ON RE-READING WALTER PATER

It is with no small satisfaction, and with a sense of reassurance of

which one may, in moods of misgiving, have felt the need during

two decades of the Literature of Noise, that one sees a writer so

pre-eminently a master of the Literature of Meditation coming, for all

the captains and the shouting, so surely into his own. The acceptance

of Walter Pater is not merely widening all the time, but it is more

and more becoming an acceptance such as he himself would have most

valued, an acceptance in accordance with the full significance of his

work rather than a one-sided appreciation of some of its Corinthian

characteristics. The Doric qualities of his work are becoming recognized

also, and he is being read, as he has always been read by his true

disciples--so not inappropriately to name those who have come under his

graver spell--not merely as a _prosateur_ of purple patches, or a

sophist of honeyed counsels tragically easy to misapply, but as an

artist of the interpretative imagination of rare insight and magic, a

writer of deep humanity as well as aesthetic beauty, and the teacher of

a way of life at once ennobling and exquisite. It is no longer possible

to parody him--after the fashion of Mr. Mallock's brilliancy in _The New

Republic_--as a writer of "all manner and no matter," nor is it possible

any longer to confuse his philosophy with those gospels of unrestrained

libertinism which have taken in vain the name of Epicurus. His highly

wrought, sensitively coloured, and musically expressive style is seen to

be what it is because of its truth to a matter profound and delicate and

intensely meditated, and such faults as it has come rather of too much

matter than too little; while his teaching, far from being that of

a facile "Epicureanism," is seen, properly understood, to involve

something like the austerity of a fastidious Puritanism, and to result

in a jealous asceticism of the senses rather than in their indulgence.

"Slight as was the burden of positive moral obligation with which he had

entered Rome," he writes of Marius, as on his first evening in Rome the

murmur comes to him of "the lively, reckless call to 'play,' from the

sons and daughters of foolishness," "it was to no wasteful and vagrant

affections, such as these, that his Epicureanism had committed him."

Such warnings against misunderstanding Pater is careful to place, at, so

to say, all the cross-roads in his books, so scrupulously concerned is

he lest any reader should take the wrong turning. Few writers, indeed,

manifest so constant a consideration for, and, in minor matters,

such a sensitive courtesy toward, their readers, while in matters

of conscience Pater seems to feel for them an actual pastoral

responsibility. His well-known withdrawal of the "Conclusion" to _The

Renaissance_ from its second edition, from a fear that "it might

possibly mislead some of those young men into whose hands it might

fall," is but one of many examples of his solicitude; and surely such as

have gone astray after such painstaking guidance have but their own

natures to blame. As he justly says, again of Marius, "in the reception

of metaphysical _formula_, all depends, as regards their actual and

ulterior result, on the pre-existent qualities of that soil of human

nature into which they fall--the company they find already present

there, on their admission into the house of thought."

That Pater's philosophy could ever have been misunderstood is not to be

entertained with patience by any one who has read him with even ordinary

attention; that it may have been misapplied, in spite of all his care,

is, of course, possible; but if a writer is to be called to account for

all the misapplications, or distortions, of his philosophy, writing may

as well come to an end. Yet, inconceivable as it may sound, a critic

very properly held in popular esteem recently gave it as his opinion

that the teaching of Walter Pater was responsible for the tragic career

of the author of _The Picture of Dorian Gray_. Certainly that remarkable

man was an "epicurean"--but one, to quote Meredith, "whom Epicurus would

have scourged out of his garden"; and the statement made by the critic

in question that _The Renaissance_ is the book referred to in _The

Picture of Dorian Gray_ as having had a sinister influence over its hero

is so easily disposed of by a reference to that romance itself that it

is hard to understand its ever having been made. Here is the passage

describing the demoralizing book in question:

His eye fell on the yellow book that Lord Henry had sent him.... It

was the strangest book he had ever read. It seemed to him that in

exquisite raiment, and to the delicate sound of flutes, the sins of

the world were passing in dumb show before him. Things that he had

dimly dreamed of were suddenly made real to him. Things of which he

had never dreamed were gradually revealed.

