricks* directed at dog ordevil or divinity, according to the mood in which the*noble poet' chose to f-^'nd himself. Let us confine cui'-selves to that unquestionably remarkable LETTER TCJOT-iIT l,TOR/VY on Bowles and Pope, v-hich is admittedly hircritical diploma -piece. There are of course ver^^" goodthings in it. Byron v'as a genius; and your genius wil!say genial things nov: and then, whatsoever subject hehappens to be treating. But he cannot in the very leaimainta""*-" '"•^'mself at the critical point: he is like th€ball i fountain, mounting now and then gloriouslyon the su.i.iit of the column and catching the ra:^'s thatit attracts and reflects, much more often lying'-wallov;:in the basin, Fever v/as such critical floundering. H.ABSTBAGTThe first chapter was v/ritten as a background for therest of the discussion of Byron's literary criticiaTi, since hiscriticism v'^=s to ^ l^^rp'c r'-t^nt f^i*^ '^Gsu^l.t of p 'oersc^rlcharacteristico. This clicpter accounts f.r his inc-.-niiistenciesand his Lmpatience over hypocrisy, and it points out his kindlynature, "^is ^airness, and his desire to aic "^-'^ -'^p-^^essed.An attempt is made in the second chapter to suggest theV70rks, such as "Jin's FROM HOp^aCE and DOF r^TAIT, vAich containthe na/'cr portion ^' on's critical ^"'"-'^rks.cuses for entering the field of literary criticisni are given:his search for and dependence upon an authority'-, his opinionsresulting "^rom '-r' r ^eading, and his use criticism as a justi-fication for his ovm. methods and as a means of counteractingaccusations o-^ plap-i^rism.The thiiv . o-.r contains a discuosicn of s^.iie of Eyron'scritical tenets vvhic' he employs throughout his work. Many ofhis viev/s are TTeo-classic in character, tut frec;-' cntly one findsscattered rc.nantic princi ^ ich are their exacu cpposites.Thus his criticism becomes rather complicated, since we findintervsling definitions and opinions of poetr;;)'- and poets aregiven, as v;ell as the en^ in \: " ' " poetry ^h^a^.be v.-rittc. T'ravel, vdde experience ?ncl knov/ledge, ss vfell asemotion and art v;ere in his opinion requisites to cCinposition.T-,,.^...----^-^£(5 common senc'- -^r:' -^eason v:ith appropriate and con-sistent subject matter, ana he did not approve of an entiredescriptive poam or of sonnets. Ethical and mo^al poetr^r whichmaintained factual truth throughout vja.s to hiu ; ^-i.-im7c^"+ -^nt.Byron claimed to have enjoyed comedies far more than tragedies,hut a large part of his critical material deals v/ith theclassical concepts which he advocated in Vj-rit:/ ^r-^ ady.The fourth chapter gives some of Byron's vai:>t quantity ofcriticism of hi s ovn works. From tMs criticism we find hov;the poet fvlt ao he ./rote tha'.;, enc li^v." .juch priue and _j^^j.eat^ur€he took in the popularity of his v;orks. In some of his lettei^sand conversation he admitted having condescended to "the falsetaste" of his age. He disliked being identified with thecharr'cters which he had portrayed, for although he v/as fre-(yiently c^^^T'-ird ev-i&y v;ith them v/hile he v;as dr^w^'n'" their..CT'^, he v;?. s entirely apart from these fictiti'-'U.;. per-sonages c they were completed. He frenklA'- admitted hisIrck of knowledge in the field of poetic forms. A number ofhis conflicting views on critical Journals are given toillustrate his varying opinions, llore detailed criticismsof and ^C^^ -^n^" ---e r-'vcn -3 illustrations of hischanging 9ttitu:le3 tc-./ard "lis c\... compositicThe fifth chapter deals \/ith sc . ' ' teriel oneighteenth- century and earlier writers. A fev; pages are de-S'-r^'' '"Speare v/hc" '"c -'cn^.^. most - ...uently t/-^oush-out his entire poetry ?nd prose. He not only derived iiiany ofhis figures of speech from Shakespeare's plaj^'S, but he alsou;seC J-.:; izespep^G ' v;orkc t' ^"^ icns for his cv/n methodsAlthough Byron stated that 3hai -e v;as no longer popularon the stege or ? s general material for reading, he neverthe-terial - cerning Shakespearean performances^'.lich he had attended, Ai h he considered Shakespeare ab^d model, he v'as thoroughly?- acquainted himself vrith all ofhi- ..