He was a monomaniac on plagiarism, forever raising the cry of ‘Stop

thief.’ Yet Poe, like Molière, whom he resembled in no other

particular, ‘took his own’ whenever it pleased him to do so, and he was

not over solicitous to advertise his sources. He was in the right. If

poets advertised their sources, what would be left for the commentators

to do? Poe hinted that Hawthorne appropriated his ideas, and he

flatly accused Longfellow of so doing. He was punished grotesquely,

for Chivers, the author of _Eonchs of Ruby_, accused Poe (after the

latter’s death, when it was quite safe to do so) of getting many of his

best ideas from Chivers.

VI

THE POET

Poe’s claim to mastership in verse rests on a handful of lyrics

distinguished for exquisite melody and a haunting beauty of phrase.

That part of the public which estimates a poet by such pieces as find

their way into anthologies regards Poe primarily as the author of ‘The

Bells’ and ‘The Raven.’ If popularity were the final test of merit,

these strikingly original performances would indeed crown his work.

After sixty years, neither has lost in appreciable degree the magical

charm it exerted when first the weird melody fell upon the ear. Each

is hackneyed beyond description; each has been parodied unmercifully,

murdered by raw elocutionists, and worse than murdered by generations

of school-children droning from their readers, about the ‘midnight

dreary’ and the ‘Runic rhyme.’ But it is yet possible to restore in a

measure the feeling of astonished delight with which lovers of poetry

greeted the advent of these studies in the musical power of words.

The practical and earnest soul will find little to comfort him in the

poetry of Poe. It teaches nothing, emphasizes no moral, never inspires

to action. The strange unearthly melodies must be enjoyed for the

reason that they are strange and unearthly and melodious. The genius of

the poet has travelled

By a route obscure and lonely,

Haunted by ill angels only,

Where an Eidolon, named Night,

On a black throne reigns upright,

and we can well believe that it comes

From an ultimate dim Thule,--

From a wild weird clime that lieth, sublime,

Out of Space--out of Time.

Wholly out of space and time was he who wrote ‘Dreamland,’ ‘The City

in the Sea,’ ‘The Haunted Palace,’ ‘Israfel,’ ‘The Sleeper,’ and

‘Ulalume.’ It is idle to ask of these poems something they do not

pretend to give, and it can hardly be other than uncritical to describe

them as ‘very superficial.’ They are strange exotic flowers blooming

under conditions the most adverse, a fresh proof that genius is

independent of place and time.

* * * * *

In Poe’s work as a whole there is unquestionably too much of brooding

over death, the grave, mere physical horrors. Since his genius lay that

way, he must be accepted as he was. But it is permitted to regret, if

not the thing in itself (the domain of art being wide), at least the

excess. Poe speaks of certain themes which are ‘too entirely horrible

for the purposes of legitimate fiction. These the mere romanticist must

eschew, if he do not wish to offend or to disgust.’ And having laid

down this doctrine, Poe goes on to relate the story of ‘The Premature

Burial.’ It turns out a vision. But the narrator affirms that he was

cured by the experience, that he read no more ‘bugaboo tales--_such as

this_. In short I became a new man and lived a man’s life.’ Without

assuming that Poe spoke wholly from the autobiographical point of view,

we may believe the passage to contain a measure of his actual thought.

We may claim for him a more important place in our literature than do

his radical admirers whose fervent eulogy too often takes the form

of the contention that Poe was greater than this or that American

man of letters. His strong, sombre genius saved the literature from

any danger of uniformity, relieved it at once and forever from the

possible charge of colorlessness. That strangeness of flavor which a

late distinguished critic notes as a mark of genius is imparted by

Poe’s work to our literary product as a whole. Here indeed was ‘the

blossoming of the aloe.’

FOOTNOTES:

[25] ‘... There is one thing I am anxious to caution you against,

& which has been a great enemy to our family, I hope,

however, in yr case, it may prove unnecessary, “A too free

use of the Bottle” ...’ William Poe to E. A. Poe, 15th June,

1843. Harrison’s _Poe_, vol. ii, p. 143.

[26] G. E. Woodberry.

[27] E. C. Stedman.

[28] ‘Reply to “Outis.”’

VIII

_Henry Wadsworth Longfellow_

REFERENCES:

=Samuel Longfellow=: _Life of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow_, second

edition, 1886, and _Final Memorials of ... Longfellow_, 1887.

=W. D. Howells=: _Literary Friends and Acquaintance_, 1900.