It was a novel without a plot, and with only one character, being,

indeed, simply a psychological study of a certain young Parisian who

spent his life trying to realize in the nineteenth century all the

passions and modes of thought that belonged to every century except

his own, and to sum up, as it were, in himself the various moods

through which the world-spirit had ever passed, loving for their

mere artificiality those renunciations that men have unwisely called

virtue, as much as those natural rebellions that wise men still call

sin. The style in which it was written was that curious jewelled

style, vivid and obscure at once, full of _argot_ and of archaisms,

of technical expressions and of elaborate paraphrases, that

characterizes the work of some of the finest artists of the French

school of _Décandents._ There were in it metaphors as monstrous as

orchids, and as evil in colour. The life of the senses was described

in the terms of mystical philosophy. One hardly knew at times

whether one was reading the spiritual ecstasies of some medieval

saint or the morbid confessions of a modern sinner. It was a

poisonous book. The heavy odour of incense seemed to cling about its

pages and to trouble the brain. The mere cadence of the sentences,

the subtle monotony of their music, so full as it was of complex

refrains and movements elaborately repeated, produced in the mind of

the lad, as he passed from chapter to chapter, a form of reverie, a

malady of dreaming, that made him unconscious of the falling day and

the creeping shadows....

For years Dorian Gray could not free himself from the memory of this

book. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that he never

sought to free himself from it. He procured from Paris no less than

five large paper copies of the first edition, and had them bound in

different colours, so that they might suit his various moods and the

changing fancies of a nature over which he seemed, at times, to have

almost entirely lost control.

The book thus characterized is obviously by a French writer--I have

good reason for thinking that it was _À Rebours_ by Huysmans--and how

any responsible reader can have imagined that Walter Pater's _The

Renaissance_ answers to this description passes all understanding. A

critic guilty of so patent a misstatement must either never have read

_The Picture of Dorian Gray_, or never have read _The Renaissance_. On

the other hand, if on other more reliable evidence it can be found that

Oscar Wilde was one of those "young men" misled by Pater's book, for

whose spiritual safety Pater, as we have seen, was so solicitous, one

can only remind oneself again of the phrase quoted above in regard to

"that soil of human nature" into which a writer casts his seed. If that

which was sown a lily comes up a toadstool, there is evidently something

wrong with the soil.

Let us briefly recall what this apparently so "dangerous" philosophy

of Pater's is, and we cannot do better than examine it in its most

concentrated and famous utterance, this oft-quoted passage from that

once-suppressed "Conclusion" to _The Renaissance_:

Not the fruit of experience, but experience itself, is the end. A

counted number of pulses only is given to us of a variegated

dramatic life. How may we see in them all that there is to be seen

in them by the finest senses? How shall we pass most swiftly from

point to point, and be present always at the focus where the

greatest number of vital forces unite in their purest energy? To

burn always with this hard, gem-like flame, to maintain this

ecstasy, is success in life.... While all melts under our feet, we

may well grasp at any exquisite passion, or any contribution to

knowledge that seems by a lifted horizon to set the spirit free for

a moment, or any stirring of the senses, strange dyes, strange

colours, and curious odours, or work of the artist's hands, or the

face of one's friend. With this sense of the splendor of our

experience and of its awful brevity, gathering all we are into one

desperate effort to see and touch, we shall hardly have time to make

theories about the things we see and touch.... Well! we are all

_condamnés_, as Victor Hugo says; we are all under sentence of

death, but with a sort of indefinite reprieve--_les hommes sont tous

condamnés à mort avec des sursis indéfinis_: we have an interval,

and then our place knows us no more. Some spend this interval in

listlessness, some in high passions, the wisest, at least among "the

children of this world," in art and song. For our one chance lies in

expanding that interval, in getting as many pulsations as possible

into the given time. Great passions may give us this quickened

sense of life, ecstasy and sorrow of love, the various forms of

enthusiastic activity, disinterested or otherwise, which come

naturally to many of us. Only be sure it is passion--that it does

yield you this fruit of a quickened, multiplied consciousness. Of

such wisdom, the poetic passion, the desire of beauty, the love of

art for its own sake, has most. For art comes to you proposing

frankly to give nothing but the highest quality to your moments as

they pass, and simply for those moments' sake.

Now, if it be true that the application, or rather the misapplication,

of this philosophy led Oscar Wilde to Reading Gaol, it is none the

less true that another application of it led Marius to something like

Christian martyrdom, and Walter Pater himself along an ever loftier and

serener path of spiritual vision.

