New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1909-05-08


not unskilled in his craft But there is oh
viously sore disappointment in store for the
reader who learns that The Hound of Heaven"
struck Patmore as lone OF the very few great
odes Of which the language can boast" and
turns TO the poem TO ind it beginning in this
wise:
fed Him. down the nights and down the days:
/ fed him down the arches Of the years;
ned Him, SoWa The labyrinthlne ways
OF my own mind; and in the mist of tears
hid from III Him and under running laughter
And shot. precipitated
From those strong Feet that followed, followed
But with unhurrying chase,
And unperturbed pace,
Deliberate speed majestic insfancy'
Wory i 6e9tn4n +i,s E ,F5 beat beat
"Ali things betray thee who betraTest Ne
Patmore wrote some exquisite verse. as every
one who knows THE Toys viii be quick to ad
nit but he also composed quantity Of stuff
disclosing no poetic instinct whatever. That in
stinct must surely have slept in him when the
lines just quoted, and those which follow them,
could persuade him that The Hound of Heaven
had about il any of the marks OF greatness
The Thompsonians, IN fact excite curiosity as
TO the ground Of their zealotry. The publication
of his shelley invites stiH further examina-
ton into q not very important but nevertheless
interesting problem
He wrote this essay in 1889 and sent It to The
Dublin Review the quarterly founded by Car
dinal NisenIan- 1t returned and nothing
more was heard Of il until it found among
his papers on his death, in 1907 Then il was
offered again TO the very periodical which had
rejected il. and. being this time accepted. at
tracted so much attention that for the first time
in its history Of seventy-two years The Dublin
Review had TO bring out a second edition.
Naturally the next step was to put il into book
form. and ii has been reprinted in q very dainty
little volume with an Introduction by Mr.. George
wyndharn- He launches it with the bold as
sertion that il is the most important contribu-
ton TO pure Letters written in English during
the last twenty years. and in saying this he
compares it with poetry well as with other
critical essays Let Us see what this master
piece is like.
It opens with expressions Of regret that the
Church, by which We are 10 understand the
Church Of Rome. has not been sufficiently hos
pitsble to poetry II then exhibits the childlike
character Of Shelley. the unfortunate elements
in his training and the sadness OF his fate
Proceeding 10 n analysis Of his poetry Thonp-
son speaks Of its springing from the chiIdlike
faculty of make believe, Of Shelley's intuitive
grasp upon the secrets Of nature. of his fgural-
tive gift, and so on. He concludes as he be-
gins, on note OF regret. in this instance for
the poets want of Christian hope" and for the
evil side OF mis- life. In substance. the essay is
doubt illuminating. buI not in any dazzling
way. You feel that Shelley is interpreted With
insight yet with no special freshness or
breadth. Mr.. Wyndham observes that he holds
Matthew Arnold's Essays in Criticism" in very
great regard. but he adds that they did not
reach such heights and that they do not han
die subjects a rule, pertinent Poetry"
We are at a loss TO explain this curious pro-
nouncement- Arnold's essays not only reveal
a man with a genius for poetry, but they are
vitalized by the reaction OF powerful mind
upon questions Of poetry and criticism. Thomp-
sons thought is neither original nor profound
and the impression left by his essay is simply
that Of a sympathetic writer of poetic tenn
permanent framing clever sentences on ordt-
narily penetrating ideas.
Some Of the things that he has say he says
very well. Thus in distinguishing between Shell
ley and the wordsworthians in their treatment
Of nature, he says: He saw in her not a picture
set for his copying but palette set for his
brush; not a habitation prepared for his in
habiting. but a Coliseum whence he might
quarry stones for his own palaces Even in his
descriptive passages the dream character of his
scenery is notorious; il is not the clear, recog-
nizable scenery of Wordsworth, but a landscape
that hovers athwart the heat and haze arising
from his cracking fantasies That is a good
bit Of description. and of Characterization
and we need not underestimate its cleverness
Matthew Arnolds remarks natural magic"
we smile over Mr. Wyndham's exaltation
of Thompson above England's greatest critic
But in the foregoing passage may find a
cew 10 the uncriticai infatuation Of Mr. wynd-
ham. PatmOre. Mrs. Meynen and all the others
Thompson is nothing if not an assiduous maker
Of phrases. Speaking Of the artiicality Of a
good deal OF modern simplicity. he says: There
IS in fact, q certain land a words the Prsttor-
ian cohorts Of poetry, whose prescriptive aid is
invoked by every aspirant 10 the poetical purple
and without whose presc:ipttve aid none dares
aspire to the poetical purple; against these it is
time some banner should be raised" The point
is justly taken, but unlol tunately TLOmpson.s
way OF raising his banner consisted in making a
desperate search for words and figures which
would demonstrate his superiority to. or at
least his aloofness from, the Prsetorian CO.
horts." The result was a strain of seIf-con-
sciousness. of sophistication. in his writings
which Matthew Arnold. fancy would have
found dstasteful, but which seems 10 have q
strong fascination fer readers of another tyne
I win moi Ierturbate Thy ParadisaI state"
says Thompson. beginning che Of his poenls
and here are some ILLUSTRATIONS Of the effort he
made in prose to lend originality to his stvle.
Few poets mated before and no poet
was 50 mated afterward, until Browning stoope.i
and picked up fair-coined soul that lay rustn,
in pool OF tears
Poverty never dictated 10 his pen; the designs on
has brgh: imagination were never etched by
sharp fumes Of necessity.
But no such hapless lot was Shellev's as that Of
his own conte-1pcraTles-keats half chewed in the
Jaws OF Lnaooh ai.n sIII olahs on 70 italy, De
raaiuled from those cruel jaws: tccleridge, whom
.hey duffy munl5ied FOR the major portion OF his
Critics who kept iaeonitably planting il