The Quarterly Review. Mr. KeatsThe Examiner[Leigh Hunt][John Hamilton Reynolds] Markup and editing by David Hill Radcliffe Completed November 2009 Examiner.1818.Keats Center for Applied Technologies in the Humanities Virginia Tech
Published under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
License
Lord Byron and his Times: http://lordbyron.org
The Quarterly Review. Mr. KeatsThe ExaminerHunt, Leigh, 1784-1859Reynolds, John Hamilton, 1794-1852London11 October 1818563648-49
Any dashes occurring in line breaks have been removed.
Obvious and unambiguous compositors’ errors have been silently corrected.
NINES categories for Genre and Material Form at
http://www.performantsoftware.com/nines_wiki/index.php/Submitting_RDF#.3Cnines:genre.3E on
2009-02-26BibliographyBook HistoryCollectionCriticismDramaEphemeraFictionHumorLawLettersLife WritingHistoryManuscriptNonfictionPeriodicalPoliticsReference WorksPoetryReligionReviewTranslationTravel
THE EXAMINER.No. 563. SUNDAY, OCT. 11, 1818.LITERARY NOTICES.No. 44.
A manly and judicious letter, signed
J. S. appeared in the Morning
Chronicle the other day, respecting the article in the Quarterly Review on the Endymion of the young poet
Mr. Keats. It is one of
several public animadversions, which that half-witted, half-hearted, Review has called
indignantly forth on the occasion. “This is the hastily-written tribute,” says the
writer, “of a stranger, who ventures to predict that Mr. K. is
capable of producing a poem that shall challenge the admiration of every reader of true taste
and feeling; nay, if he will give up his acquaintance with Mr. Leigh
Hunt, and apostise in his friendships, his principles, and his politics (if he
have any) he may even command the approbation of the Quarterly Review.”—We really believe so; but Mr.
Keats is of a spirit which can afford to dispose with such approbation, and
stand by his friend. We should have given the whole of this letter, but we have since met with
another in the Alfred Exeter paper, which is more
elaborate on the subject; and we have not room for both.
THE QUARTERLY REVIEW.—MR. KEATS.
We have met with a singular instance, in the last number of the Quarterly Review, of that
unfeeling arrogance, and cold ignorance, which so strangely marked the minds and hearts of
Government sycophants and Government writers. The Poem of a young man of genius, which evinces
more natural power than any other work of this day, is abused and cried down, in terms which
would ill grace any other pens that those used in the defence of an Oliver
or a Castles. We have read the poetic romance of Endymion (the book in
question) with no little delight; and could hardly believe that it was written by so young a
man as the preface infers. Mr. Keats, the author of it,
is a genius of the highest order; and no one but a Lottery Commissioner and a Government
Pensioner, (both of which, Mr. William Gifford, the
Editor of the Quarterly Review, is) could,
with a false and remorseless pen, have striven to frustrate hopes and aims, so youthful and so
high as this young Poet nurses. The Monthly
Reviewers, it will be remembered, endeavoured, some few years back, to crush the
rising heart of Kirk White; and indeed they in part
generated that melancholy which ultimately destroyed him; but the world saw the cruelty, and,
with one voice, hailed the genius which malignity would have repressed, and lifted it to fame.
Reviews are creatures that “stab men in the dark;"—young and enthusiastic spirits
are their dearest prey. Our readers will not easily forget the brutality with which the Quarterly Review, in a late number of their
ministerial book, commented on the work of an intelligent and patriotic woman, whose ardour and
independence happened to be high enough to make them her enemies. The language used by these
Government critics, was lower than men would dare to utter to female ears; but Party knows no
distinctions,—no proprieties,—and a woman is the best of prey for its malignity,
because it is the gentlest and the most undefended. We certainly think that criticism might
chuse its objects from the vain, the dangerous, and the powerful, and not from the young and
the unprotected.
“It should strike the hearts of age and care, And spare the youthful and the fair.”
The cause of the unmerciful condemnation which has been passed on Mr. Keats, is pretty apparent to all who have watched the
intrigues of literature, and the wily and unsparing contrivances of political parties. This
young and powerful writer was noticed some little time back in the Examiner, and pointed out, by its Editor, as one who was likely to revive the early vigour of English
poetry. Such a prediction was a fine but dangerous compliment to Mr.
