|
|
| |
Only
Connect
Timothy
Brownlow,
Malaspina
University-College
-
The
tapestry of the
Romantic period
is vast, so vast
that it is perhaps
impossible to
find a wall anywhere,
even in one's
mind, big enough
to contain it.
I am reminded
of the history
of one Old Master
painting: it was
cut into many
pieces and dispersed
around the globe.
Art historians
have to date traced
all but one segment
of the painting,
and the curators
of the National
Gallery, London
(the owners of
the central fragment)
have paid handsomely
to retrieve the
missing parts,
so visitors can
now see an almost
complete picture.
The Director of
the National Gallery
recently announced
on television: "If
anyone knows the
whereabouts of
this remaining
fragment, we would
be most interested
in hearing about
it." Teachers
and scholars of
Romanticism seem
to be always making
a similar request
(or re-quest):
if anyone out
there finds the
missing piece
of the great jig-saw
puzzle called
Romanticism, please
get in touch immediately.
We seem to be
permanently out
of touch with
the subject. Romanticism
often works by
the method patented
by Polonius in
Hamlet: "by
indirections find
directions out" (2.
1. 65). Maybe we
should not want
the missing piece
of the painting
to be restored;
its absence teases
us out of thought
as doth eternity.
To put it in other
words, Romanticism
is a quest for
wholeness that
can never be completely
achieved or satisfied:
fragmentation
and frustration
are constant companions,
which I believe
only increases
its relevance
and importance.
-
The
great Romantics,
for all their
strong and idiosyncratic
personalities,
were basically
humble in front
of the givens
of existence.
Their language
feels its way
into perceived
truths, rather
than assaulting
them with the
battering rams
of logic or the
unearned certainties
of abstract jargon.
What needs to
be restored, and
there is every
sign that it is
slowly being restored,
is intuition along
with tuition,
the touch described
by Pope in "An
Essay on Man": "The
spider's touch,
so exquisitely
fine!/ Feels at
each thread, and
lives along the
line" (Butt
512). The huge
task awaiting
contemporary critics
is the perennial
one of absorbing
one's predecessors,
re-experiencing
the original works
in all their nakedness,
and living along
the line with
an informed but
humble analysis.
I use the word "nakedness" advisedly,
as it seems that
many works have
been clothed with
so many interpretations,
or varnished with
so many layers,
that one of our
first tasks is
to patiently clean
the canvas, restore
the original colours,
and discard the
fashionable vestments
of thought with
which they have
become encrusted.
A. N. Whitehead
once complained
about the second-handedness
of academic thought;
today, thought
is likely to have
been more extensively
shop-soiled.
-
The
Romantics had
a similar task
of renovation
200-odd years
ago. They inherited
a mechanistic
language from
the eighteenth
century, which
in their different
ways, they set
out to transform.
Wordsworth's "Preface
to Lyrical Ballads" is
still a clarion
call to exalted
but pragmatic
common sense.
We need a similar
revolution of
the wheel of language
to restore the
place of each
spoke in the economy
of the circle,
radiating outwards
from a luminous
hub of meaning.
If the intellectual
master-theme of
the Enlightenment
was Descartes's "I
think, therefore
I am," and
Rousseau's reaction
could be summed
up as "I
feel, therefore
I am," the
motto of the true
Romantic teacher/scholar
should be "I
inter-relate,
therefore I am." Too
much has been
made of the Romantic
stress on solitude
and a corresponding
solipsism and "mystification";
the Romantics
were also obsessed
with community;
the fact that
few of them achieved
satisfactory communal
relationships
while longing
for a true community—Wordsworth's "Perfect
Contentment, Unity
entire" (Hayden
I, 701)—is
another way of
saying how modern
they are.
-
In
my experience,
students in the
past ten years
have become increasingly
disenchanted with
some of the intellectual
orthodoxies of
the past thirty
years. Although
they don't always
have the language
to articulate
it, they are saying: "Yes,
there was a lot
of dirty water
to empty from
the bath, but
where has the
baby gone?" I
hope I will not
be perceived as
flippant in using
this homely metaphor,
as it reminds
me of the Romantic
watch-cry: "Back
to Nature." These
simple slogans
are dangerously
intoxicating,
as the Romantic
generation found
out, but they
contain a multitude
of complex attitudes.
So, let me make
a start in defining
what I perceive
it entails to
be a teacher of
Romanticism in
2005 trying to
restore the baby,
or to get back
to nature. I want
to concentrate
on three areas:
avoidance of jargon;
a restoration
of orality; and
a revival of sensuousness.
I believe these
three areas are
inter-connected,
and are highlighted
by an awareness
of ecological
principles: the
first returns
us to linguistic
origins; the second
returns us to
oral immediacy;
and the third
returns us to
the physical.
-
First,
jargon. Two types
of jargon should
be distinguished:
1) the language
of specialties
and technicalities
within any discipline,
which practitioners
will recognize
and non specialists
can learn, given
some research;
2) the use of
specialized language
out of context,
or in such a way
as to obfuscate
the issues and
intimidate the
reader, often
expressed in long,
abstract, and
ugly words. Orwell's
1947 essay "Politics
and the English
Language" diagnosed
the disease, but
his insights have
become more and
more relevant
with each decade.
William Zinsser
sums up this issue
with admirable
clarity: ". . . no
one who has something
original or important
to say will willingly
run the risk of
being misunderstood;
people who write
obscurely are
either unskilled
in writing or
up to mischief" (62-3).
One could add
an adaptation
of Keats's remark
about poetry: "We
hate [writing]
that has a palpable
design upon us" (Wu
1021). Much of
the criticism
of Romanticism
over the past
thirty years has
had very palpable
designs on us,
and whether the
writers were up
to mischief or
not, they are
often obscure.
One of the first
tasks of the teacher
in the field,
therefore, is
to point out the
difference between
the types of jargon
outlined above.
Most students
nowadays read
little enough,
after all, so
we should be alert
to guiding them
towards the bracing
complexity of
good scholarship
and away from
the opaque inertness
of vague or pretentious
writing. The principles
of feng shui,
that everything
has a field of
energy, surely
applies to words
as well: good
writing is full
of energy, it
generates the
electricity of
meaning. Bad writing
blocks the energy
flows of thought,
creating a toxic
build-up.
-
Aggressive
language seems
to sweep all before
it in majestic
generalizations.
Academics have
their "buzzwords" as
much as any other
group. Buzzwords
immediately separate
the sheep from
the goats, the "us" from
the "them";
they seem to say,
are you a paid-up
member in our
club? Academics
are particularly
adept at playing
this game, forgetting
that the country
of knowledge is
the birthright
of every intelligent
being, not the
province of self-selecting
illuminati. When
Wordsworth wrote
about wanting
to return to the
language really
used by men, I
believe he had
in mind something
analogous to the
situation described
by Daniel Nettle
and Suzanne Romaine
in Vanishing Voices:
the Extinction
of the World's
Languages. The
authors present
a powerful thesis
to show that biodiversity
has always been
linked to linguistic
diversity. "Traditional
fishermen, particularly
on small islands
(in Micronesia)
where the people
still depend on
the sea for most
of their food,
are still rich
sources of information
unknown to western
scientists" (72).
This vastly intricate
knowledge is internalized
and memorized:
The
tides are also
timed in relation
to lunar phases,
and these too
were committed
to memory. Most
of the languages
and dialects
have specific
terms for the
paired currents
which form on
either side
of the islands,
a region in
which these
currents converge
downstream,
and a back current
flowing toward
the island from
this convergence
point. The islanders
were using their
knowledge of
current patterns
in both fishing
and navigation
long before
they were documented
by oceanographers.
(Nettle and
Romaine 75)
Wordsworth,
in admiring the
linguistic richness
and biodiversity
of the Lake District,
is tuning in to
frequencies that,
once silenced,
can never return.
During the recent
outbreak of foot-and-
mouth disease
in England, there
was great concern
in the Lake District
that the ancient
breed of fell
sheep would be
infected. If so,
the instinctive
knowledge of thousands
of years would
be lost, as those
sheep are famous
for knowing their
boundaries without
any fences. The
internalized knowledge
of many peoples
whose habitat
is at risk has
a comparable vulnerability,
not just to disease,
but to the juggernauts
of modernization,
allied with the
arrogant certainties
of the trained
experts.
-
In
her 1977 book,
The Ecology of
Imagination in
Childhood, (whose
very title contains
three of the key
words in this
area), Edith Cobb
laments the lack
of mutuality in
the language of
scholarship in
her time:
Unfortunately,
the language of
conquest still
maintains a supreme
hold on our social
and political
theory, our medical
policies, and
most serious of
all, our teaching
of ideas about
nature and man.
Even among naturalists
and biologists
the realization
that in ecology
as a biological
science we have,
for the first
time in the history
of thought, an
instrument for
the study of reciprocity
and mutuality
among categories
of thought, as
well as among
divisions and
levels in nature,
seems strangely
lacking. (24)
Much
of the ensuing "discourse" of
the final decades
of the twentieth
century intensified
this lack, for
all its protestations
of "multi-culturalism," most
of it showing
little awareness
of, even a contempt
for, the kind
of humble precision
that Cobb describes.
-
Richness
of language accompanies
variety of occupation.
When one is eroded,
the other is impoverished.
The diminishment
of Gaelic in Ireland
followed the decay
of traditional
crafts and the
obliteration of
much of the flora
and fauna, as
explained by Desmond
Fennell in "The
Last Years of
the Gaeltacht" (1981):
The
Gaelic which is
spoken today in
the Gaeltacht,
and which is gradually
being abandoned,
is a very thin
language compared
with the spoken
Gaelic of three
hundred, a hundred,
or fifty years
ago . . . a
huge loss of vocabulary
occurred when
the craft industries
largely disappeared
from the countryside
in face of competition
from factory products . . . today
you see people
working in the
fields, fishing,
gathering seaweed,
building houses
and making boats.
Eighty years ago
there were coopers,
nail-makers, sail-makers,
weavers, tailors,
cobblers, and
so on. . . . (qtd.
in Foster 442)
These
languages are
idiomatic and
full of the vivid
particulars of
a way of life,
just as the voices
of these people
are distinctive
and individual.
Jargon, on the
other hand, strings
together ready-made
thoughts. Under
the guise of profound
meaning, it delivers
a stale monotony
rather than the
freshness of perception
admired by Wordsworth
in the Lake District:
.
. . because in
that condition
the passions of
men are incorporated
with the beautiful
and permanent
forms of nature.
. . . The language,
too, of these
men is adopted
. . . because
such men hourly
communicate with
the best objects
from which the
best part of language
is originally
derived. . . .
(Wu 357)
Although
Wordsworth and
Blake approach
nature from very
different perspectives,
Wordsworth in
such passages
is close to the
Blake who wrote: "To
Generalize is
to be an Idiot.
To Particularize
is the Alone Distinction
of Merit" (Johnson
and Grant 440).
The Greeks have
an expression
pointing up a
similar contrast: "the
poet or the idiot" (Kirkpatrick
532). In other
words, if one
does not have
a touch of the
poet, seeking
the universal
in tiny details,
one is likely
to string generalities
together, losing
sight of the roots
of meaning. Wordsworth's "spots
of time" (Wu
307), Dorothy
Wordsworth's incomparable
descriptions of
the "simplicity,
unity, and life" of
her environment
(Wu 434), Coleridge's
acutely observed
nature notes—"A
dunghill at a
distance sometimes
smells like musk,
and a dead dog
like elder-flowers" (Hudson
24)—Byron's
flippant down-to-earthness: "And
so, for god sake,
hock and soda
water" (Wu
807), Keats's
evocation of the "Season
of mists" by
making us see
and hear "the
small gnats" mourning "among
the river sallows" (Wu
1080), and Clare's
teeming universe
of outer and inner
weathers—all
these are part
of the Romantic
revolt against
what I have called
aggressive abstractions.
-
The
French historian,
Hippolyte Taine,
in his description
of Robespierre's
use (or misuse)
of language, strikes
a contemporary
disenchanted note.
Robespierre, according
to Taine, has
a
.
. . hollow, inflated
mind that, filled
with words and
imagining that
these are ideas,
revels in its
own declamation
and dupes itself
that it may dictate
to others. . .
. It might be
said he never
saw anything with
his own eyes,
that he neither
could nor would
see, that false
conceptions have
intervened and
fixed themselves
between him and
the object; he
combines these
in logical sequences,
and simulates
the absent thought
by an affected
jargon. (McFarland
137-8)
This
is strikingly
similar to Orwell's
diagnosis in 1947:
The
writer [of jargon]
either has a meaning
and cannot express
it, or he inadvertently
says something
else, or he is
almost indifferent
as to whether
his words mean
anything or not.
This mixture of
vagueness and
sheer incompetence
is the most marked
characteristic
of modern English
prose, and especially
of any kind of
political writing.
As soon as any
topics are raised,
the concrete melts
into the abstract
and no one seems
able to think
of turns of speech
that are not hackneyed:
prose consists
less and less
of words chosen
for the sake of
their meaning,
and more and more
of phrases tacked
together like
the sections of
a prefabricated
hen-house. (Stubbs
and Barnet 267)
Northrop
Frye once wrote
about a "high
authority in the
field" of
education, whom
he describes as "fluent
without being
articulate." He "cannot
break out of an
armour of ready-made
phrases when he
tries to express
his real convictions.
Once again, nothing
can now be done
for him: there
are no courses
in remedial metaphor" (www.mrbauld.com/fryepoet.html).
-
One
of the most productive
areas of recent
scholarship in
the Romantic field
has been the turn
towards an ecological
criticism, by
scholars such
as Jonathan Bate
and James McKusick.
A further fruitful
development is
the return to
the extensive
quotation of original
texts, epitomized
by the criticism
of Thomas McFarland.
And in The Gang,
John Worthen effectively
counters the too-easy
assumption that
the Romantics
worked in solipsistic
isolation. These
approaches enable
one to escape
the twin boxes
of left-wing or
right-wing ideologies,
or of old-fashioned
humanist versus
avant-garde theorist,
and find one's
bearings in "a
language that
is ever green" (Bate, "I
AM," 147),
a line of Clare's
that characterizes
the new approach.
Clare's work especially
disproves the
contention of
some recent critics
that the immersion
in nature entails
a retreat from,
or falsification
of, political
awareness. The
political issues
shift into what
McKusick calls "a
zone of ecological
conflict" (McKusick
226). For ecocritical
scholars, the
contemporary relevance
of the Romantics,
in every sense
including the
political, is
precisely their
passionate awareness
of the inter-connectedness
of natural and
human phenomena.
The Romantics
knew and exemplified
the paradox of
returning to the
origins (and therefore
seeming to be
archaic) in order
to be original.