Nothing short of wilful misconstruction can make of the counsel thus

offered, with so priestly a concern that the writer's exact meaning be

brought home to his reader, other than an inspiration toward a noble

employment of that mysterious opportunity we call life. For those of us,

perhaps more than a few, who have no assurance of the leisure of an

eternity for idleness or experiment, this expansion and elevation of the

doctrine of the moment, carrying a merely sensual and trivial moral in

the Horatian maxim of _carpe diem_, is one thrillingly charged with

exhilaration and sounding a solemn and yet seductive challenge to us to

make the most indeed, but also to make the best, of our little day. To

make the most, and to make the best of life! Those who misinterpret or

misapply Pater forget his constant insistence on the second half of that

precept. We are to get "as many pulsations as possible into the given

time," but we are to be very careful that our use of those pulsations

shall be the finest. Whether or not it is "simply for those moments'

sake," our attempt must be to give "_the highest quality_," remember, to

those "moments as they pass." And who can fail to remark the fastidious

care with which Pater selects various typical interests which he deems

most worthy of dignifying the moment? The senses are, indeed, of natural

right, to have their part; but those interests on which the accent of

Pater's pleading most persuasively falls are not so much the "strange

dyes, strange colours, and curious odours," but rather "the face of

one's friend," ending his subtly musical sentence with a characteristic

shock of simplicity, almost incongruity--or "some mood of passion or

insight or intellectual excitement," or "any contribution to knowledge

that seems by a lifted horizon to set the spirit free for a moment."

There is surely a great gulf fixed between this lofty preoccupation with

great human emotions and high spiritual and intellectual excitements,

and a vulgar gospel of "eat, drink, for tomorrow we die," whether or not

both counsels start out from a realization of "the awful brevity" of our

mortal day. That realization may prompt certain natures to unbridled

sensuality. Doomed to perish as the beasts, they choose, it would seem

with no marked reluctance, to live the life of the beast, a life

apparently not without its satisfactions. But it is as stupid as it is

infamous to pretend that such natures as these find any warrant for

their tragic libertinism in Walter Pater. They may, indeed, have found

aesthetic pleasure in the reading of his prose, but the truth of which

that prose is but the beautiful garment has passed them by. For such

it can hardly be claimed that they have translated into action the

aspiration of this tenderly religious passage:

Given the hardest terms, supposing our days are indeed but a shadow,

even so we may well adorn and beautify, in scrupulous self-respect,

our souls and whatever our souls touch upon--these wonderful bodies,

these material dwelling-places through which the shadows pass

together for a while, the very raiment we wear, our very pastimes,

and the intercourse of society.

Here in this passage from _Marius_ we find, to use Pater's own words

once more, "the spectacle of one of the happiest temperaments coming,

so to speak, to an understanding with the most depressing of theories."

That theory, of course, was the doctrine of the perpetual flux of things

as taught by Aristippus of Cyrene, making a man of the world's practical

application of the old Heraclitean formula, his influence depending on

this, "that in him an abstract doctrine, originally somewhat acrid, had

fallen upon a rich and genial nature well fitted to transform it into a

theory of practice of considerable stimulative power toward a fair

life." Such, too, was Pater's nature, and such his practical usefulness

as what one might call a philosophical artist. Meredith, Emerson,

Browning, and even Carlyle were artists so far related to him and each

other in that each of them wrought a certain optimism, or, at all

events, a courageous and even blithe working theory of life and conduct,

out of the unrelenting facts of existence unflinchingly faced, rather

than ecclesiastically smoothed over--the facts of death and pain and

struggle, and even the cruel mystery that surrounds with darkness and

terror our mortal lot. Each one of them deliberately faced the worst,

and with each, after his own nature, the worst returned to laughter. The

force of all these men was in their artistic or poetic embodiment of

philosophical conceptions, but, had they not been artists and poets,

their philosophical conceptions would have made but little way. And it

is time to recall, what critics preoccupied with his "message" leave

unduly in the background, that Pater was an artist of remarkable power

and fascination, a maker of beautiful things, which, whatever their

philosophical content, have for our spirits the refreshment and

edification which all beauty mysteriously brings us, merely because it

is beauty. _Marius the Epicurean_ is a great and wonderful book, not

merely on account of its teaching, but because it is simply one of the

most _beautiful_ books, perhaps the most beautiful book, written in

English. It is beautiful in many ways. It is beautiful, first of all, in

the uniquely personal quality of its prose, prose which is at once

austere and sensuous, simple at once and elaborate, scientifically exact

and yet mystically suggestive, cool and hushed as sanctuary marble,

sweet-smelling as sanctuary incense; prose that has at once the

qualities of painting and of music, rich in firmly visualized pictures,

yet moving to subtle, half-submerged rhythms, and expressive with every

delicate accent and cadence; prose highly wrought, and yet singularly

surprising one at times with, so to say, sudden innocencies, artless and

instinctive beneath all its sedulous art. It is no longer necessary, as

I hinted above, to fight the battle of this prose. Whether it appeal to

one not, no critic worth attention any longer disparages it as mere

ornate and perfumed verbiage, the elaborate mannerism of a writer hiding

the poverty of his thought beneath a pretentious raiment of decorated

expression. It is understood to be the organic utterance of one with a

vision of the world all his own striving through words, as he best can,

to make that vision visible to others as nearly as possible as he

himself sees it. Pater himself has expounded his theory and practice of

prose, doubtless with a side-thought of self-justification, in various

places up and down his writings, notably in his pregnant essay on

"Style," and perhaps even more persuasively in the chapter called

"Euphuism" in _Marius_. In this last he thus goes to the root of the

matter:

That preoccupation of the _dilettante_ with what might seem mere

details of form, after all, did but serve the purpose of bringing

to the surface, sincerely and in their integrity, certain strong

personal intuitions, a certain vision or apprehension of things

as really being, with important results, thus, rather than

thus--intuitions which the artistic or literary faculty was called

upon to follow, with the exactness of wax or clay, clothing the

model within.

This striving to express the truth that is in him has resulted in a

beauty of prose which for individual quality must be ranked with the

prose of such masters as De Quincey and Lamb, and, to make a not

irrelevant comparison, above the very fine prose of his contemporary

Stevenson, by virtue of its greater personal sincerity.

There is neither space here, nor need, to illustrate this opinion by

quotation, though it may not be amiss, the musical and decorative

qualities of Pater's prose having been so generally dwelt upon, to

remind the reader of the magical simplicities by which it is no less

frequently characterized. Some of his quietest, simplest phrases have a

wonderful evocative power: "the long reign of these quiet Antonines,"

for example; "the thunder which had sounded all day among the hills";

"far into the night, when heavy rain-drops had driven the last lingerers

home"; "Flavian was no more. The little marble chest with its dust and

tears lay cold among the faded flowers." What could be simpler than

these brief sentences, yet how peculiarly suggestive they are;

what immediate pictures they make! And this magical simplicity is

particularly successful in his descriptive passages, notably of natural

effects, effects caught with an instinctively selected touch or two,

an expressive detail, a grey or coloured word. How lightly sketched,

and yet how clearly realized in the imagination, is the ancestral

country-house of Marius's boyhood, "White-Nights," "that exquisite

fragment of a once large and sumptuous villa"--"Two centuries of the

play of the sea-wind were in the velvet of the mosses which lay along

its inaccessible ledges and angles." Take again this picture:

The cottagers still lingered at their doors for a few minutes as the

shadows grew larger, and went to rest early; though there was still

a glow along the road through the shorn corn-fields, and the birds

were still awake about the crumbling grey heights of an old temple.

And again this picture of a wayside inn:

The room in which he sat down to supper, unlike the ordinary

Roman inns at that day, was trim and sweet. The firelight danced

cheerfully upon the polished three-wicked _lucernae_ burning cleanly

with the best oil, upon the whitewashed walls, and the bunches of

scarlet carnations set in glass goblets. The white wine of the place

put before him, of the true colour and flavour of the grape, and

with a ring of delicate foam as it mounted in the cup, had a

reviving edge or freshness he had found in no other wine.

Those who judge of Pater's writing by a few purple passages such as the

famous rhapsody on the _Mona Lisa_, conceiving it as always thus heavy

with narcotic perfume, know but one side of him, and miss his gift

for conveying freshness, his constant happiness in light and air and

particularly running water, "green fields--or children's faces." His

lovely chapter on the temple of Aesculapius seems to be made entirely

of morning light, bubbling springs, and pure mountain air; and the

religious influence of these lustral elements is his constant theme.

For him they have a natural sacramental value, and it is through

them and such other influences that Pater seeks for his hero the

sanctification of the senses and the evolution of the spirit. In his

preoccupation with them, and all things lovely to the eye and to the

intelligence, it is that the secret lies of the singular purity of

atmosphere which pervades his _Marius_, an atmosphere which might be

termed the soul-beauty of the book, as distinct from its, so to say,

body-beauty as beautiful prose.