=G. R. Carpenter=: _Henry Wadsworth Longfellow_, ‘Beacon

Biographies,’ 1901.

=T. W. Higginson=: _Henry Wadsworth Longfellow_, ‘American Men of

Letters,’ 1902.

I

HIS LIFE

The Longfellows are descendants of William Longfellow of Horsforth

in Yorkshire, who came to New England ‘about 1676,’ settled in

Newbury, and married Anne Sewall, a sister of Samuel Sewall, the first

chief-justice of Massachusetts. ‘Well educated but a little wild’

is one of several illuminating phrases used to describe this young

Yorkshireman. He joined the expedition against Quebec under Sir William

Phipps (1690) and perished in a wreck on the coast of Anticosti.

One of his sons, Stephen, a blacksmith, had a son who was graduated

at Harvard, became a schoolmaster in Falmouth (Portland), and held

important offices in the town government. His son, the third Stephen,

grandfather of the poet, was judge of the court of common pleas, and

representative of his town in the legislature.

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow was born at Portland, in the District

of Maine, on February 27, 1807. He was the second son of Stephen

Longfellow, a prominent lawyer, conspicuous in political life, a member

of the Massachusetts legislature, and afterwards, when Maine acquired

statehood, a representative for his state in Congress. The mother of

the poet, Zilpah (Wadsworth) Longfellow, was a daughter of General

Peleg Wadsworth, whose adventures during the Revolution bordered on

the romantic. Through the Wadsworths the poet was a descendant of John

Alden and Priscilla Mullens.

At the age of thirteen Longfellow printed in the Portland ‘Gazette’

his boyish rhymes on ‘The Battle of Lovell’s Pond.’ He studied at

private schools and at the Portland Academy, entered Bowdoin College,

Brunswick, Maine, in the Sophomore year, and was graduated in 1825, the

fourth in a class of thirty-eight. That he stood so high seemed to him

‘rather a mystery.’ Before leaving college he had begun contributing

to the ‘United States Literary Gazette,’ a new bi-monthly, published

in Boston and edited by Theophilus Parsons. In one year seventeen of

his poems appeared in the ‘Gazette,’ for which payment was made at the

rate of two dollars a column. Five of these early poems were reprinted

in _Voices of the Night_.

At the Commencement of 1825 the trustees of Bowdoin had determined to

establish a professorship of modern languages. The chair was promised

Longfellow when he should have fitted himself for it by study abroad.

He sailed from New York in May, 1826, provided by George Ticknor with

letters of introduction to Irving, Eichhorn, and Southey. He travelled

in France, Spain, Italy, and Germany, mastered the Romance languages,

planned certain prose volumes, and announced to his sister Elizabeth

that his poetic career was finished. In August, 1829, he was back in

America.

His appointment being confirmed and the stipend fixed at eight hundred

dollars (together with another hundred for services as college

librarian), Longfellow entered on his duties. During the next five and

a half years he corrected bad French and Italian exercises, heard worse

viva voce translations, in brief, was a pedagogue in all homely and

trying senses of the word. With any one save a born drill-master the

class-room soon loses novelty. In spite of the knowledge that he was

useful in a chosen field of work, more than happy in his home-life (he

had married, in 1831, Miss Mary Storer Potter of Portland), Longfellow

felt the narrowness of his surroundings. Bowdoin was a little college

and Brunswick a village. The young professor was ambitious. In his own

phrase, he wanted a stage on which he could ‘take longer strides and

speak to a larger audience.’ At one time he thought of buying the Round

Hill School, and visited Northampton to look over the ground. Fortune

had something better in store for him. Ticknor was about to resign the

chair of modern languages at Harvard, and proposed as his successor

Longfellow, whose translation of the _Coplas_ of Manrique (1833) had

attracted his notice. The position was formally offered and accepted;

it was understood that Longfellow was to spend a year and a half in

Europe before taking up his work.

Accompanied by his young wife, Longfellow crossed the ocean in April,

1835, and passed the summer in Stockholm and Copenhagen, studying

the Scandinavian languages. In the autumn he was in Holland. Mrs.

Longfellow died the last of November. Longfellow went to Heidelberg for

the winter, and to Switzerland and the Tyrol for the spring and summer,

and in December (1836) was at Cambridge preparing his college lectures.

He lodged at the famous colonial mansion in Brattle Street known

as Craigie House, in a room that had once been Washington’s. When

Longfellow first applied, old Mrs. Craigie, deceived by his youthful

appearance, told him that she had ‘resolved to take no more students

into the house.’ Craigie House passed into the possession of Worcester,

the lexicographer. Worcester sold it to Nathan Appleton, whose daughter

Longfellow married in 1843. It then became the property of Mrs.