They were, in
Kant's phrase,
the "favourites
of Nature" (Gadamer
21). In discussing
Clare as "an
increasingly influential
model for the
current generation
of ecological
writers," McKusick
writes:
Clare's
historical priority
in generating
a poetic ecolect
suggests that
modern ecological
consciousness
did not emerge
gradually from
an antecedent
configuration
of scientific
concepts, but
constitutes a
radically new
conceptual paradigm
that demands a
distinctive form
of expression.
(245, 243)
Contemporary
critics espousing
an ecological
approach are creating "a
radically new
conceptual paradigm" to
restore the origins.
They are thus
enacting the Romantic
quest themselves,
by indirections
finding directions
out.
-
Another
way that teachers
and critics of
Romanticism can
anchor their
material in the
specific is to
remember the
connections
between literacy
and orality.
The real language
of men is colloquial,
idiomatic utterance.
It is essentially
anecdotal. The
word anecdote
comes from a
Latin stem meaning
unpublished material,
usually of a
personal
nature. The pressure
of "publish
or perish" for
professional
academics has
been so pronounced
in recent decades
that many scholars
have eschewed
anecdotal material
as unprofessional.
The great Romantics,
of course,
had no such
qualms. That
sublime egotist,
Wordsworth,
was steeped
in Rousseau,
who led the
way in substituting
the confessional
(the personal,
emotion-driven)
for the professional
(the impersonal,
fact-driven).
This confessional
tradition,
of course, can
lead to triviality
and excess,
but part of
the greatness
of the Romantics
is their ability
to blend the
personal with
the impersonal.
It is not unconnected
that many of
them were prolific
talkers. Coleridge's
talk was legendary,
and his notebooks
often read
like overflow
conversations
(or monologues).
Wordsworth,
while not possessing
the gift of
the gab like
Coleridge,
nevertheless
had a very
distinctive
utterance;
who can forget
Hazlitt's description
of Wordsworth's
voice: "a
deep guttural
intonation,
and
a strong tincture
of the northern
burr, like
the
crust on wine" (Wu
607)? And
Benjamin
Robert Haydon
describes "Wordsworth
repeating
Milton with
an intonation
like the
funeral
bell of
St
Paul's and
the music
of Handel
mingled.
. . ." (Wu
660) at
the "immortal
dinner" of
28 December,
1817.
Byron,
especially
in Don
Juan,
catches
the idiomatic
immediacy
of colloquial
conversation
at all
levels
of society.
And the
reader
of Keats's
letters
regrets
not to
have
heard
those
searing
asides
as part
of the
poet's
social
conversation.
-
If
the printed word
is allied to the
linear and the
eye, the spoken
word is intuitive
and auditory.
Walter J. Ong
writes:
By
contrast with
vision, the dissecting
sense, sound is
thus a unifying
sense. A typical
visual ideal is
clarity and distinctness,
a taking apart
(Descartes's campaigning
for clarity and
distinctness registered
an intensification
of vision in the
human sensorium).
The auditory ideal,
by contrast, is
harmony, a putting
together. (72)
And
Ong could be describing
the Romantic enterprise
in the following: "Knowledge
is ultimately
not a fractioning
but a unifying
phenomenon, a
striving for harmony.
Without harmony,
as interior condition,
the psyche is
in bad health." (72).
-
The
importance of
the auditory to
Wordsworth is
well known. In
fact, for a poem
ostensibly so
much about seeing, "Tintern
Abbey" starts
with auditory
memories:
Five
years have past;
five summers,
with the length
Of
five long winters! And again
I hear
These
waters, rolling from their
mountain springs
With
a soft inland murmur. (Wu
265)
To
see into the life
of things is to
engage in a unified
sensuous response,
in touch with
the ancient rhythms
of nature, and
modified by the
imagination. [See
attachment: "Craftsmanship."]
-
In
a defining Romantic
gesture, Wordsworth
read the completed
Prelude aloud
to Coleridge and
others at Coleorton
Hall in Leicestershire
in 1806. Reading
aloud, like truly
engaged conversation,
is badly in need
of revival. I
recently read "Tintern
Abbey" aloud
to my first-year
course. In the
discussion afterwards,
one student picked
up the line "For
thou art with
me here upon the
banks / Of this
fair river. .
." and
asked whether
Wordsworth was
quoting Psalm
23: "For
thou art with
me, thy rod and
thy staff comfort
me." I
replied that Wordsworth
is very likely
doing so, especially
as an earlier
verse of the Psalm
goes: "He
shall feed me
in a green pasture:
and lead me forth
beside the waters
of comfort." Wordsworth
and Dorothy are
walking in a "green
pastoral landscape" beside
the River Wye.
In my experience,
students are more
likely to pick
up such echoes,
allusions, and
textures when
they listen as
well as read.
Marshall McLuhan
describes the
difference cogently.
In oral interchange,
.
. . there are
numerous simultaneous
vistas of any
topic whatever.
The subject is
looked at swiftly
from many angles;
classic notions
and insights concerning
that subject are,
via memory, on
the tip of every
tongue in the
intimate group.
