And he asks--

Is the Muse

Fall'n to a thing of Mode, that must each year

Supplant her derelict self of yesteryear?

But he declines to see that the new thing which every generation rightly

asks of every new poet is by no means "mode," or empty fashion of

writing, but the one essential thing, personality, which can never be

twice the same. The reason why you will not find any two poets writing

in the same way is that every genuine poet has to express himself in his

own way, whether it be by offering his own "baseness for a gift," like

Villon, or by building a new heaven and a new hell, like Dante. The

maker of literature puts this new thing into his work, in the mere act

of making it, and it stands out, as plainly as his signature, in every

line he writes. Not to find it is to have fallen upon work which is but

literary, "books made out of books." Walt Whitman thought that such

"pass away."

In that "Apologia" from which we have already quoted, Watson indignantly

denounces those who think "all Art is cold" if "an ardor not of Eros'

lips" is in it, and he attempts to indicate that state of vision in

which man may know--

A deeper transport and a mightier thrill

Than comes of commerce with mortality.

Does he then,

In silence, in the visionary mood,

reach this ecstatic state? If so, it has left no impression on his

poetry. In his poetry there is no vision, only speculation about vision;

no ecstasy, only a reasonable meditation. He speaks of God, "the Whole,"

the "cosmic descant," and the large words remain empty. In such poems as

_The Unknown God_ and _The Father of the Forest_ we seem to have been

taught a lesson, read out in a resonant, well controlled voice; nothing

has been flashed upon us, we have overheard nothing.

And, indeed, of how little of this poetry can we say, in the words of

Mill's great definition, that it has been overheard! Its qualities,

almost, though not quite, at the best, are the qualities of good

oratory. Watson began by writing epigrams, admirable of their kind, with

a more lyric nineteenth century handling of the sharp eighteenth century

weapon. The epigram lies at the root of his work--that is to say,

something essentially of the quality of prose. He is a Pope who has read

Keats. Oratory or the epigram come into his most characteristic

passages, as in the well known and much admired lines on the greatness

and littleness of man:

Magnificent out of the dust we came

And abject from the Spheres.

Now that, striking and effective as it is, is an antithetical ingenuity

which a really fine poet would have gone out of his way to avoid. It is

oratory, not poetry, and it would make good oratory, for there point has

need of all its sharpness; oratory is action.

It is through this oratorical quality of mind that Mr. Watson's style,

though so ordered and measurably, often leaves an impression of having

been deliberately heightened above the level of ordinary speech. The

great things in poetry are song at the core, but externally mere speech.

Think of some actual, anonymous Elizabethan song, and then read the

piece which Watson has called "Song in Imitation of the Elizabethans."

It is not merely that he has not captured the exact note of the period,

but rather copied the note of a later period; such lines as

Idly clanged the sullen portal,

Idly the sepulchral door,

are not direct speech, and can therefore never become pure song. They

are dressed in poetical phraseology, which is a very different thing.

It is curious to find this quality in a writer who is in every sense so

critical. Behind a great deal of Watson's work there is the critical

intelligence, not the poetical temperament. _Wordsworth's Grave_ is

written in discipleship to Matthew Arnold, and it is not Arnold when he

is at his best--the Arnold of _Sohrab and Rustum_ and _The Sick King in

Bokhara_--that Watson has approached, but that half poet, half prose

writer who wrote the Obermann poems. The foundation of those poems is

prose, and a great deal of their substance is no more than rhymed prose.

But at times the poet flashes out, transfiguring material and form for

the moment, before he drops back into prose again. Watson's work is more

on a level; he neither falls so low nor rises so high. But, even more

than with Arnold, the substance of it is criticism, and the thinking and

the style suggest the best kind of prose. Set the poem, with its finely

chosen epithets and phrases--"Impassioned quietude, Thou wast home, Thou

hadst, for weary feet, the gift of rest, the frugal note of Gray," and

the like--beside Pater's essay on Wordsworth, and you will find many

points of resemblance, and not only in the echo of "impassioned

quietude" from Pater's "impassioned contemplation." Compare it with

Matthew Arnold's essay on Wordsworth and you will again find many points

of resemblance, not only in detail, which would not matter, but also in

the whole way of approaching and handling the subject. Does the rhyme

bring in any essential difference between specimens of fine prose and

this poem, so well thought out, so poetically expressed? There lies the

whole question, for if it does not bring such a difference, can it be

accepted as poetry, as an adequate kind of poetry?