Keats: it exposed him instantly to the malice of the Quarterly Review. Certain it is, that
hundreds of fashionable and flippant readers will henceforth set down this young poet as a
pitiable and nonsensical writer, merely on the assertions of some single heartless critic, who
has just energy enough to despise what is good, because it would militate against his
pleasantry, if he were to praise it.
The genius of Mr. Keats is peculiarly
classical; and, with the exception of a few faults, which are the natural followers of youth,
his imagination and his language have a spirit and an intensity which we should in vain look
for in half the popular poets of the day. Lord Byron is a
splendid and noble egoist: he visits classical shores; roams over romantic lands, and wanders
through magnificent forests; courses the dark and restless waves of the sea, and rocks his
spirit on the midnight lakes; but no spot is conveyed to our minds that is not peopled by the
gloomy and ghastly feelings of our proud and solitary man. It is as if he and the world were
the only two things which the air clothed. His lines are majestic vanities;—his poetry
always is marked with a haughty selfishness;—he writes loftily, because he is the spirit
of an ancient family;—he is liked by most of his readers, because he is a Lord. If a
common man were to dare to be as moody, as contemptuous, and as misanthropical, the world would
laugh at him. There must be a coronet marked on all his little pieces of poetical insolence, or
the world would not countenance them. Mr. Keats has none of this
egotism—this daring selfishness, which is a stain on the robe of poesy. His feelings are
full, earnest, and original, as those of the older writers were and are; they are made for all
time, not for the drawing-room and the moment. Mr. Keats always speaks of,
and describes nature, with an awe and a humility, but with a deep and almost breathless
affection.—He knows that Nature is better and older than he is, and he does not put
himself on an equality with her. You do not see him when you see her. The moon, and the
mountainous foliage of the woods, and the azure sky, and the ruined and magic temple; the rock,
the desart, and the sea; the leaf of the forest, and the embossed foam of the most living
ocean, are the spirits of his poetry; but he does not bring them in his own hand, or obtrude
his person before you, when you are looking at them. Poetry is a thing of generalities—a
wanderer amid persons and things—not a pauser over one thing, or with one person. The
mind of Mr Keats, like the minds of our older poets, goes round the
universe in its speculations and its dreams. It does not set itself a task. The manners of the
world, the fictions and the wonders other worlds, are its subjects; not the pleasures of hope,
or the pleasures of memory. The true poet confines his imagination to no one thing—his
soul is an invisible ode to the passions.—He does not make a home for his mind in one
land—its productions are an universal story, not an eastern tale. The fancies of
Moore are exquisitely beautiful, as fancies, but
they are always of one colour;—his feelings are pathetic, but they are to be found in the
reflections on things, not in the moods and miseries of one person. There is not one poet of
the present day, that enjoys any popularity that will live; each writes for his booksellers and
the ladies of fashion, and not for the voice of centuries. Time is a lover of old books, and he
suffers few new ones to become old. Posterity is a difficult mark to hit; and few minds can
rend the arrow full home. Wordsworth might have safely
cleared the rapids in the stream of time, but he lost himself by looking at his own image in
the waters. Coleridge stands bewildered in the
cross-road of fame;—his genius will commit suicide, and be buried
in it. Southey is Poet Laureate, “so there is no
heed to be taken of him.” Campbell has relied on
two stools, “The
Pleasures of Hope,” and “Gertrude of Wyoming;” but he
will come to the ground, after the fashion of the old proverb. The journey of fame is an
endless one; and does Mr. Rogers think that pumps and
silk stockings (which his genius wears) will last him the whole way? Poetry is the coyest
creature that ever was wooed by man; she has something of the coquet in her; for she flirts
with many, and seldom loves one.
Mr. Keats has certainly not perfects any thing yet; but
he has the power, we think, within him, and it is in consequence of such an opinion that we
have written these few hasty observations. If he should ever see this, he will not regret to
find that all the country is not made up of Quarterly Reviewers. All
that we wish is, that our readers would read the Poem, as we have done, before they assent to
its condemnation. They will find passages of singular feeling, force, and pathos. We have the
highest hopes of this young Poet. We are obscure men, it is true, and not gifted with that
perilous power of mind, and truth of judgement, which are possessed by Mr. Croker, Mr.