(Hawkes 52)
In
processing the
written word,
however,
.
. . the reader's
eye not only prefers
one sound, one
tone, in isolation;
it prefers one
meaning at a time.
Simultaneities
like puns and
ambiguities—the
life of spoken
discourse—become,
in writing affronts
to taste, floutings
of efficiency.
(Hawkes 52)
Federico
Garcia Lorca,
writing about
the peculiarly
Spanish concept
of "duende," that
gut feeling of
authenticity,
which "squeezes
lemons of daybreak," is
close to McLuhan's "simultaneous
vistas":
All
the Arts are capable
of possessing
duende, but naturally
the field is widest
in music, in dance,
and in spoken
poetry, because
they require a
living body as
interpreter—they
are forms that
arise and die
ceaselessly, and
are defined by
an exact present.
(Gili 132-3)
This
tip-of-the-tongueness
in an exact present
is a timeless
moment, what Blake
called the "Moment
in each Day that
Satan cannot find" (Johnson
and Grant 295).
Of course, in
art of any worth,
there is an intellectual
cement, a fluid
architecture.
But one is inclined
to agree with
Terence Hawkes
when he observes
that writing,
far from being
a reproduction,
is more a reduction,
of living speech
(51). The Romantics
struggled with
this enigma: that
to commit a thought
to paper is to "sentence" it
to a kind of death.
Shelley, in morbid
but brilliant
mood, sums up
this aspect of
writing: ". . . this
jingling food
for the hunger
of oblivion, called
verse" (McFarland
168). That so
much of the work
of the Romantics
has cheated oblivion
and lives in our
memories is testimony
to their arduous
struggle with
this demon. One
is tempted to
exclaim with Dante
in the Purgatorio: "And
here let poetry
rise again from
the dead" (Canto
1. 8). That would
be a "dolce
stil nuova" indeed.
-
Another
neglected aspect
of oral culture
is the premium
it puts on a ready
memory—the
story-teller or
reciter can call
on an extensive
repertoire of
paradigms and
plots and narrative
tricks, enabling
a change of direction,
if desired. From
what we know of
the composition
of "Tintern
Abbey," it
was carried in
the poet's head
for days, and
written down when
the walkers reached
Bristol. One can
imagine, on the
one hand, relief
in consigning
it to paper; on
the other, reluctance
to lose the immediacy
of the fructifying
moments near the
abbey itself.
This Mozartian
process of composition
probably felt
like moving from "wild
ecstasies" to "sober
pleasures." In
several classes
recently, I have
set assignments
where, instead
of a written task,
students can opt
to learn a poem
by heart, recite
it to the class,
and comment on
it orally. Those
who chose this
option were pleasantly
surprised at how
relatively superficial
most silent readings
are. They were
intrigued and
thrilled by the
process of reading,
marking, learning,
and inwardly digesting
that this necessitated.
Furthermore, the
rest of the class
were charmed and
surprised at how
differently the
poems sounded,
coming as they
did from the body
of the learner,
not just the head.
In this way, students
can build up a "body
of knowledge" as
opposed to a bunch
of facts. And
it certainly helps
if the teacher
enjoys weaving
spontaneous quotations
and allusions
and echoes into
the warp and weft
of the content-driven
discourse.
-
To
come to the third
segment of my
argument: the
return to the
sensuous. Thomas
McFarland, in
his book Romanticism
and the Heritage
of Rousseau, uses
throughout the
book the metaphor
of touching the
weave of the great
tapestry of Romanticism
(I allude to this
in my first paragraph).
The ramifications
of the word "touch" are
relevant to my
theme as well.
For example, when
someone has lost
perspective, we
say that he or
she is "out
of touch";
when we want to
continue in communication
with someone,
we say: "keep
in touch";
when performers
are below par,
we talk of them "losing
their touch";
a musical toccata "was
originally a piece
intended to show
touch technique,
and the word comes
from the feminine
past participle
of toccare, to
touch" (Ackerman
71); when we are
moved by a generous
gesture, we say
we are "touched";
it is no coincidence
that mentally
disturbed people
are sometimes
described as "touched";
we talk of "the
touch of the poet," of
the "common
touch," of
the "natural
touch," and
of over-emotional
people as "touchy" (Rousseau
was a typical
example). I have
already quoted
Pope's lines on
the "spider's
touch";
when reading those
lines, we can
picture the filigree
of a spider's
web, that natural
and fragile mandala.
In the mandala
of Romanticism,
an adjustment
to any one part
sends a quiver
throughout the
whole design.
Teachers of Romanticism
should become
like Whitman's "Noiseless,
Patient Spider" launching
forth "filament,
filament, filament.
. ." "Till
the gossamer thread
you fling catch
somewhere, O my
soul." Finding
and imparting
this true sense
of touch keeps
us what Whitman
in another poem
calls "Aplomb
in the midst of
irrational things" (Hall
158, 132).
