He made progress in his profession and was called to argue cases

at New Haven and before the supreme court at Boston. The intervals

of legal business were given to poetry. Bryant’s father urged him

to contribute to the new ‘North American Review and Miscellaneous

Journal,’ the editor of which was an old friend. The young lawyer-poet

seeming indifferent to the suggestion, Doctor Bryant carried with

him to Boston two pieces he had unearthed among his son’s papers,

namely, ‘Thanatopsis’ in its first form, and ‘A Fragment’ now called

‘Inscription at the Entrance of a Wood.’ Both were printed in the

‘Review’ for September, 1817. Other poems followed, together with three

prose essays (on ‘American Poetry,’ on ‘The Happy Temperament,’ and on

the use of ‘Trisyllabic Feet in Iambic Verse’). He also contributed

poems to ‘The Idle Man,’ Richard Henry Dana’s magazine, and the ‘United

States Literary Gazette.’

In June, 1821, Bryant married Miss Frances Fairchild of Great

Barrington. In April of this year he had been invited to give ‘the

usual poetic address’ before the Phi Beta Kappa Society at Harvard.

‘The Ages’ was written for this occasion and publicly read on August

30. At the instance of his Boston friends, Bryant printed ‘The Ages’

with seven other pieces in a little pamphlet entitled _Poems_.

Never in love with the law, the poet began to regard it with aversion.

He was intellectually restless and took to play-writing. A farce,

‘The Heroes,’ in ridicule of duelling, was sent to his friends, the

Sedgwicks, in New York, who admitted its merits but doubted its chances

of success on the stage, Bryant, at the suggestion of Henry Sedgwick,

made two or three visits to the city in search of congenial work. He

thought he had found it when he undertook to edit ‘The New York Review

and Athenæum Magazine,’ a periodical made by amalgamating ‘The Atlantic

Magazine’ with the older ‘Literary Review.’ Bryant wrote to a friend

that it was a livelihood, ‘and a livelihood is all I got from the law.’

The editor of the ‘Review’ was active in various ways. He studied the

Romance languages, gave a course of lectures on poetry before the

Athenæum Society (1825), and annual courses on mythology before the

National Academy of the Arts of Design (1826–31). He was amused with

New York life; Great Barrington had not been amusing. He published

verse and prose in his own review and helped Sands and Verplanck edit

their annual, ‘The Talisman.’ Somewhat later he edited _Tales of the

Glauber Spa_ (1832), the joint work of Sands, Leggett, Paulding, Miss

Sedgwick, and himself.[1]

The ‘Review’ suffered from changes in the business management, and

Bryant’s prospects became gloomy. At this juncture (1826) he was

invited to act as assistant to William Coleman, editor of the ‘New

York Evening Post.’ In 1828 he became ‘a small proprietor in the

establishment,’ and when Coleman died (July, 1829) Bryant assumed the

post of editor-in-chief and engaged as his assistant William Leggett, a

young New Yorker who had shown a marked ability in conducting a weekly

journal called ‘The Critic.’ ‘I like politics no better than you do’

(Bryant had written to Dana), ‘but ... politics and a bellyfull are

better than poetry and starvation.’

His theory of the journalist’s function is well known. ‘He regarded

himself as a trustee for the public.’[2] Party was much, and Bryant was

a strong Democrat, but the people were greater than party.

Bryant’s handling of public questions belongs to political history. His

lifelong fight against a protective tariff, his defence of Jackson’s

policy respecting nullification and the United States Bank, his

maintenance of the right to discuss slavery as freely as any other

subject about which there is a difference of opinion, his insistence

that the question of giving the franchise to negroes in the state

of New York be settled on its merits and as a local matter with

which neither Abolitionist nor slave-holder had anything to do, his

determined stand against the annexation of Texas and enlargement of

the area of slavery, his position on a multitude of questions which

in his life as a public censor he found it necessary to defend or to

attack--are fully set forth in the two biographies by his coadjutors.

From 1856 Bryant acted with the Republican party, giving his cordial

support to Frémont and to Lincoln. He was a presidential elector in

1861. He advocated the election of Grant in 1868, and again in 1872,

the latter time reluctantly ‘as the best thing attainable in the

circumstances.’

