The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-01-05
POETS AND CRITICS.

In the current number of the AcGdemy, Mr..
41atthew Arnold has stated his views upon q
'ubiect of considerable literary interest.
4 Excellent work, he says, sin lower kind
&ounts in the long run above work which is
|Short of excellence in higher first-rate
|riticism has permanent value greater than
bat of any but first-rate works of poetry and
4 IT." On a question like this, SAYS q writer
b the Daily Nelos, few men are better able
b speak or are more entitled TO be heard
han MIR. Arnold, who has achieved distin-
pushed success both as poet and a critic.
Ie knows, if any one knows, the worth and
|orthlessness of criticism, and the author of
&1he Forsaken Norman" and "The Scholar
iipsy," whose best poems, according to Mr..
pwinburne, cannot but live as long as any
Il their time is not likely to depreciate the
lorious art in which he has proved himself
klmaster. II is therefore with some difidence
hat we venture to differ from writer so
hreful and judicious; but we think the fall
cy of the argument might be proved, to 60
y 10 further from Mr.. Matthew Arnold's own
ritings In criticism his work will be al
bwed. even by those who differ from him,
be ''first-rate,' and it is probable that in
PINE respects he has no rival in this depart
lent of literature; as a poet, on the other
and, il would he absurd to place him in the
highest rank by the side of Shakespeare and
Itilton or even of Wordsworth and Keats.
ct it needs no spirit of prophecy to declare
pat few of Mr.. Arnold's poems, half a
pzen perhaps, two or three assuredly, will
permanent place in English literature.
as much be said for Mr.. Arnold's criti-
b? We greatly doubt it, and for this rea-
that criticism, however fine it may be,
YES but q temporary purpose, and in
noes comparatively few minds, while
4 a try lays hold of the human heart with a
b which time cannot relax, since it APP
is to universal feelings, which are unaf-
q ted by change.
The art of criticism has been frequently
bciated with the art of poetry. Dryden was
of the earliest and ablest of English
les, and what he has written about poetry
poets has still its interest for students;
it is scarcely too much to say that the
se of ''glorious John" has become obsolete,
lie his verse lives and will live. 1t may be
ected that Dryden ranks with the poets
b, in Mr.. Arnold's estimation are first
We do not think this would be Mr.
holds Judgment; but let us take a less
btful case. DR.. johnson WAS accounted a
at critic in his own day, and despite much
matsm and prejudice has not wholly lost
reputation. He is often in error, he often
>ws an incapacity for appreciating the high
H order of poetry, but he is always vigorous
ID clear-headed and his discernment is
tnetimes admirable. On the other hand,
bnson was q small poet, and would perhaps
Ker have written in rhyme if it had not
5en the fashion of the age; yet one or two of
Us pieces, especially the lines on Levet, sur
I've in the memory of all lovers of poetry.
gam Addison's criticism, considering the
me at which it was written, may assuredly
styled first-rate, while his poetry is for the
post part very poor stuff indeed. But who
Dads Addisons criticism nowadays? Who
IS not read, perhaps learned, one or more of
e sacred poems written by the famous essay
and preserved in most collections of Eng.
d poetry?
gThe present age has produced some great
bglish critics and poets indeed, almost all
poets who fiourlshed at the beginning OF
century Coleridge, Shelley, Wordsworth
Mt, and Southey, for example, distin-
fshed themselves in criticism as well as in
6try. Take the last of these names as an
bstration of our subject. Robert Southeys
lief in his greatness as poet has not been
bred by his contemporaries. His epics have
proved q fortune to his family, neither
be they placed his name, as he fondly an
Ipated, by the side of Milton's Southey's
5rk in poetry must, we fear, be pronounced
cond-rate his work as a prose writer and
itic is, some of it, of the highest order; yet
Southey's name holds its placein literature
I'VE believe it will, it will be due probably
q few beautiful occasional verses rather
an to the worth, high though it be, of hi
most inimitable prose. Sure we are that
eat as Coleridge proved himself in tn,
aims of criticism, all he ever wrote abou
betry is as nothing when compared with tina
ost exquisite of all love poems, ''Genevieve,
til the Hymn in the Vale of Chamouni,
with the Ancient Mariner" On tn
bole, it may be said that poetry which can
justly be pronounced the best-that is t.
y, which must not be ranked with that O
Inte and Shakespeare, of Milton and Molier
has sometimes, nevertheless, permanen
lue, which is not reached even by first-rat
tlcism.