Longfellow.

At Harvard the exactions of work were not like those in the smaller

college, strictly pedagogical. Longfellow had time for literature

and for society. The years were richly productive, as the following

bibliographical lists show.

_Outre-Mer, A Pilgrimage beyond the Sea_, 1835; _Hyperion, a Romance_,

1839; _Voices of the Night_, 1839; _Ballads and Other Poems_, 1842;

_Poems on Slavery_, 1842; _The Spanish Student_, 1843; _The Waif, a

Collection of Poems_, 1845 (edited); _The Poets and Poetry of Europe_,

1845 (edited); _The Belfry of Bruges and Other Poems_, 1846; _The

Estray, a Collection of Poems_, 1847 (edited); _Evangeline, a Tale

of Acadie_, 1847; _Kavanagh, a Tale_, 1849; _The Seaside and the

Fireside_, 1850; _The Golden Legend_, 1851; _The Song of Hiawatha_,

1855.

After eighteen years of service at Harvard, Longfellow, in 1855,

resigned his professorship, handing over its responsibilities to a

worthy successor, James Russell Lowell. Released from academic duties,

he was able to give himself unreservedly to literary work. Even in

these new conditions he enjoyed less freedom than would be supposed.

Longfellow had become a world-famous poet and was compelled to pay

in full measure the penalties of fame. The demands on his time were

enormous. As his reputation increased there was a proportionate

increase in the army of visitors which besieged his door. The uniform

kindness of their reception encouraged hundreds more to come.

The beautiful serenity of Longfellow’s domestic life was broken in upon

by a frightful tragedy. One July morning in 1861 Mrs. Longfellow’s

dress caught fire from a lighted match. It was impossible to save her,

and she died the following day. The poet never recovered from the shock

of her death. How crushing the blow was may be faintly conceived from

that poem, ‘The Cross of Snow,’ found among his papers after his death.

During the last quarter century of his life Longfellow published the

following books: _The Courtship of Miles Standish_, 1858; _Tales

of a Wayside Inn_, 1863; _Flower-de-Luce_, 1867; _The New England

Tragedies_, 1868; _Dante’s Divine Comedy, a Translation_,[29] 1867–70;

_The Divine Tragedy_, 1871; _Christus, a Mystery_, 1872;[30] _Three

Books of Song_, 1872; _Aftermath_, 1873; _The Masque of Pandora_, and

_Other Poems_, 1875; _Poems of Places_, 1876–79 (edited); _Kéramos and

Other Poems_, 1878; _Ultima Thule_, 1880. The posthumous volumes were

_In the Harbor_, 1882, and _Michael Angelo_, 1884.

All the customary honors with which literary achievement may be

recognized were bestowed on Longfellow. Some were formal and academic,

scholastic tributes to scholastic achievement. Others were spontaneous

and popular, an expression of the heart. Two illustrations will suffice

to show the range of the poet’s influence. In 1869, during Longfellow’s

last journey in Europe, the degree of D. C. L. was conferred on him by

the University of Oxford. In 1879, when the tree which overhung ‘the

village smithy’ was felled, an armchair was made of the wood, and given

to the poet by the school-children of Cambridge. Both these tributes

were necessary. Each is the complement of the other. Taken together,

they symbolize the characteristics of the man and the artist.

Of all American poets Longfellow reached the widest audience. And it

was with a feeling of personal bereavement that every member of that

vast audience heard the news of his death at Cambridge, on March 24,

1882.

II

LONGFELLOW’S CHARACTER

As a young man Longfellow was pretty much like other young men, fond

of society and fond of dress. At Cambridge the sober-minded were a

little disturbed by the brilliancy of his waistcoats. In the Thirties

it was permitted men, if they would, to array themselves like birds of

paradise. Longfellow appears in some degree to have availed himself

of the privilege. After a visit to Dickens in London in 1842 the

novelist wrote Longfellow that boot-maker, hosier, trousers-maker, and

coat-cutter had all been at the point of death. ‘The medical gentlemen

agreed that it was exhaustion occasioned by early rising--to wait upon

you at those unholy hours!’ An English visitor who saw Longfellow in

1850 thought him too fashionably dressed with his ‘blue frock-coat of

Parisian cut, a handsome waistcoat, faultless pantaloons, and primrose

colored “kids.”’

In middle age his social instinct was as strong as ever, but he cared

less for ‘society.’ He restricted himself to the companionship of his

friends, holding always in reserve time for his dependants, of whom he

had more than a fair share.

Longfellow was large-hearted. He liked people if they were likable and

sympathized with them if they were unattractive or unfortunate. He was

open-handed, a liberal giver. Adventurers preyed upon him. He endured

them with patient strength. When their exactions became outrageous,

he made an effort to be rid of them. If unsuccessful, he laughed at

his own want of skill and resigned himself to be imposed on a little

longer. A weaker man would have sent these bores and parasites about

their business at once.

Incapable of giving pain to any living creature, he could not

understand the temper which prompts another to do so. Fortunately the

violence or malignity of criticism had little effect on him. He could

even be amused by it. Of Margaret Fuller’s ‘furious onslaught’ on him

in the ‘New York Tribune,’ Longfellow said, ‘It is what ‘might be

called a bilious attack.’

He disliked publicity whether in the form of newspaper chronicle of

his doings or recognition in public places. He thought it absurd

that because Fechter had dined with him this unimportant item must

be telegraphed to Chicago and printed in the morning journals. Fond

as he was of the theatre, he sometimes hesitated to go because of

the interest his presence excited. It was thought extraordinary that

he was willing to read his poem ‘Morituri Salutamus’ at the fiftieth

anniversary of his class at Bowdoin. He was delighted when he found

he was to stand behind the old-fashioned high pulpit; ‘Let me cover

myself as much as possible. I wish it might be entirely.’

One trait of Longfellow’s character has been over-emphasized--his

gentleness. He was indeed gentle; but continual harping on that string

has created the impression that he was gentle rather than anything

else. In consequence we have a legendary Longfellow in whom all other

traits of character are subordinated to the one. His amiability, his

sense of justice, his entire freedom from selfishness and vanity, and

his genuine modesty, which led him even when he was right and his

neighbor wrong to avoid giving needless pain by intimating to the

neighbor how wrong he was--all contributed to hide the more forceful

and emphatic qualities. But the qualities were there.

Nothing is easier than to multiply illustrations of this poet’s

gracious traits of character. Holmes epitomized all eulogy when he said

of Longfellow: ‘His life was so exceptionally sweet and musical that

any voice of praise sounds almost like a discord after it.’

III

THE POET

Americans sometimes disturb themselves needlessly over the question

whether Longfellow was a great poet. It is absolutely of no importance

whether he was or was not. Of one thing they may be sure,--he was a

poet. Song was his natural vehicle of expression. He had a masterly

command of technical difficulties of his art. Language became pliant

under his touch. Taking into account the range of his metres, the

uniform precision with which he handled words, and the purity of his

style, Longfellow is eminent among American poetical masters.

His sonnets are exquisite. His ballads, like ‘The Skeleton in Armor,’

have no little of the fresh unstudied character which charms us in old

English ballad literature, a something not to be traced to the spirit

alone but to the technique as well. The twenty-two poems of ‘The Saga

of King Olaf’ show an almost extraordinary metrical power.

It must also be remembered that Longfellow popularized for modern

readers the so-called English hexameter. _Evangeline_ was a metrical

triumph, considering it wholly aside from the innate beauty of the

story or the artistic handling of the incidents. The poet did not

foresee his success. In fact, as early as 1841, in the preface to his

translation of Tegnér’s _Children of the Lord’s Supper_, Longfellow

speaks of the ‘inexorable hexameter, in which, it must be confessed,

the motions of the English muse are not unlike those of a prisoner

dancing to the music of his chains.’ But here he was hampered by his

theory of translation, by his anxiety to render as literally as he

could the text of the original. When he took the matter into his own

hands and moulded the verse according to his own artistic sense, it

became another thing. Wholly aside from the pleasure _Evangeline_ has

given countless readers, it is something to have broken down prejudice

against the hexameter to the extent of drawing out an indirect

compliment from Matthew Arnold, whose self-restraint in the matter of

giving praise was notorious.[31] Scholars have by no means withdrawn

their opposition to the English hexameter. That a more liberal temper

prevails is largely due to Longfellow.

_Evangeline_ had a stimulating effect on one English poet of rare

genius, Arthur Hugh Clough. A reading of the Tale of Acadie immediately

after a reperusal of the _Iliad_ led to the composition of _The Bothie

of Tober-na-Vuolich_.[32]

Another of Longfellow’s triumphs was so great as to make it difficult

for any one to follow him. _Hiawatha_ succeeded both because of the

metre and in spite of it. Any one can master this self-writing jingle.