-
In
The Spell of the
Sensuous: Perception
and Language in
a More-Than-Human
World, the philosopher
and ecologist
David Abram presents
a powerful argument
for coming to
our senses. Although
his emphasis is
not literary,
many of his paragraphs
read like cogent
analyses of the
way Romantic authors
process their
awareness of nature,
especially John
Clare:
Such
hierarchies [intellectual
assumptions that
put human experience "above" nature]
are wrecked by
any phenomenology
that takes seriously
our immediate
sensory experience.
For our senses
disclose to us
a wild-flowering
proliferation
of entities and
elements, in which
humans are thoroughly
immersed. While
this diversity
of sensuous forms
certainly displays
some sort of reckless
order, we find
ourselves in the
midst of, rather
than on top of,
this order. We
may cast our gaze
downward to watch
the field mice
and the insects
that creep along
the bending grasses . . . yet,
at the same moment,
hawks soaring
on great winds
gaze down upon
our endeavors.
Melodious feathered
beings flit like
phantoms among
the high branches
of the trees,
while other animate
powers, known
only by their
traces, move within
the hidden depths
of the forest. . . . Does
the human intellect,
or "reason," really
spring us free
from our inheritance
in the depths
of this wild proliferation
of forms? Or on
the contrary,
is the human intellect
rooted in, and
secretly borne
by, our forgotten
contact with the
multiple nonhuman
shapes that surround
us? [Abram's emphases].
(48)
That
passage also reads
like an elaboration
of Keats's doctrine
of Negative Capability,
as exemplified
in passages such
as the following
from his letters: ".
. . if a sparrow
come before my
window I take
part in its existence
and pick about
the gravel"; "I
lay awake last
night—listening
to the Rain with
a sense of being
drown'd and rotted
like a grain of
wheat"; ".
. . let us open
our leaves like
a flower and be
passive and receptive" (Gittings
38, 89, 66). [See
attachments: "John
Clare (1793-1864)" and "Keats
on Poetry."]
-
And
in an article
lamenting the
Enlightenment
neglect of "the
rights of nature," Jonathan
Bate makes a point
similar to Abram's:
Postmodernity
proclaims that
all marks are
textmarks, but
I believe we must
hold fast to the
possibility that
certain textmarks
called poems can
bring back to
our memory humankind's
ancient knowledge
that without landmarks
we are lost. (Rights
6)
In
the shortest and
most haunting
of the "Lucy" poems,
Wordsworth uses
the word "touch" with
exquisite aptness,
first, to imply
immunity from
change and suffering,
second, to rub
in the radical
change in the
second verse when
Lucy is like one
of nature's inanimate
objects—out
of touch indeed:
A
slumber did my
spirit seal,
I
had no human fears;
She
seemed a thing that could
not feel
The
touch of earthly years.
No
motion has she now, no force;
She
neither sees nor hears;
Rolled
round in earth's diurnal course
With
rocks and stones and trees.
(Wu 327)
I
once heard M.
H. Abrams lecture
for an hour on
these lines. His
respectful tracing
of the web of
meanings in this
miniature masterpiece
kept the listeners
in touch with
the mysteries
of the poet's
craft and art,
and the lecture
was a model for
good teaching
of Romanticism.
In one of the
best recent books
about teaching,
The Courage to
Teach: Exploring
the Inner Landscape
of a Teacher's
Life, Parker Palmer
writes: "to
teach is to create
a space in which
the community
of truth is practiced." This
community "is
a complex and
eternal dance
of intimacy and
distance, of speaking
and listening,
of knowing and
not knowing" (90,
106). This "eternal
dance of intimacy
and distance" is
a hallmark of
Romanticism, and
teachers and scholars
in the field should
cultivate it.
-
Touch
is the foundation
stone of Wordsworth's
description in
the Two-Part Prelude of his whole development,
not just physical,
but also mental
and spiritual:
From
early days,
Beginning
not long after that first
time
In
which, a babe, by intercourse
of touch,
I
held mute dialogues with my
mother's heart,
I
have endeavoured to display
the means
Whereby
the infant sensibility,
Great
birthright of our being, was
in me
Augmented
and sustained. (Wu 319)
The
mature human being
and artist is
able to relate
to the world because
of that early "intercourse
of touch":
No
outcast he, bewildered
and depressed:
Along
his infant veins are interfused
The
gravitation and the filial
bond
Of
nature that connect him with
the world. (Wu 318)
A
similar maternal
and homely image
is used by Dante
at the climax
of the Paradiso
to convey the
ineffability of
the beatific vision:
Omai
sara piu corta
mia favella,
Pur
a quell ch'io ricordo, che
d'un fante
Che
bagni ancor la lingua alla
mammella.
[Now
my speech will come more short
even of what I remember than
an infant's who yet bathes
his tongue at the breast.]
(Sinclair 482)
This
swoop from the
sublime to the
meticulous detail
is a function
of that "grand
elementary principle
of pleasure" that
Wordsworth celebrates
in the "Preface
to Lyrical Ballads." (Wu
361) Another heir
of authentic Romantic
sensuousness—Gerard
Manley Hopkins—who
could not be accused
of wallowing in
the sensual, wrote
a sonnet "To
R.B." [Robert
Bridges], whose
first line exalts "The
fine delight that
fathers thought.