To secure the independence and detachment that would enable him to

judge measures fairly, Bryant avoided intercourse with public men, kept

away from Washington, took no office, and was otherwise singular. In

this way he at least secured a free pen. As to the tone of the comments

on men in public life, Bryant approved the theory of a brother

editor who maintained that nothing should be said which would make it

impossible for him who wrote and him who was written about to meet at

the same dinner-table the next day. It is not pretended, however, that

he was uniformly controlled by this theory. What was the prevailing

idea of his journalistic manner may be known from Felton’s review of

_The Fountain_, in which he marvels that these beautiful poems can

be the work of one ‘who deals with wrath, and dips his pen daily in

bitterness and hate....’

Since 1821 no collection of Bryant’s verse had been made. Then after

ten years he gathered together eighty-nine pieces, including the eight

which had appeared in the pamphlet of 1821, and issued them as _Poems_,

1832. Through the friendly offices of Irving the book was reprinted

in England with a dedicatory letter to Samuel Rogers. Notwithstanding

favorable notices, both English and American, Bryant was despondent.

‘Poetic wares,’ he said, ‘are not for the market of the present day ...

mankind are occupied with politics, railroads, and steamboats.’ But

he found it necessary to reprint the volume in 1834 (with additional

poems), and again in 1836.

His work in prose and verse after 1839 includes _The Fountain and

Other Poems_, 1842; _The White-Footed Deer and Other Poems_, 1844;

_Poems_, 1847; _Letters of a Traveller_, 1850; _Poems_, 1854; _Letters

from Spain_, 1859; _Thirty Poems_, 1864; _Letters from the East_,

1869; _The Iliad of Homer, translated into English blank verse_, 1870;

_The Odyssey_, 1871–72; _Orations and Addresses_, 1873; _The Flood of

Tears_, 1878.

The introduction to the _Library of Poetry and Song_ is from Bryant’s

pen, as is also the preface to E. A. Duyckinck’s (still unpublished)

edition of Shakespeare. His name appears as one of the authors of _A

Popular History of the United States_ (1876), together with that of

Sydney Howard Gay, on whom fell the burden of the actual writing. It is

unfortunate that no adequate reprint of Bryant’s political leaders has

been made. As much ought to be done for him as Sedgwick did for Leggett.

Bryant found relief from the strain of editorial work in foreign

travel. He was abroad with his family in 1834–36, visiting France,

Italy, and Germany. He did his sight-seeing deliberately, spending a

month in Rome, two months at Florence, three months in Munich, and

so on. He had been four months at Heidelberg, when, says one of his

biographers (in phrases which he never learned from Bryant), ‘His

studious sojourn at this renowned seat of learning was interrupted by

intelligence of the dangerous illness of his editorial colleague,’ and

he returned home. During a visit to England in 1845 Bryant met Rogers,

Moore, Herschel, Hallam, and Spedding, heard one of his own poems

quoted at a Corn Law meeting, where among the speakers were Cobden and

Bright, and carried a letter of introduction to Wordsworth from Henry

Crabb Robinson. He made yet other journeys to Europe and to the East.

Notable among Bryant’s public addresses were the orations on Cooper

(1852) and Irving (1860) delivered before the New York Historical

Society. He was a founder and the third president of the Century

Association, first president of the New York Homœopathic Society,

president of the American Free Trade League, and member of literary

and historical societies innumerable. He held no public office, but

as time went on it might almost be said that an office was created

for him--that of Representative American. He seemed the incarnation

of virtues popularly supposed to have survived from an older and

simpler time. He was a great public character. The word venerable

acquired a new meaning as one reflected on the career of this eminent

citizen who was born when Washington was president, who as a boy had

written satires on Jefferson, and who as a man had discussed political

questions from the administration of John Quincy Adams to that of

Hayes. Other men were as old as he, Bryant seemed to have lived longer.

‘And when at last he fell, he fell as the granite column falls, smitten

from without, but sound within.’[3] His death was the result of an

accident. He gave the address at the unveiling of the statue of

Mazzini in Central Park. Though wearied with the exertion and almost

overcome by the heat, he was able to walk to the house of a friend.

As he was about entering the door he fell backward, striking his head

violently against the stone step. He never recovered from the effects

of this fall, and died on June 12, 1878.