Considering _Marius_ as a story, a work of imagination, one finds the

same evocative method used in the telling of it, and in the portrayal

of character, as Pater employs in its descriptive passages. Owing

to certain violent, cinematographic methods of story-telling and

character-drawing to which we have become accustomed, it is too often

assumed that stories cannot be told or characters drawn in any other

way. Actually, of course, as many an old masterpiece admonishes us,

there is no one canon in this matter, but, on the contrary, no limit to

the variety of method and manner a creative artist is at liberty to

employ in his imaginative treatment of human life. All one asks is that

the work should live, the characters and scenes appear real to us, and

the story be told. And Pater's _Marius_ entirely satisfies this demand

for those to whom such a pilgrimage of the soul will alone appeal. It is

a real story, no mere German scholar's attempt to animate the dry bones

of his erudition; and the personages and the scenes do actually live

for us, as by some delicate magic of hint and suggestion; and, though at

first they may seem shadowy, they have a curious way of persisting, and,

as it were, growing more and more alive in our memories. The figure of

Marcus Aurelius, for example, though so delicately sketched, is a

masterpiece of historical portraiture, as the pictures of Roman life,

done with so little, seem to me far more convincing than the like

over-elaborated pictures of antiquity, so choked with learned detail,

of Flaubert and of Gautier. Swinburne's famous praise of Gautier's

_Mademoiselle de Maupin_ applies with far greater fitness to Pater's

masterpiece; for, if ever a book deserved to be described as

The golden book of spirit and sense,

The holy writ of beauty,

it is _Marius the Epicurean_.

It has been natural to dwell so long on this "golden book," because

Pater's various gifts are concentrated in it, to make what is, of

course, his masterpiece; though some one or other of these gifts is to

be found employed with greater mastery in other of his writings, notably

that delicate dramatic gift of embodying in a symbolic story certain

subtle states of mind and refinements of temperament which reaches its

perfection in _Imaginary Portraits_, to which the later "Apollo in

Picardy" and "Hippolytus Veiled" properly belong. It is only necessary

to recall the exquisitely austere "Sebastian Van Storck" and the

strangely contrasting Dionysiac "Denys L'Auxerrois" to justify one's

claim for Pater as a creative artist of a rare kind, with a singular and

fascinating power of incarnating a philosophic formula, a formula no

less dry than Spinoza's, or a mood of the human spirit, in living,

breathing types and persuasive tragic fables. This genius for creative

interpretation is the soul and significance of all his criticism. It

gives their value to the studies of _The Renaissance_, but perhaps its

finest flower is to be found in the later _Greek Studies_. To Flavian,

Pater had said in _Marius_, "old mythology seemed as full of untried,

unexpressed motives and interest as human life itself," and with what

marvellous skill and evocative application of learning, he himself later

developed sundry of those "untried, unexpressed motives," as in his

studies of the myths of Dionysus--"The spirit of fire and dew, alive and

leaping in a thousand vines"--and Demeter and Persephone--"the peculiar

creation of country people of a high impressibility, dreaming over their

work in spring or autumn, half consciously touched by a sense of its

sacredness, and a sort of mystery about it"--no reader of Pater needs to

be told. This same creative interpretation gives a like value to his

studies of Plato; and so by virtue of this gift, active throughout the

ten volumes which constitute his collected work, Pater proved himself

to be of the company of the great humanists.

Along with all the other constituents of his work, its sacerdotalism,

its subtle reverie, its sensuous colour and perfume, its marmoreal

austerity, its honeyed music, its frequent preoccupation with the

haunted recesses of thought, there go an endearing homeliness and

simplicity, a deep human tenderness, a gentle friendliness, a something

childlike. He has written of her, "the presence that rose thus so

strangely beside the waters," to whom all experience had been "but as

the sound of lyres and flutes," and he has written of "The Child in the

House." Among all "the strange dyes, strange colours, and curious

odours, and work of the artist's hands," one never misses "the face of

one's friend"; and, in all its wanderings, the soul never strays far

from the white temples of the gods and the sound of running water.

It is by virtue of this combination of humanity, edification, and

aesthetic delight that Walter Pater is unique among the great teachers

and artists of our time.

Vanishing Roads and Other Essays · 第 47 / 64 题