The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1891-06-21
OUR LITERARY BUDGET.
difference Between The Poetic and The Sci
entifC Temperament.
NO SYMPATHY BETWEEN THE TWO.
when Science Puts In Flesh and Blood. tho
Poetwnl Lend His Divine Spirit
TO Aid the Transnguration.

The poetic and scientific temperaments are
widely separated, and. in great measure, Of
independent development Lavosier. when
avouth travelling in Switzerland saw nothing
in tho Alps but geological formations Newton
had no appreciation Of the fine arts, calling
statues stone dolls With much that is now
go highly specialized 10 would be strange in
deed. # we did not have the two great groups
~ subjects included under literature and
science. holding tho energies of entirely dis
tnct sets of minds. While accepting this as
fruc. the separation of the two IS not inhe-
rent. and in many of the writings, both OF sa-
wants and poets. the union is evident enough.
l.etus glance IN the FIRST place at the purely
lierar, attitude OF the poet. lie deals with
man for whom the world was made The
creature of God. be loves, hates. conquers, or
j. defeated Those things are supposed mostly
~ interest him which enable him 20 carry out
The divine plan. OK which hc can. a. t FREQ
acent. accomplished often 10 ms cost, for
himself Nature is simply the stage on
which this drama is enacted. To care for tie
stage for It's OWL sake is something tho poet
cannot understand This IS the m0nkish at
titudo also Thomas % kemps says. And
,rbot have We 10 do with genera and species,
w. to whom the Eternal word speaketh is
delivered from many an OPINION. Goethe
stood. IN his love for science. so lar alone,
that his friendship with Schuler had distinct
limitations GOothe's tOnuucss for lnyestiCa-
zion was sOmethiug for which Schiller had 10
sympathy. He could not treat nature as
disconnected set of phenomena. In the IAN
quape Of CARLYLE there was surely another
wav # representing nature, not separated
and disunitcd bat active and alive. and eX-
pan3ino from the whole into the parts. But
-f..fa q D. tlrf
hvpothos.s. which be failed tO sec was directly
ia the line Of his own thought as above eK-
pressed. Margaret uller Was another who was
amazed that q man OF Goethe stature should
"st0op knocking at stoncs.' While Instances
could be multiplied IN illustration of the want
Vi sympathy between % literary and % scicn-
thC process, much can be SAID 70 the contrary.
Thoinsight possessed 10y some English authors
is remarkable. Shakespeare defined types OF
insanity, as IN Lear and IA Hamlet.
hundred years before the medical profession
bad advanced SO FAR as o. classify the diseases
a.. the mind. Charles Dickens. in the person
II Barney Fagins familiar IN oliver Wlet
illustrates q form of mperiection IN speech
which WIS not identified 10y the physicians
until forty years after the novel was written.
Many OF the writings of BalZQc are based On
% scheme of science. and Zola and lbscn rec
ognlZe the availability Of the law of Aeredity
Tor the purpose of modern tragedy. Writers
ol the first rank IN tins century very generally
show that they have caught the drift OF the
scientific movement and are in sympathy
with 10. / need DO no more than mention
Wordsworth. COleudge, Soutbey 1enuy5on
and Browning. Wordsworth is named in the
1rst place as the poet OF nature. We find little
o. exact description. but moro than the
mere landscape effect Is here. If the time.
SAWS Wordsworth. should ever come when
what is now called science. thus famharlIed
10 men, shall be ready TO put on, as II were @
form OF flesh and blood. the poet will lend his
divine spirit 10 aid the TRANSFORMATIONS and
Will welcome the being thus produced as
dear and genuine inmate of the household OK
nan COleridge freQueuted the lecture
room Of Sir Humphrey Dayy 20 obtain. SO he
sad poetIcal suggestions. SOuthey has the
reputation Of being the best naturalist among
the English poets. His descriptions of corais
and scaanemOnes have been greatly admired.
II mag nation underhes the poetic faculty. lt
can le shown that much Is III common with 1t
and tie mental processes of the scientist.
Nothing is more prOsaic than the taking of an
inventory of nature. Emerson has justly sad
that concholog.st, beginning by owning
shells must take care that the shells DO not
own him. But the better wOrk-the search
for afhnities the analysis of causes. the build
ing OF schemes which harmonic numerous
apparently dssociated facts appeals strongly
b the imaglnatiOn.-POet