Works of Charles and Mary Lamb. VI-VII. Letters
Charles Lamb to Samuel Taylor Coleridge, [10 January 1797]
[p.m. Jan. 10, 1797.]
Saturday.
I AM completely reconciled to that second strophe, and wa[i]ve all
objection. In spite of the Grecian Lyrists, I persist on [in] thinking your
brief personification of Madness useless; reverence
1797 | COLERIDGE’S ODE AGAIN | 81 |
forbids me to say, impertinent. Golden
locks and snow white glories are as incongruous as your former, and if the
great Italian painters, of whom my friend knows about as much as the man in the
moon, if these great gentlemen be on your side, I see no harm in retaining the
purple—the glories that I have observed to encircle the heads of saints and
madonnas in those old paintings have been mostly of a dirty drab-color’d
yellow—a dull gambogium. Keep your old line: it will excite a confused kind of
pleasurable idea in the reader’s mind, not clear enough to be called a
conception, nor just enough, I think, to reduce to painting. It is a rich line,
you say, and riches hide a many faults. I maintain, that in the 2d antist: you
do disjoin Nature and the world, and contrary to
your conduct in the 2d strophe. “Nature joins her
groans”—joins with whom, a God’s name,
but the world or earth in line preceding? But this is being over curious, I
acknowledge. Nor did I call the last line useless, I only objected to “unhurld.” I cannot
be made to like the former part of that 2d Epode; I cannot be made to feel it,
as I do the parallel places in Isaiah, Jeremy and Daniel. Whether it
is that in the present case the rhyme impairs the efficacy; or that the
circumstances are feigned, and we are conscious of a made up lye in the case,
and the narrative is too long winded to preserve the semblance of truth; or
that lines 8. 9. 10. 14 in partic: 17 and 18 are mean and unenthusiastic; or
that lines 5 to 8 in their change of rhyme shew like art—I don’t know,
but it strikes me as something meant to affect, and failing in its purpose.
Remember my waywardness of feeling is single, and singly stands opposed to all
your friends, and what is one among many! This I know, that your quotations
from the prophets have never escaped me, and never fail’d to affect me
strongly. I hate that simile. I am glad you have amended that parenthesis in
the account of Destruction. I like it well now. Only utter [? omit] that
history of child-bearing, and all will do well. Let the obnoxious Epode remain,
to terrify such of your friends as are willing to be terrified. I think I would
omit the Notes, not as not good per se, but as uncongenial with the dignity of
the Ode. I need not repeat my wishes to have my little sonnets printed verbatim
my last way. In particular, I fear lest you should prefer printing my first
sonnet, as you have done more than once, “did the wand of Merlin
wave”? It looks so like Mr. Merlin, the
ingenious successor of the immortal Merlin,
now living in good health and spirits, and flourishing in magical reputation in
Oxford Street; and on my life, one half who read it would understand it so. Do
put ’em forth finally as I have, in various letters, settled it; for
first a man’s self is to be pleased, and then his friends,—and, of course
the greater number of his friends, if they differ inter se.
Thus taste may safely be put to 82 | LETTERS OF C. AND M. LAMB | Jan. |
the vote. I do
long to see our names together—not for vanity’s sake, and naughty pride
of heart altogether, for not a living soul, I know or am intimate with, will
scarce read the book—so I shall gain nothing quoad
famam,—and yet there is a little vanity mixes in it, I cannot help
denying. I am aware of the unpoetical cast of the 6 last lines of my last
sonnet, and think myself unwarranted in smuggling so tame a thing into the
book; only the sentiments of those 6 lines are thoroughly congenial to me in my
state of mind, and I wish to accumulate perpetuating tokens of my affection to
poor Mary; that it has no originality in
its cast, nor anything in the feelings, but what is common and natural to
thousands, nor aught properly called poetry, I see; still it will tend to keep
present to my mind a view of things which I ought to indulge. These 6 lines,
too, have not, to a reader, a connectedness with the foregoing. Omit it, if you
like.—What a treasure it is to my poor indolent and unemployed mind, thus to
lay hold on a subject to talk about, tho’ ’tis but a sonnet and
that of the lowest order. How mournfully inactive I am!—’Tis night:
good-night.