^rko.Even thO'- -ron v.Tcte a considerable quantity ofmaterial about his friend Sher^drn, little it c^n beclassed as pu^ ' ""^erary criticisrn, for it is in gener' 1 an^v-luation of Sheridan as a man belongin to his London circleByron's three essays intended for publication as v;ell as' is numerous references to Fope in his letters are mentionedin EL"':'!" '"etail ""'"^ connection '"-ith ""--i" -;• contrcv-^^^" •:'f ^ '"'^".."Igs,because Byron cir-imed that Pope ^ reatest Englishwriter and one of his literar;^-' models.Chapter six is a survey of Byron's evalu?" -* " " 'i-temporaries in Engl His criticism of the Lake an r ' .neySchools is given as a foundation for the rest of this chapter.cfP^'TTTi's reasons for r-r-^' ticizin^p; SoutheT'", ^'7<^rrl.swortTi , ?=ncColeric're are f^iver) , ^ -v .. - - „ ?->''tt"'"^hypocrisy, condemnation as conservativ ^cft thrrpr'icj'lis^ to ac^ert '^overnnen'^ ' ' ' ""nts, and personalantipathy. - ' ' ^ •^^mned co ..lembers t'-e"'cckne^r School, but his ^iudpment of Keats is softened?,z a result of p-^'r'^n'n r>r.pr!-s dealt vith thethings Eyron had longed for throughcut his life, uul ha^ u:.-fortunately been deprived c^. Byron had a high opinion-^--no.ir p - p nan, althcu^'^^ ' "d th^t ne could notunderstand Shelle^''' s ethereal poetry..Chapter' seven is a rapid survey'' of P^Ton's crit'^c^lmgtr-Tl-l ^^-.^^T^. - .n^^^.-^ r-y-y^^ ^^I'.ticiS^' ^- -ceded by a suinmary cf T^yron^ s important place in continentaliiuerature. Byron's opinion or iviadame StaSl v/as much thesame £S that of others, although at first he felt a slightantagonism to such a great talker. His opinion grev; morefavorable when she stood on his side after his departure f : omEngland. Other important French V'n:»iters such as Constant,Lamartine, Housseau, and Voltaire are mentioned, although nottc - Byrc-n's r.r,^+^., r.+ rry opinions of tl"eItalian language and literature ?re 3u-..ii.i:.;.rized, together ..11..an ev- 1^^ -i on Alfi eri .c/..it^. L^^^i.:.— . --'-^ - ^ca^- -ec\;ith mu - - ^ - -^"ially c-ncerning Dante's reputa-tion in T B^''rcn h-r-d a great interest and admiration for^OCOxxU n..-Gw'J «4L/i...».0 \1 -L. w X- < - - - - '~' ^other v/ ' iterc ' . .he v;as familiar.The last chrpt, z various ev^^luations of Byrona critic. Calvert's Ci^iiiirns • . -~ ^ - ^ . ^..^^ ..lostd anc t out, but also the most s^^pathet-'c '-nd ^••^vo-'"-hlc . 3v;inbur::e ' s "tbtedl;''' colored by hisciblihe 01 Byr stylist, ' caulay'b ga^^itt'sare proba" ifluenced ' pinion of the man and poetas v/ell 5S o-^ / " - - ^ ^amts-bury's of criticisra with Calvert entire coOi>. of care-fully weighed and written criti:'teresting ,^,o,-.>. ^^^Hze - '~'&. ' . _ can together give an entirelyTD-PCEsion o^ oet's critical work, '"hich, after all, was in: - ^_.ei^" Bi'^-llible nor absclutel^^ perfect criticiBIBLIOGMPHYArnold's prefcce to his selected edition,Blessington, Marguerite, Ccuntess of - A journal of conversationwith Lord Byron. 1859, Boston: William Yezaie. IT.C. Houghton& Cc.Briscoe, '.l^alter A., ed. - Byron, the poet. 1924, London,Brydges, Sir Egerton - Letters on the character axad poeticalgenius of Byron, London, 1824, Longman, Hurst, Rees, Onne,Bro|Ti,and Green,Calvert, Tilliam - Byron; romantic paradox, 1935, Ghapel Kill,The University of North Carolina press,Campbell, Oscar J., Pyre, J.F.A,,^ & Weaver, Bennett - Poetry andcriticism of the romantic movement. 1940, F.S. Crofts & Co.,'r-\: York,(The) Confessions of Lord Byron: a collection of his privateopinions of men and of matter, taken from the new and enlargededition of his letters and journals. Arranged by Lewis Bettanf190 3, London, John Hurray,English bards and Scotch reviewers with manuscript notes andclippings from periodicals. Printed by T. Ceilings, London,third edition, no year given,(An.) English gentleman, the life, writings, opinions and timesof Lord Byron, 3v. London, Matthen,"'lley.Esteve , Edmond - Byron et le r-^raantisme fran9aise. Essai sur lafortune et 1' influence de I'eouvre de Byron en France de 1812a 1850. 1907, Paris, Hachette et ci®.Fuess, Claude M. - Lord Byron as a satirist in verse. 1912, NewYork, ColuiTibia University Press,Goode, Clement - Byron as a critic. R Wagner Sohn, Weimar, 1923Hazlitt, William - Pope, Lord Byron, and Bowles, June 1821,London Magazine. Works, v,ll,Howarth, R.G., ed. - The letters of George Gordon, 6th Lord Eyrofiselected. Intrc

The political opinions of Lord Byron

Abstract

Extracted data

The political opinions of Lord Byron

Abstract

Extracted data

Related items

Related items