Criticism, though it may find place in a poem (as in Shelley's Letter to

Maria Gisborne) can never be the basis of poetry. Pope tried to turn the

current of English poetry into this narrow channel, but the sea-force

soon had its way with the banks and dykes. Watson has tried to revive

that heresy; he has disguised its principles under new terms, but it

remains the same heresy. Poetry is even less a criticism of thought than

it is a "criticism of life," it must be at all points creation, creation

of life, creation of thought, if it is to be poetry in the true sense.

It is to Wordsworth, among many masters, that Watson tells us that he is

most indebted. Wordsworth is not always a safe master, and it is

apparently from him that Mr. Watson has accepted the main principles of

his blank verse. Wordsworth's blank verse was more often bad than good;

it was bad on principle, and good by the grace of a not infrequent

inspiration. At its best, it is not among the great specimens of blank

verse, or not for more than a very few lines at a time. It is without

vitality, it is without that freedom in beauty which can come from

vitality alone. Watson has learned from Wordsworth that it is possible

to write grave and impressive lines, sweeping up to fine perorations, in

which the pauses are measured, not by the vital pulses of the mood, but

by a conscious, cultivated method. Some of Wordsworth's blank verse "The

Prelude," though in itself tame and inefficient, takes hold of the

reader through a personal warmth which makes him almost forget that he

is reading verse at all. But we never feel personal warmth in Mr.

Watson; he succeeds or fails as an artificer, and as an artificer only.

It is probably not too much to say that there is not a cadence in his

verse which has not been heard before. By what miracle it is that out of

the same number and order of syllables no two cadences of Shakespeare

and of Browning, of Keats and of Herrick, of Crashaw and of Blake, can

be precisely matched no man knows or will ever know--least of all the

poet himself. He writes what comes to him, and he may work on his

writing until hardly a word of the original stuff remains; and with all

his care, or in spite of it, the thing turns doggedly into his own

manner of speech, and comes to us with a cadence that we have never

heard before. He may have read much or little, and it will make barely

an appreciable difference. The music that is not learned in books comes

from some unknown source which is as variable as the sea or the wind.

Music learned from books, however much beauty may be breathed into it by

the singer, keeps the taint of its source about it. It is by such music

that the literary artist, not the artist in literature, is known.

William Watson's _Odes and Other Poems_ is remarkable for precisely the

qualities which have distinguished his work since the time when, in

_Wordsworth's Grave_, he first elaborated a manner of his own. That

manner has some of the qualities of eighteenth century verse--its

sobriety, its strictness, its intellectual and critical interests; and

it also has certain of the richer and more emotional elements of the

nineteenth century revival of the Elizabethan passion, and splendor. The

reader is reminded of Gray, of Wordsworth, of Matthew Arnold, at moments

of Keats and of Rossetti. In spite of occasional and unaccountable

blemishes, Watson's work is, in the main, the most careful work of any

of the younger poets. Nor is it lacking in a poetic impulse. It does not

seem to us that this impulse is a very strong one, or one of special

originality, but it is there, undoubtedly; and Watson's verse, unlike

that of most of the people now writing, justifies its existence. Take,

for instance, these opening lines from the ode _To Arthur Christopher

Benson_:

In that grave shade august

That round your Eton clings,

To you the centuries must

Be visible corporate things

And the high Past appear

Affably real and near,

For all its grandiose airs, caught from the mien of

Kings.

The new age stands as yet

Half built against the sky

Open to every threat

Of storms that clamor by:

Scaffolding veils the walls,

And dim dust floats and falls,

As, moving to and fro, their tasks the masons ply.

But changeless and complete,

Rise unperturbed and vast,

Above our din and heat,

The turrets of the Past,

Mute as that city asleep,

Lulled with enchantments deep,

Far in Arabian dreamland built where all things

last.

The grave and equable sweep of this verse, so unlike most of the hot and

flurried rhyming of contemporaries, has the excellence of form which

gives adequate expression to a really poetic conception. Watson takes a

very serious view of things, except in a few attempts at satire or

playfulness, which are not quite fortunate either in idea or in

execution. He has the laudable desire to enter into competition with the

great masters on their own ground. And the result is by no means

ludicrous, as it would be with most people. Only it is a little as if

the accomplished copyist were to challenge comparison with the picture

which he has, after all, copied. Work done in the manner, and under the

influence, of previous writers may indeed, under certain circumstances,

attain the virtue of originality; but only under certain circumstances.

Chatterton, for instance, was original only when he copied, or when he

fancied he was copying; Keats was absolutely himself even at the period

when his form was entirely imitative. The personality of some men can

find no home in the present, can wear no dress of modern fashion; can

express itself only by a return to the ways of speech of an earlier age.

But this sort of spiritual nostalgia can only become effective when it

is a very deep and individual instinct, and not merely a general

literary sympathy. Watson has learned more from his masters than he has

brought to them. We have read his latest book with real appreciation of

its many admirable qualities, but, on closing it, we have no more

definite idea of Watson himself, of what he really is, apart from what

he chooses to express, than we had before opening it. And yet the

greater part of the book, in one sense, is quite personal. He tells us

what he thought of Stevenson's _Catriona_, how he felt in Richmond Park,

and of his friendly regard for one or two estimable men of letters. But

the real man, the real point of view, the outlook on life, the deeper

human sympathies: what do we learn of these? There is, indeed, one poem,

among the finest in the book, in which a touch of more acute personal

feeling gives a more intimate thrill to the verse--the poem called _Vita

Nuova_, of which we may quote the greater part:

O ancient streams, O far-descended woods

Full of the fluttering of melodious souls;

O hills and valleys that adorn yourselves

In solemn jubilation; winds and clouds,

Ocean and land in stormy nuptials clasped,

And all exuberant creatures that acclaim

The Earth's divine renewal: lo, I too

With yours would mingle somewhat of glad song.

I too have come through wintry terrors--yea,

Through tempest and through cataclysm of soul

Have come, and am delivered. Me the Spring

Me also, dimly with new life hath touched,

And with regenerate hope, the salt of life;

And I would dedicate these thankful tears

To whatsoever Power beneficent,

Veiled though his countenance, undivulged his thought,

Hath led me from the haunted darkness forth

Into the gracious air and vernal morn,

And suffers me to know my spirit a note

Of this great chorus, one with bird and stream

And voiceful mountain,--nay, a string, how jarred

And all but broken! of that lyre of life

Whereon himself, the master harp-player.

Resolving all its mortal dissonance

To one immortal and most perfect strain,

Harps without pause, building with song the world.

But this poem stands alone in the volume as an expression of very

interesting personal feeling, the rest being mainly concerned with

generalities.

Like all Watson's volumes of verse, these _Odes and Other Poems_ contain

some excellent literary criticism, conveyed in the neatest and briefest

fashion possible. In fact, Watson's verse is only too full of sane and

measured criticism--an excellent quality no doubt, but hardly one quite

compatible with poetry of a high order. But how fine, how exact, how

discriminating, is this piece of criticism, for instance, in verse!

Forget not, brother singer! that though Prose

Can never be too truthful or too wise,

Song is not Truth, not Wisdom, but the rose

Upon Truth's lips, the light in Wisdom's eyes.

It was in the epigram that Watson first did finished work, and his most

typical work is certainly to be found in forms more or less akin to the

epigram; in the sonnet, for example. There are so many good sonnets in

this volume that choice is difficult; here is one called "Night on

Curbar Edge":

No echo of man's life pursues my ears;

Nothing disputes this Desolation's reign;

Change comes not, this dread temple to profane,

Where time by aeons reckons, not by years,

Its patient form one crag, sole stranded, rears,

Type of whate'er is destined to remain

While yon still host encamped on night's waste

plain

Keeps armed watch, a million quivering spears,

Hushed are the wild and wing'd lives of the moor;

The sleeping sheep nestle 'neath ruined wall,

Or unhewn stones in random concourse hurled;

Solitude, sleepless, listens at Fate's door;

And there is built and 'stablisht over all

Tremendous silence, older than the world.

The breadth of phrasing here is noticeable; and it is by such qualities

as this, as well as by the careful accuracy with which every note is

produced, that Watson is distinguished alike from older men of the type

of Alfred Austin, and from younger men of such varying capacities as

John Davidson and Yeats. If he has not the making of a great poet, he is

already an accomplished poet; and if he does not possess the highest

qualities, he possesses several of the secondary qualities in the

highest degree.

Watson's _Ode on the Day of Coronation of King Edward the Seventh_ is a

fine piece of verse writing, and can hardly fail to remind the reader of

great poetry. It is constructed with care, it flows, it has gravity, an

air of amplitude, many striking single lines, and its sentiments are

unexceptionable. When we read such lines as these:

All these, O King, from their seclusion dread,

And guarded palace of eternity,

Mix in thy pageant with phantasmal tread,

Hear the long waves of acclamation roll,

And with yet mightier silence marshal thee

To the awful throne thou hast inherited----

we feel that this is at least workman-like work, written by a man who

has studied great masters, and who takes himself and his art seriously.

There is not an undignified line in the whole poem, nor a break in the

slow, deliberate movement. Watson has style, he is never facile or

common. He has frequent felicities of phrase, but he subordinates

separate effects to the effect of the whole, and he is almost the only

living writer of verse of whom this could be said. His ode is

excellently made, from every external point of view. Yet, after reading

it over and over, with a full recognition of its technical qualities, we

are unable to accept it as genuine poetry, as the equal of the thing

which it resembles.

Great poetry is not often written for official occasions, but that it

can be so written we need only turn to Marvell's _Horatian Ode upon

Cromwell's Return from Ireland_ to realize. Watson looks instinctively

to public events for his inspiration, and there is something in his

temper of mind and of style which seems to set him naturally apart as a

commentator upon the destinies of nations. He has never put any vital

part of himself into his work; he has told us nothing of what he is when

he is not a writer. All his utterances have been themselves official,

the guarded statement of just so much of his own thoughts and feelings

as he cares to betray to the public. His kind is rather critical than

creative, and it was by his epigrams that he first attracted attention.

His technique is so accomplished that he seems very often to be thinking

only of what he is saying, when it is evident, on a closer examination,

that he is thinking much more of how he is saying it. For the poet who

concerns himself with public events this might seem to be a useful part

of his poetic equipment. Court ceremonies demand court dress.

Undoubtedly, but the art of the courtier requires him to forget that he

is dressed for an occasion, to forget everything but the occasion.

Throughout the whole of his coronation ode Watson never forgets that he

is celebrating an important ceremony. His costume is perfectly adjusted,

he wears it with grace and dignity; his elocution, as he delivers his

lines, is a model of clearness and discreet emphasis. Everything that he

says is perfectly appropriate; good taste can go no further. But the

occasion itself, the meaning, the emotion, of the occasion? That does

not come into the poem; the poem tells us all about it.

Now look at Marvell's ode, and forget for the moment that it is a

masterpiece of poetry. What a passion fires the hard, convincing

thought! How the mere logic holds the attention! Every word lives, and

the cadences (creating a new form for themselves) do but follow the

motions of the writer's bright, controlling energy. It is impossible to

read the lines aloud without a feeling of exultation. In Watson's ode

there is not a breath of life; what is said--admirable and sensible, and

at times poetically conceived as it is--comes with no impetus from the

mind that has conceived it coldly. And it is to be noted that, though

thought and expression are fitted together with great skill and

precision, the expression is always rather above the pitch of the

thought. Take these lines:

O doom of overlordships! to decay

First at the heart, the eye scarce dimmed at all;

Or perish of much cumber and array,

The burdening robe of empire, and its pall;

Or, of voluptuous hours the wanton prey;

Die of the poisons that most sweetly slay;

Or, from insensate height,

With prodigies, with light

Of trailing angers on the monstrous night,

Magnificently fall.

There we find expression strained to a point to which the thought has

not attained. In other words, we find rhetoric. Weight and resonance of

verse do but drag down and deafen that which they should uplift and

sound abroad, when, instead of being attendants upon greatness, they

attempt to replace it.

Dramatis Personæ · 第 32 / 54 题