My sister, I thank
God, is nigh recovered. She was seriously ill. Do, in your next letter, and
that right soon, give me some satisfaction respecting your present situation at
Stowey. Is it a farm you have got? and what does your worship know about
farming? Coleridge, I want you to write
an Epic poem. Nothing short of it can satisfy the vast capacity of true poetic
genius. Having one great End to direct all your poetical faculties to, and on
which to lay out your hopes, your ambition, will shew you to what you are
equal. By the sacred energies of Milton,
by the dainty sweet and soothing phantasies of honeytongued Spenser, I adjure you to attempt the Epic. Or
do something more ample than writing an occasional brief ode or sonnet;
something “to make yourself for ever known,—to make the age to come
your own”. But I prate; doubtless you meditate something. When
you are exalted among the Lords of Epic fame, I shall recall with pleasure, and
exultingly, the days of your humility, when you disdained not to put forth in
the same volume with mine, your religious musings, and that other poem from the Joan of Arc,
those promising first fruits of high renown to come. You have learning, you
have fancy, you have enthusiasm—you have strength and amplitude of wing enow
for flights like those I recommend. In the vast and unexplored regions of
fairyland, there is ground enough unfound and uncultivated; search there, and
realize your favourite Susquehanah scheme. In all our comparisons of taste, I
do not know whether I have ever heard your opinion of a poet, very dear to me,
the now out of fashion Cowley—favor me
with your judgment of him, and tell me if his prose essays, in particular, as well as no
inconsiderable
part of his verse,
be not delicious. I prefer the graceful rambling of his essays, even to the
courtly elegance and ease of Addison—
abstracting from this the latter’s exquisite humour. Why is not your
poem on Burns in
the Monthly Magazine? I was much
disappointed. I have a pleasurable but confused remembrance of it.
When the little volume is printed, send me 3 or 4, at all events not more
than 6 copies, and tell me if I put you to any additional expence, by printing
with you. I have no thought of the kind, and in that case, must reimburse you.
My epistle is a model of unconnectedness, but I have no partic: subject to
write on, and must proportion my scribble in some degree to the increase of
postage. It is not quite fair, considering how burdensome your correspondence
from different quarters must be, to add to it with so little shew of reason. I
will make an end for this evening. Sunday Even:—Farewell.
Priestly, whom I sin in almost adoring,
speaks of “such a choice of company, as tends to keep up that right
bent, and firmness of mind, which a necessary intercourse with the world
would otherwise warp and relax. Such fellowship is the true balsam of life,
its cement is infinitely more durable than that of the friendships of the
world, and it looks for its proper fruit, and complete gratification, to
the life beyond the Grave.” Is there a possible chance for such
an one as me to realize in this world, such friendships? Where am I to look for
’em? What testimonials shall I bring of my being worthy of such
friendship? Alas! the great and good go together in separate Herds, and leave
such as me to lag far far behind in all intellectual, and far more grievous to
say, in all moral, accomplishments. Coleridge, I have not one truly elevated character among my
acquaintance: not one Christian: not one but undervalues Christianity. Singly
what am I to do? Wesley (have you read
his life? was he not an elevated character?) Wesley has
said, “Religion is not a solitary thing.” Alas! it
necessarily is so with me, or next to solitary. ’Tis true, you write to
me. But correspondence by letter, and personal intimacy, are very widely
different. Do, do write to me, and do some good to my mind, already how much
“warped and relaxed” by the world!—’Tis the
conclusion of another evening. Good night. God have us all in his keeping.
If you are sufficiently at leisure, oblige me with an
account of your plan of life at Stowey—your literary occupations and
prospects—in short make me acquainted with every circumstance, which, as
relating to you, can be interesting to me. Are you yet a Berkleyan? Make me one. I rejoice in being,
speculatively, a necessarian. Would to God, I were habitually a practical one.
Confirm me in the faith of that great and glorious doctrine, and keep me steady
84 | LETTERS OF C. AND M. LAMB | Jan. |
in the contemplation of it. You sometime
since exprest an intention you had of finishing some extensive work on the
Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion. Have you let that intention go? Or
are you doing any thing towards it? Make to yourself other ten talents. My
letter is full of nothingness. I talk of nothing. But I must talk. I love to
write to you. I take a pride in it. It makes me think less meanly of myself. It
makes me think myself not totally disconnected from the better part of Mankind.