II

BRYANT’S CHARACTER

We seldom think of Bryant other than as he appears in the Sarony

photograph of 1873. With the snowy beard, the furrowed brow, the sunken

but keen eyes, a cloak thrown about the shoulders, he is the ideal poet

of popular imagination. Thus must he have looked when he wrote ‘The

Flood of Years,’ and it is difficult to realize that he did not look

thus when he wrote ‘Thanatopsis.’ We do not readily picture Bryant as

young or even middle-aged.

Parke Godwin saw him first about 1837. He had a ‘wearied, almost

saturnine expression of countenance.’ He was spare in figure, of medium

height, clean shaven, and had an ‘unusually large head.’ He spoke with

decision, but could not be called a copious talker. His voice was

noticeably sweet, his choice of words and accuracy of pronunciation

remarkable. When anything was said to awaken mirth, his eyes gleamed

with ‘a singular radiance and a short, quick, staccato but hearty

laugh followed.’ He was more sociable when his wife and daughters were

present than at other times. Bryant’s reserve was always a conspicuous

trait.

Under that prim exterior lurked fire and passion. ‘In court he often

lost his self-control.’ It was thought that Bryant might keep a promise

he once made of thrashing a legal opponent within an inch of his life

(‘if he ever says that again’) though the man was twice his size. Not

long after he became editor-in-chief of the ‘Post’ Bryant cowhided a

journalistic adversary who had bestowed upon him by name, ‘the most

insulting epithet that can be applied to a human being.’[4] It was the

only time his well-schooled temper outwitted him.

His friendships were strong and abiding. He had an inflexible will and

a keen sense of justice, so keen that it drove him out of the law. No

thought of personal ease or advantage could turn him from a course he

had mapped out as right. He was generous. His benefactions were many

and judicious, and the manner of their bestowal as unpretending as

possible.

Bryant’s ‘unassailable dignity’ was a marked trait of character. He

refused an invitation to a dinner given Charles Dickens by a ‘prominent

citizen’ of New York. ‘That man,’ said Bryant, ‘has known me for

years without asking me to his house, and I am not going to be made a

stool-pigeon to attract birds of passage that may be flying about.’

He was perfectly simple-minded, incapable of assuming the air of famous

poet or successful man of the world. Doubtless he relished praise, but

he had an adroit way of putting compliments to one side, tempering the

gratitude he really felt with an ironical humor.

III

THE LITERARY CRAFTSMAN

Bryant was a deliberate and fastidious writer. His literary executors

could never have said of him that they found ‘neither blot nor erasure

among his papers.’ His copy, written on the backs of old letters

or rejected manuscripts, was a wilderness of interlineations and

corrections, and often hard to decipher.

Famous as he was for correctness, it seems a mere debauch of eulogy to

affirm that all of Bryant’s contributions to the ‘Evening Post’ do not

contain ‘as many erroneous or defective forms of expression’ as ‘can be

found in the first ten numbers of the _Spectator_.’ But there is little

danger of overestimating his influence on the English of journalism

during the forty years and more that he set the example of a high

standard of daily writing. He was sparing of advice, though in earlier

days he could not always conquer the temptation to amuse himself over

the English of his brother editors.[5] It has been denied that he had

any part in compiling the famous ‘index expurgatorius,’ but it is not

unreasonable to suppose that this list, embodying traditions of the

editorial office, had his approval. Bryant was for directness and

precision in writing. Ideas must stand on their merits, if they have

them, for such phrasing will define them perfectly.

His prose style may be studied in his books of travel and his

addresses. The literary characteristic of _Letters of a Traveller_ and

its companion volumes is excessive plainness, a homely quality like

that of a village pedagogue careful not to make mistakes. One is often

reminded of the honest home-spun prose of Henry Wansey’s _Excursion to

the United States_.

Turning to the volume of _Orations and Addresses_, the reader finds

himself in another world. Bryant’s memorial orations are among the

best of their kind, stately, uplifting, and at times even majestic.

They belong to a type of composition which lies midway between oratory

and literature and unites certain characteristics of each. Written

primarily to be heard, and adapted to public utterance, they are also

meant to be read. They must stand the test of the ear and then that of

the eye. The listener must find his account in them as they come from

the lips of the orator, and he who afterward turns at leisure the pages

of the printed report must be satisfied. Bryant’s speeches are markedly

‘literary;’ and though oratorical they are wholly free from bombast.

Poet though he was, he built no cloud-capped towers of rhetoric.

Coming now to his verse, we find that his poetic flights, though lofty,

were neither frequent nor long continued. Apparently he was incapable

of writing much or often. This seems true even after allowance is made

for his busy and exacting life as a journalist. For years together he

composed but a few lines in each year.

His theory fitted his own limitations. Bryant maintained that there is

no such thing as a long poem, that what are commonly called long poems

are in reality a succession of short poems united by poetical links.

The paradox grows out of the vagueness attaching to the words ‘length’

and ‘poem.’ Exactly what a poem is, we shall never know. That is a

shadowy line which divides poetry from verse. And there is no term so

unmeaning as length. When does a poem begin to be long--is it when the

poet has achieved a hundred verses or a thousand, when he has written

six cantos or twelve?

To say, as Bryant is reported to have said, that ‘a long poem is no

more conceivable than a long ecstasy,’ is to make all poetry dependent

on an ecstatic condition. And it reduces all poetic temperaments to the

same level. Why may not poetry be an outcome of ‘the true enthusiasm

that burns long’?

Bryant showed skill in handling a variety of metrical forms; it is

unsafe to say that he excelled only in blank verse. With declared

partisanship for the short poem, he nevertheless did not cultivate the

sonnet. Up to the time he was fifty-eight years of age he had written

but twelve, and for some of these he apologized, saying, ‘they are

rather poems in fourteen lines than sonnets.’

Comparing the length of his life with the slenderness of his poetical

product, we are tempted to bring against this eminent man the charge

of wilful unproductiveness. This reluctance, or inertia, or whatever

it may be called, has helped to give the impression of a lack of

spontaneity. We are aware of the effort through the very exactness

with which the thing has been done. Bryant resembled certain pianists

who plead as excuse for not playing, a lack of recent practice. When

after repeated urgings one of the reluctant brotherhood ‘consents to

favor us,’ he plays with precision enough but rarely with abandon. The

conscious and over-solicitous artist shows in every note.

If much writing has its drawbacks, it also has its value. And the poet

who sings frequently cannot offer as a reason for not performing, the

excuse that his lyre has not been out of the case for weeks, and that

in all probability a string is broken.

IV

THE POET

The fine stanzas entitled ‘The Poet’ contain Bryant’s theory of his

art. The framing of a deathless poem is not the pastime of a drowsy

summer’s day.

No smooth array of phrase,

Artfully sought and ordered though it be,

Which the cold rhymer lays

Upon his page with languid industry,

Can wake the listless pulse to livelier speed,

Or fill with sudden tears the eyes that read.

The secret wouldst thou know

To touch the heart or fire the blood at will?

Let thine own eyes o’erflow;

Let thy lips quiver with the passionate thrill;

Seize the great thought, ere yet its power be past,

And bind, in words, the fleet emotion fast.

* * * * *

Yet let no empty gust

Of passion find an utterance in thy lay,

A blast that whirls the dust

Along the howling street and dies away;

But feelings of calm power and mighty sweep,

Like currents journeying through the windless deep.

This is flat contradiction of the idea that entirely self-conscious and

self-controlled art can avail to move the reader. Bryant pleads for

deepest feeling in exercise of the poetic function; it is more than

important, it is indispensable. Of that striking poem ‘The Tides,’ he

said ‘it was written with a certain awe upon me which made me hope that

there might be something in it.’ The poem proved to be one of Bryant’s

noblest conceptions. Yet a lady of ‘judgment’ told one of Bryant’s

friends, who of course told him, that she did not think there was much

in it.

Nature appeals to Bryant in her broad and massive aspects. ‘The

Prairies’ is an illustration. Gazing on the ‘encircling vastness’ for

the first time, the heart swells and the eye dilates in an effort to

comprehend it:--

Lo! they stretch,

In airy undulations, far away,

As if the ocean, in his gentlest swell,

Stood still, with all his rounded billows fixed,

And motionless forever.

As the poet looks abroad over the vast and glowing fields, there sweeps

by him a vision of the races that have peopled these solitudes and

perished to make room for races to come. It is magnificent even if

it is not scientific. In the sense it gives of the spaciousness of

the prairies with the myriad sounds of life projected on the great

elemental silence, it is a true American poem.

‘A Hymn of the Sea’ is another illustration of that largeness of view

characteristic of Bryant. Each thought is lofty and far-reaching. The

cloud that rises from the ‘realm of rain’ shadows whole countries, the

tornado wrecks a fleet, whirling the vast hulks ‘like chaff upon the

waves:’--

These restless surges eat away the shores

Of earth’s old continents; the fertile plain

Welters in shallows, headlands crumble down,

And the tide drifts the sea-sand in the streets

Of the drowned city.

He conveys the idea not only of spaciousness but of endless duration in

the lines describing the coral worm laying his ‘mighty reefs,’ toiling

from ‘age to age’ until

His bulwarks overtop the brine, and check

The long wave rolling from the southern pole

To break upon Japan.

Certain lines in ‘A Forest Hymn’ are also remarkable for the sense they

give of vast reaches of time, stretching not forward but backward into

eternity:--

These lofty trees

Wave not less proudly that their ancestors

Moulder beneath them. Oh, there is not lost

One of earth’s charms: upon her bosom yet,

After the flight of untold centuries,

The freshness of her far beginning lies

And yet shall lie.

The ‘Song of the Stars,’ though not one of Bryant’s happiest

poems,--the hypercritical reader feeling that the ‘orbs of beauty’ and

‘spheres of flame’ might have made a more appropriate metrical choice

for their song,--shows none the less the poet’s strength in dealing

with nature in the large. The lines ‘To a Waterfowl’ are magical in

part by virtue of the impression they make of immense distance. With

the poet’s penetrating vision we can see the solitary way through the

rosy depths, the pathless coast, and the one bit of life in

The desert and illimitable air.

Bryant’s mind readily lifts itself from the minute to the massive, as

in the poem ‘Summer Wind,’ a fine example of the crescendo effects he

knew so well how to produce. In a few lines he gives the sensation

of heat, closeness, exhaustion, and pictures the plants drooping in

a stillness broken only by the ‘faint and interrupted murmur of the

bee.’ His thought then sweeps upward to the wooded hills towering in

scorching heat and dazzling light, and then still higher to the bright

clouds,

Motionless pillars of the brazen heaven--

Their bases on the mountains--their white tops

Shining in the far ether....

The poet never wearies of this majestic pageantry of the natural world.

In ‘The Firmament,’ in ‘The Hurricane’ (imitated from Heredia), in

‘Monument Mountain,’ his chief thought is to translate the reader to

his own lofty vantage-ground.

But Nature is not merely a spectacle, it has a power to heal and

invigorate. Life loses its pettiness when one leaves the city and

seeks the forest. The holy men who hid themselves ‘deep in the woody

wilderness’ perhaps did not well--

But let me often to these solitudes

Retire, and in thy presence reassure

My feeble virtue. Here its enemies,

The passions, at thy plainer footsteps shrink

And tremble and are still.

The poet finds inspiration not alone in the terror of the storm, the

majesty of the forest, the gray waste of ocean, the mystery of the

night of stars, but in the humbler things, the rivulet by which he

played as a child, the violet growing on its bank, the hum of bees,

the notes of hang-bird and wren, the gossip of swallows, and the gay

chirp of the ground squirrel. ‘The Yellow Violet’ and the lines ‘To the

Fringed Gentian’ spring from this love of the unobtrusive charms of

Nature. Less familiar than these, but a faultless example of Bryant’s

art, is ‘The Painted Cup:’--

... tell me not

That these bright chalices were tinted thus

To hold the dew for fairies, when they meet

On moonlight evenings in the hazel bowers,

And dance till they are thirsty.

The poet will not call up ‘faded fancies of an ‘elder world.’ If the

fresh savannahs must be peopled with creatures of imagination, it may

be done without borrowing European elves:--

Let then the gentle Manitou of flowers,

Lingering among the bloomy waste he loves,

Though all his swarthy worshippers are gone--

Slender and small, his rounded cheek all brown

And ruddy with the sunshine; let him come

On summer mornings, when the blossoms wake,

And part with little hands the spiky grass,

And touching, with his cherry lips, the edge

Of these bright beakers, drain the gathered dew.

Bryant wrote poems of freedom. The earlier of these, ‘The Song of

the Greek Amazon,’ the ‘Massacre at Scio,’ the ‘Greek Partisan,’ and

‘Italy,’ voice his sympathy with the oppressed nations of the Old

World, the ‘struggling multitude of states,’ that ‘writhe in shackles.’

American literary masters · 第 2 / 26 段