Canning, Mr. Barrow, or Mr. Gifford, (all “honourable men,” and writers in
the Quarterly Review.) We
live far from the world of letters,—out of the pale of fashionable criticism,—aloof
from the atmosphere of a Court; but we are surrounded by a beautiful country, and love Poetry,
which we read out of doors, as well as in. We think we see glimpses of a high mind in this
young man, and surely the feeling is better that urges us to nourish its strength, than that
which prompts the Quarterly Reviewer to crush it in its youth, and for ever. If however the
mind of Mr. Keats be of the quality we think it to be of, it will not be
cast down by this wanton and empty attack. Malice is a thing of the scorpion kind—it
drives the sting into its own heart. The very passages which the Quarterly Review quotes as ridiculous, have in them the
beauty that sent us to the Poem itself. We shall close these observations with a few extracts
from the romance itself:—If our readers do not see the spirit and beauty in them to
justify our remarks, we confess ourselves bad judges, and never more worthy to be trusted.
The following address to Sleep is full of repose and feeling:—
“O magic sleep! O comfortable bird, That broodest o’er the troubled sea of the mind Till it is hush’d and smooth! O unconfined Restraint! imprisoned liberty! great key To golden palaces, strange minstrelsy, Fountains grotesque, new trees, bespangled caves, Echoing grottos, full of tumbling waves And moonlight!”
This is beautiful—but here is something finer:—
“——That men, who might have tower’d in the van Of all the congregated world, to fan And winnow from the coming step of time All chaff of custom, wipe away all slime Left by men slugs and human serpentry, Have been content to let occasion die, Whilst they did sleep in love’s elysium. And, truly, I would rather be struck dumb, Than speak against this ardent listlessness: For I have ever thought that it might bless The world with benefits unknowingly; As does the nightingale, up-perched high, And cloister’d among cool and bunched leaves, She sings but to her love, nor e’er conceives How tip-toe Night holds back her dark-grey hood.”
The turn of this is truly Shakesperian,
which Mr. Keats will feel to be the highest compliment
we can pay him, if we know any thing of his mind. We cannot refrain from giving the following
short passage, which appears to us scarcely to be surpassed in the whole range of English
Poetry. It has all the naked and solitary vigour of old sculpture, with all the energy and life
of old poetry:—
“——At this, with madden’d stare, And lifted hands, and trembling lips, he stood, Like old Deucalion mounted o’er the flood, Or blind Orion hungry for the morn.”
Again, we give some exquisitely classic lines, clear and reposing as a Grecian
sky—soft and lovely as the waves of Ilyssus:—
“——Here is wine, Alive with sparkles.—Never, I aver, Since Ariadne was a vintager, So cool a purple; taste these juicy pears, Sent me by sad Vertumnus, when his fears Were high about Pomona: here is cream, Deepening to richness from a snowy gleam; Sweeter than that nurse Amalthea skimm’d For the boy Jupiter.”
This is the very fruit of poetry,—a melting repast for the imagination. We
can only give one more extract—our limits are reached. Mr.
Keats is speaking of the story of Endymion
itself. Nothing can be more imaginative than what follows:—
“——Ye who have yearn’d With too much passion, will here stay and pity, For the mere sake of truth; as ’tis a ditty Not of these days, but long ago ’twas told By a cavern wind unto a forest old; And then the forest told it in a dream To a sleeping lake, whose cool and level gleam A poet caught as he was journeying To Phœbus’ shrine; and in it he did
fling His weary limbs, bathing an hour’s space, And after, straight in that inspired place He sang the story up into the air, Giving it universal freedom.
We have no more room for extracts. Does the author of such poetry as this
deserve to be made the sport of so servile a dolt as a Quarterly Reviewer?—No. Two things
have struck us on the perusal of this singular poem. The first is, that Mr. Keats excels, in what Milton excelled—the power of putting a spirit of life and novelty into
the Heathen Mythology. The second is, that in the structure of his verse, and the sinewy quality of his thoughts, Mr. Keats greatly
resembles old Chapman, the nervous translator of
Homer. His mind has “thews and limbs like to
its ancestors.”Mr. Gifford, who
knows something of the old dramatists, ought to have paused before he sanctioned the abuse of a
spirit kindred with them. If he could not feel, he ought to know better.