. ." (Gardner
68). Delight is
the "gravitation
and the filial
bond" that
bathes the infant's
and the poet's
tongue.
-
Jonathan
Bate reminds us
that the word "environment" did
not appear until
1830, at a time
when the two meanings
implicit in the
word "culture" were
beginning their
irrevocable divorce—the
cultivation of
the earth and
the cultivation
of our minds
(Song 3-8). Contemporary
teachers and scholars
in the "field" of
Romanticism are
attempting to
effect a reconciliation
between these "two
cultures"—and
it is from the
great Romantics
that we can learn
the art of this
humane husbandry.
-
In
the Romantic quest
for inter-relationships,
symbolic utterance
plays a key role.
The nature of
reality as these
writers saw it
cannot be reduced
to a set of rules
or formulae; the
swerve from minute
particular to
the vast unknown
is the province
of symbol. Hans-Georg
Gadamer, in "The
Relevance of the
Beautiful," explains
the function of
the symbol:
What
does the word "symbol" mean?
Originally it
was a technical
term in Greek
for a token of
remembrance. The
host presented
his guest with
the so-called
tessera hospitalis
by breaking some
object in two.
He kept one half
for himself and
gave the other
half to his guest.
If in thirty or
fifty years time,
a descendant of
the guest should
ever enter his
house, the two
pieces could be
fitted together
again to form
a whole in an
act of recognition.
.
. . for our experience of
the symbolic in general, the
particular represents itself
as a fragment of being that
promises to complete and make
whole whatever corresponds
to it. Or, indeed, the symbol
is that other fragment of
being that has always been
sought in order to complete
and make whole our own fragmentary
life . . . the experience of the beautiful,
and particularly the beautiful
in art, is the invocation
of a potentially whole and
holy order of things, wherever
it may be found. (31-2)
The
nature of Romantic
experience is
fragmentary, but,
paradoxically,
that is what gives
it meaning, because
the fragment is
always engaged
in the desire
and pursuit of
the whole. This
should be good
news to today's
students, who
feel overwhelmed
with "information
overload" and
often find difficulty
making connections
between their
often impressive
areas of knowledge.
William James
in Principles
of Psychology (1890) uses a
vivid image of
the reductionist
mentality, which
claims "a
river consists
of nothing but
pailsful, spoonsful,
quartpotsful,
barrelsful" of
water. Romantic
symbolism, as
McFarland points
out, is close
to the authentic
image as defined
by James:
Every
definite image
in the mind is
steeped and dyed
in the free water
that flows round
it. With it goes
the sense of its
relations, near
and remote, the
dying echo of
whence it came
to us, the dawning
sense of whither
it is to lead.
The significance,
the value, of
the image is all
in this halo or
penumbra that
surrounds and
escorts it. (McFarland
298)
This "dawning
sense of whither
it is to lead" is
close to Wordsworth's "something
evermore about
to be" in
the Crossing the
Alps section of
the Thirteen-Book
Prelude:
Our
destiny, our nature,
and our home,
Is
with infinitude, and only
there—
With
hope it is, hope that can
never die,
Effort,
and expectation, and desire,
And
something evermore about to
be. (Wu 391)
Skilful
teaching of Romanticism
should always
nourish this "dawning
sense" of
an active imagination.
For example, the
Romantics, especially
Wordsworth and
Coleridge, were
fascinated by
rivers. Rivers,
streams, waterfalls,
springs, and fountains
constantly irrigate
the landscape
of their work.
Their awareness
of moving water
in all its manifestations,
both philosophical
and sensuous,
has come to permeate
our awareness
of their own work
as fluid, meandering,
circular, powerful,
and at times destructive.
In short, since
the Romantics,
we cannot step
into the same
poem twice. [See
attachment: "The
Riparian Muse"].
-
McFarland
quotes a passage
from Goethe (1797)
distinguishing
allegory and symbol,
which will bring
us full circle
to our theme of
indirections:
Today
there are also
works of art that
sparkle by virtue
of reason, wit,
gallantry and
we include in
this category
all allegorical
works as well;
of these latter
we expect the
least, because
they likewise
destroy our interest
in representation
itself, and shove
the spirit back
upon itself, so
to speak, and
remove from its
field of vision
all that is truly
represented. The
allegorical differs
from the symbolic
in that what the
symbolic designates
indirectly, the
allegorical designates
directly. (299)
We
all know those
superficially "sparkling" works,
often couched
in jargon, which "shove
the spirit back
upon itself" and "remove
from its field
of vision all
that is truly
represented." Or,
to revert to my
homely metaphor,
works that empty
the baby with
the bath water.
Students today
want to be in
touch with the
world and themselves,
they want to be
touched by works
of art; they admire
the common touch,
but need to be
shown the difference
between the sublime
simplicity of
true works of
art and what Wordsworth
in the "Preface
to Lyrical Ballads" calls "gross
and violent stimulants" (Wu
359) that so often
pass for profundity.
While touching
the weave of the
fabric, they also
want to feel connected
to those invisible
looms whose shuttles
are forever stitching
and unstitching
our lives.
-
One
of my earliest
pupils, the Irish
sculptor, Michael
Warren, recently
gave a lecture
in Galway culminating
in his artistic
credo. While Warren
works in an idiom
ostensibly far
removed from the
Romantic, nothing
could demonstrate
the fundamental
retouching and
cleansing of the
doors of our perceptions
effected by Romanticism
in every corner
of modern art:
It
is precisely
when a creative
intelligence
at its most
attentive is
directed at
matter here
and now, in
all its density
and intractability,
and an attempt
is made to express
what is always
inexpressible,
to hear what
is always silent,
that the object
is transcended
and a reality
beyond the immediate
is touched.
LIST
OF ATTACHMENTS
Course
outline for ENGLISH
382, Studies in Romanticism
at Malaspina University-College,
Nanaimo, British Columbia.
LOST
VOICES,
a proposal
for a course
on John Clare
and other "self-taught" poets,
and the women
poets
of the Romantic
age.
"Craftsmanship." A
poem by Timothy
Brownlow.
"John
Clare (1793-1864)." Class
handout.
"Keats
on Poetry." Class
handout.
"The
Riparian Muse." Class
handout.
ONLINE
RESOURCES
"Elementary
Teaching" by
Northrop Frye: <http://www.mrbauld.com/fryepoet.html>.
Michael
Warren's website
is: <http://www.michaelwarren.ie>;
see also retrospective
catalogue listed
in PRINTED SOURCES
under Peter Murray.
PRINTED
SOURCES AND FURTHER
READING
Abram,
David. The
Spell of the Sensuous:
Perception and Language
in a More-Than-Human
World.
New York: Pantheon
Books, 1996.
Ackerman,
Diane. A
Natural History of
the Senses. New
York: Random House,
1990.
Bate,
Jonathan. The
Song of the Earth. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 2000.
---. Romantic
Ecology. London:
Routledge, 1991.
---. "The
Rights of Nature." John
Clare Society Journal 14
(July 1995): 7-15.
---,
ed. "I
AM":
The Selected Poetry
of John Clare. New
York: Farrar, Straus
and Giroux, 2003.
Brownlow,
Timothy. John
Clare and Picturesque
Landscape. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1983.
Butt,
John, ed. The
Poems of Alexander
Pope. London:
Methuen, 1965.
Cobb,
Edith. The
Ecology of Imagination
in Childhood. New
York: Columbia University
Press, 1977.
Foster,
J.W. ed. Nature
in Ireland. Dublin:
Lilliput Press, 1997.
Gadamer,
Hans-Georg. The
Relevance of the Beautiful
and Other Essays. Cambridge:
Cambridge University
Press, 1986.
Gardner,
W.H., ed. Gerard
Manley Hopkins. Harmondsworth:
Penguin, 1963.
Gili,
J. L., ed. Lorca. Harmondsworth:
Penguin, 1967.
Gittings,
Robert, ed. Letters
of John Keats. London:
Oxford University
Press, 1970.
Hall,
Donald. A
Choice of Whitman's
Verse. London:
Faber and Faber, 1968.
Hawkes,
Terence. Metaphor. London:
Methuen, 1972.
Hayden,
John O. ed. William
Wordsworth: The Poems. Harmondsworth:
Penguin, 1977.
Hudson,
Roger. Coleridge
among the Lakes and
Mountains. London:
Folio Society, 1991.
Johnson,
Mary Lynn and John
E. Grant, eds. Blake's
Poetry and Designs. New
York: W. W. Norton,
1979.
Kirkpatrick,
Betty, ed. Brewer's
Concise Dictionary
of Phrase & Fable. Oxford:
Helicon, 1992.
McFarland,
Thomas. Romanticism
and the Heritage of
Rousseau. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1995.
McKusick,
James. "The
Ecological Vision
of John Clare." University
of Toronto Quarterly,
Winter 1991-2.
Murray,
Peter. Michael
Warren: Light, Gravity
and Distance. Cork:
Crawford Municipal
Art Gallery, 2002.
Nettle,
Daniel and Suzanne
Romaine. Vanishing
Voices: The Extinction
of the World's Languages. Oxford:
Oxford University
Press, 2000,
Ong,
Walter J. Orality
and Literacy. London:
Routledge, 1982.
Palmer,
Parker. The
Courage to Teach:
Exploring the Inner
Landscape of a Teacher's
Life. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1998.
Sinclair,
John D. Dante's
Paradiso. New
York: Oxford University
Press, 1961.
Stubbs,
Marcia and Sylvan
Barnet. The
Little, Brown Reader. Boston:
Little, Brown, 1977.
Worthen,
John. The
Gang. New
Haven, Conn.: Yale
University Press,
2001.
Wu,
Duncan. Romanticism:
An Anthology. Oxford:
Blackwell, 1999.
Zinsser,
William. Writing
to Learn. New
York: Harper & Row,
1988.
|
|