I know, I am too dissatisfied with the beings around me,—but I cannot help
occasionally exclaiming “Woe is me, that I am constrained to dwell
with Meshech, and to have my habitation among the
tents of Kedar”—I know I am no ways better in practice than my
neighbours—but I have a taste for religion, an occasional earnest aspiration
after perfection, which they have not. I gain nothing by being with such as
myself—we encourage one another in mediocrity—I am always longing to be with
men more excellent than myself. All this must sound odd to you; but these are
my predominant feelings, when I sit down to write to you, and I should put
force upon my mind, were I to reject them. Yet I rejoyce, and feel my privilege
with gratitude, when I have been reading some wise book, such as I have just
been reading—Priestley on Philosophical
necessity—in the thought that I enjoy a kind of communion, a kind of friendship
even, with the great and good. Books are to me instead of friends. I wish they
did not resemble the latter in their scarceness.—And how does little David Hartley? “Ecquid in
antiquam virtutem?”—does his mighty name work
wonders yet upon his little frame, and opening mind? I did not distinctly
understand you,—you don’t mean to make an actual ploughman of him?
Mrs. C is no doubt well,—give my
kindest respects to her. Is Lloyd with
you yet?—are you intimate with Southey?
What poems is he about to publish—he hath a most prolific brain, and is indeed
a most sweet poet. But how can you answer all the various mass of interrogation
I have put to you in the course of this sheet. Write back just what you like,
only write something, however brief. I have now nigh finished my page, and got
to the end of another evening (Monday evening)—and my eyes are heavy and
sleepy, and my brain unsuggestive. I have just heart enough awake to say Good
night once more, and God love you my dear friend, God love us all. Mary bears an affectionate remembrance of you.
Joseph Addison (1672-1719)
English politician and man of letters, with his friend Richard Steele he edited
The Spectator (1711-12). He was the author of the tragedy
Cato (1713).
George Berkeley, bishop of Cloyne (1685-1753)
Bishop of Cloyne and philosopher; author of
A New Theory of Vision
(1709, 1710, 1732),
A Treatise concerning the Principles of Human
Knowledge (1710, 1734), and
Three Dialogues between Hylas and
Philonous (1713, 1725, 1734).
Hartley Coleridge [Old Bachelor] (1796-1849)
The eldest son of the poet; he was educated at Merton College, Oxford, contributed essays
in the
London Magazine and
Blackwood's, and
published
Lives of Distinguished Northerns (1832).
Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834)
English poet and philosopher who projected
Lyrical Ballads (1798)
with William Wordsworth; author of
Biographia Literaria (1817),
On the Constitution of the Church and State (1829) and other
works.
Abraham Cowley (1618-1667)
English royalist poet; his most enduring work was his posthumously-published
Essays (1668).
Mary Anne Lamb (1764-1847)
Sister of Charles Lamb with whom she wrote Tales from Shakespeare (1807). She lived with
her brother, having killed their mother in a temporary fit of insanity.
Charles Lloyd (1775-1839)
Quaker poet; a disciple of Coleridge and friend of Charles Lamb, he published
Poetical Essays on the Character of Pope (1821) and other
volumes.
John Milton (1608-1674)
English poet and controversialist; author of
Comus (1634),
Lycidas (1638),
Areopagitica (1644),
Paradise Lost (1667), and other works.
Joseph Priestley (1733-1804)
Dissenting theologian, schoolmaster, and scientist; he was author of
The History and Present State of Electricity, with Original Experiments
(1767).
Robert Southey (1774-1843)
Poet laureate and man of letters whose contemporary reputation depended upon his prose
works, among them the
Life of Nelson, 2 vols (1813),
History of the Peninsular War, 3 vols (1823-32) and
The Doctor, 7 vols (1834-47).
Edmund Spenser (1552 c.-1599)
English poet, author of
The Shepheards Calender (1579) and
The Faerie Queene (1590, 1596).
John Wesley (1703-1791)
English clergyman and author; with George Whitefield he was a founder of
Methodism.
The Monthly Magazine. (1796-1843). The original editor of this liberal-leaning periodical was John Aikin (1747-1822); later
editors included Sir Richard Phillips (1767-1840), the poet John Abraham Heraud
(1779-1887), and Benson Earle Hill (1795-45).