’Tis as easy as lying. One hardly knows how facile newspaper parodists

amused themselves before they got _Hiawatha_. Holmes explained the ease

of the measure on physiological grounds. We do not lisp in numbers, but

breathe in them. Did we but know it, we pass our lives in exhaling

four-foot rhymeless trochaics.[33] To write a poem in the metre of the

_Kalevala_ still remains, with all its specious fluency, an impossible

performance for any one not a poet. Thus Longfellow’s success had a

negative and restraining effect. He opened the field to whoever cared

to experiment with the hexameter, but closed it, for the present at

least, to any rhythmical inventions calculated however remotely to

suggest the metre of his Indian edda.

IV

_OUTRE-MER, HYPERION, KAVANAGH_

The most popular of American poets first challenged public attention as

a writer of prose. _Outre-Mer_ is a group of pieces after the manner

of Irving. _Hyperion_ is a romance ‘in the old style,’ and shows the

influence of Jean Paul Richter. _Kavanagh_, published ten years after

_Hyperion_, is a novel.

Neither of the first two books is marked by a buoyant Americanism.

_Outre-Mer_ does not, for example, suggest _A Tramp Abroad_, and

certainly Paul Flemming is no kinsman of ‘Harris.’ In other words,

Europe was as yet too remote to be made the subject of easy jest. Men

did not ‘run over’ to the Continent. The trip cost them dear in time

and money, and was not without the element of anticipated danger.

Travelling America was unsophisticated and viewed the Old World with

childlike curiosity. Foreign lands were transfigured in the romantic

haze through which they were seen.

The chapters of _Outre-Mer_ were written by a man too intoxicated with

the charm of European life to be annoyed by the petty irritations that

worry hardened tourists. Rouen, Paris, Auteuil, Madrid, El Pardillo,

Rome in midsummer, afford the Pilgrim only delight. As in all books of

the kind there are interpolated stones, and in this book interpolated

literary essays. Every page betrays the student and the lover of

literature, who quotes Jeremy Taylor and Sir Thomas Browne at Père la

Chaise, James Howell at Venice, and Shakespeare everywhere.

_Hyperion_ is steeped in sentiment--almost in sentimentality. Such a

book could only have been written when the heart was young. It is a

mistake, however, to read the volume as an autobiography; the author

objected to its being so read. More important than the love story are

the romantic descriptions of the Rhine and the Swiss Alps and the

golden atmosphere enveloping it all. Both these books have a common

object, namely, to interpret the Old World to the New.

When _Outre-Mer_ was published an admirer said that the author of

_The Sketch Book_ must look to his laurels. The praise implied was

extravagant, but not groundless. Longfellow’s prose has a measure of

the sweetness and urbanity which we associate with Irving. Both writers

are classic in their serenity, and if highly artificial at times never

absurdly stilted. They often appear in old-fashioned dress, but they

wear the costume easily and it becomes them. The modern reader, with a

taste dulled by high seasoning, marvels how the grandparents could find

pleasure in _Hyperion_. It would be to the modern reader’s advantage

to forswear sack for a while and get himself into a condition to enjoy

what so greatly delighted the grandparents.

Besides a group of literary essays (published in his collected works

under the title of ‘Driftwood’) Longfellow wrote a novel of New England

life, _Kavanagh_, which suffered by coming too soon after _Evangeline_.

It seems colorless when placed beside the romantic tale of Acadie. Yet

one can well afford to take time to learn of Mr. Pendexter’s griefs,

and incidentally to become acquainted with Billy Wilmerdings, who was

turned out of school for playing truant, and ‘promised his mother, if

she would not whip him, he would experience religion.’ Hawthorne was

enthusiastic over _Kavanagh_; he, however, disclosed the secret of its

unpopularity when he said to Longfellow: ‘Nobody but yourself would

dare to write so quiet a book.’

V

_VOICES OF THE NIGHT, BALLADS, SPANISH STUDENT, BELFRY OF BRUGES, THE

SEASIDE AND THE FIRESIDE_

Longfellow served the cause of his art in two ways: first, he was an

original poet, having a genius which, if not profound, or brilliant,

or massive, or bewilderingly fresh and new, was eminently poetical and

eminently attractive; second, he was an enthusiastic interpreter of the

poetry of other lands through the medium of trustworthy and graceful

translations.

American literary masters · 第 11 / 26 段