Page images
PDF
EPUB

A LETTER, &c.

A

SIR,

Short time since a friend of yours, and one of the most distinguished poets of the present day, informed me that there had appeared, in the Morning Chronicle, an extract from your Specimens of British Poets, entitled, "CAMPBELL'S Answer "to BowLES." I have since read, with much pleasure, the work from which the extract was taken; and I beg to return you my thanks, for the kind manner with which my name is introduced, though you profess to differ from me, and state at large the grounds of that difference, on a point of criticism. The criticism of mine, which you have discussed, is that which appears in the last volumé of the last edition of Pope's Works, entitled, "On "the Poetical Character of Pope."

B

As the opinion pronounced by the editor of the Morning Chronicle will probably be the opinion of all who read, without much reflection, not my criticism, but your representation of it; I am bound, in justice to myself, to state the grounds of my proposition clearly; to meet the arguments you have brought against it, manfully but respectfully; and to make the public (at least that part of the public which may be interested in such a discussion) a judge between us!

I feel it the more incumbent on me to do this, knowing the deserved popularity of your name, and the impression which your representation of my arguments must make on the public; though I must confess, it does appear to me that you could not have read the criticism which you discuss.

I do not think that any thing, Sir, you have advanced, at all shakes the propositions I have laid down; and, moreover, I do not doubt I shall be able to prove that you have misconceived my meaning; ill supported your own arguments; confounded what I had distinguished; and even given me grounds to think you had replied to propositions which you never read, or, at least, of which you could have read only the first sentence, omitting that which was integrally and essentially connected with it.

In an article in the Edinburgh Review, the same mis-statement was made, and the same course

of argument pursued. I feel, indeed, bound to thank Mr. JEFFREY, if he wrote the article, for the liberal tribute he paid to my poetry, at the expense of my canons of criticism. But in truth, from the coincidences here remarked, I might be led to think Mr. CAMPBELL Wrote the Review, were I not more disposed to think he drew his knowledge of my criticism on POPE, not from the criticism itself, but, at second-hand, from the criticism on the criticism in that Review, inadvertently involving himself in all its misconceptions and misrepresentations.

For, I beg you to observe, Sir, that in my first proposition, I do not say that woORKS OF ART are in no instances poetical; but only that "what is "sublime or beautiful in works of nature is MORE "so!" The very expression" more so" is a proof that poetry belongs, though not in the same degree, to both. I must also beg you to remark, that, having laid down this position, I observe, in the very next sentence, (lest it should be misunderstood as it now is, and was by a writer in the Edinburgh Review,) substantially as follows,that the loftier passions of human nature are more poetical than artificial manners; the one being eternal, the other local and transitory. I think the mere stating of these circumstances will be sufficient to shew, that both the Edinburgh Review and yourself have completely misrepre

sented my meaning. With respect to the images FROM ART, which you have adduced as a triumphant answer to what I laid down, I shall generally observe, that your own illustrations are against you. The Edinburgh Review, in the same manner, had spoken of the Pyramids. Now the Pyramids of Egypt, the Chinese Wall, &c. had occurred to me, at the time of writing, as undoubtedly POETICAL in WORKS of ART; but I supposed that any reflecting person would see that these were poetical, not essentially as works of art, but from associations both with the highest feelings of nature, and some of her sublimest external works. The generations swept away round the ancient base of the Pyramids, the ages that are past since their erection, the mysterious obscurity of their origin, and many other complex ideas, enter into the imagination at the thought of these wonderful structures, besides the association with boundless deserts; as the Wall of China is associated with unknown rocks, mountains, and rivers. Build a pyramid of new brick, of the same dimensions as the pyramids of Egypt, in Lincoln's-Inn Fields, and then say how much of the poetical sublimity of the immense and immortal piles in the deserts of Egypt is derived, not from art, but from moral associations! Place your own image of the

* A London critic, in the Quarterly Review, says, he knows nothing of Nature, external, moral, or general! I believe him.

[ocr errors]

with me,

"GIANT OF THE WESTERN STAR" upon such a pyramid, if it could be made as HIGH as the Andes, and say whether it would be considered as poetical as now it appears, looking from its throne of "clouds o'er half the world." I had often considered these and such instances generally and specifically; and I think, if you reflect a moment, will you agree that though they are works of art, they are rendered POETICAL chiefly by moral associations and physical circumstances.* But to come to your most interesting example. Let us examine the ship which you have described so beautifully. On what does the poetical beauty depend? not on art, but NATURE. Take awayt the waves, the winds, the sun, that, in association with the streamer and sails, make them look so beautiful! take all poetical associations away, ONE will become a strip of blue bunting, and the other a piece of coarse canvas on three tall poles!!

You speak also of the poetical effect of the drum and fife! Are the drum and fife poetical, without other associations? In the quotation from Shake

As Mr. D'ISRAELI has taken such antipathy to "NATURE," I have left out the word, where the sense could be understood without it.

+ Lord BYRON's argument is a verbal quibble on "Take away.” The sense will be obvious, though it is true, if there were no sea, there would be no ships!! But the chief poetical beauty is nevertheless derived from Nature, according to Mr. CAMPBELL'S OWN description.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »