The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1875-07-12
The Semi Centennial Poem.

Oura Petersburg contemporaries have, IN
the following articles, expressed OUT opinion
better than we could have done 1t ourselves
Of the semicentennial poem read at the Uni
ycrsity week before last. The so.called poem
"a a rhapsody almost destitute of poeticai
qualities. The Star describes it so accurately
and fairly, aud with such an entire absence
Of fee,iup-in q word, from the heights OF
impartiality-that we cannot but admire the
skill Of the operator. The Appeal is short,
sharp, and incisive. The two tell the whole
tale:
"Tbe DISPATCH of last Thursday contains
: fill conv of the semi. centennial poem read
81 the University of Virginia By Mr.; Lucas,
If West Virginia. As the Dispatch has
asked our opinion Of the production, we
aave II a careful reading, and are prepared to
evnress our Judgment of its merits very
briefly but to the point. The poem is very
UNEQUAL. and while 1t possesses. certain
MARKED beauties of expression there are
gross defects in it which greatly mar the
General effect. We are astonished at the
humber and gravity of sins against prosody
which the poem contains. 1t is almost In.
credible that writer who evidently has
GOOD deal of Doetical sensibility, with the
faculty of graceful and flowing language,
| and occasional vivid images, should DIS
NAV such ignorance of the mere me-
cbanical laws of metre. But there IS
NOT a stspza in Mr.. LUcas'S composition that
does not betray some such fault, as tnose
who have no ear for correct measure can
readily discover by the process OF counting
on the ends Of their fingers. AS 10 tne mat
ter of the poem, it seems at times obscure
and confused in meaning, but the general
idea is plain and fine, aud its treatment rises
in some scattered passages to quite an aoml-
rable poetic pitch. Mr.. Lucas comes COW at
the close OF the poem rather too Abruptly anu
not very skilfully, and bis last line IS unhap'
pily about bis tamest. However, II IS no! an
easy thing to write great lyrics, and we tnink
our Virginian bard has done very well on Tue
whole. Notwithstanding the badness OF DIS
matre and the veil which sometimes hides bis
thought from the comprehension OF Ordinary
people. Petersburg Appeal.
THAT PoEx.-The euterprising conductors
of the Inder appeal have anticipated our
promised criticism of The poem reciteu oy
Mr.. Daniel Lucas at the semi centennial cele-
bration of the founding OF the University:
Their notice is almost exactly lndichlVe VI
our opinion of the merits and demcrlts Oh
that production. Undoubtedly there are
many fine thoughts, apt illusions, ana mus'ca'
lines in the stanzas which Mr.. Lucas n''s ue'
voted TO Jefferson and his nobleSt mOnu-
mont but the ode is no more poetry than the
rays transmitted by an irregular crystal are
rainbow. The lines prove that their author
felt ALI of the inspiring dninlus of the occl-
sion: vet he failed to express it.. Fur.
tbermore. Mr.. Lucas has dsregarded all
the practical rules for structure OF poetic
work By the decision Of our own Poe,
University nun, and OF all modern
authorities. the severely changeless rule
| that Homer used is that which living
| worsbippers OF the muse must observe. The
| noct must be musical, logical, and intelliSl-
bile. and must obey laws as carefully as does
the architect or the sculptor. Genius should
be ashamed to present itself before the world
upproyided with armor and weapons OF
which mediocrty makes hourly Use. Dir.
Lucas has given to the University tribute
that meets every requirement Of Virglnian
sentiment, and establishes the fact that there
is some poetic element in his soul; but his
work is un1rtistic, raises craving which 1t
does not satisfy, and goes hating on IN exc
cution after lame and irregular manner
which destroys the effect of large conception
and dignity of diction. Still, underlooking
all the involution and all the falsity OF
rhythm, there are suggestions in the poem
that demand praise.
Il is only necessary that the author should
recosnize and follow the laws of poetic com
position to place his productions in the front
! rank of American verses. In conclusion, we
think this poem unworthy, from its sloVenly
construction and infelicity Of expression, Of
the talent of its author. Mr.. Lucas can do
better, and it is to be regretted that be did
not do bis best on this Growing opportunity
of vrgnian's reer.-Petersburg Star.