NATURALISTIC ROMANTICISM

We have for a moment lost sight of Coleridge. When Wordsworth and he

divided the new kinds of poetry between them, there fell to his share,

as the reader will remember, a task which was the exact opposite of

Wordsworth's, namely, the treating of supernatural subjects in a

natural manner. He fulfilled it in his contributions to the volume

published under the title of _Lyrical Ballads_, and indeed in the

greater proportion of the little collection of poems which entitles him

to rank high among English poets.

[Illustration: S. T. COLERIDGE]

Samuel Taylor Coleridge was a country boy, the son of a Devonshire

clergyman. He was born in October 1772. From 1782 to 1790 he was at

school in London. It was during those school-days, spent at Christ's

Hospital, that his friendship with another English Romanticist, his

warm admirer, Charles Lamb, was formed. From 1791 to 1793 he studied

at Cambridge. He had neither means nor prospects, and in a fit of

despair, occasioned either by his debts or by an unhappy love affair,

he suddenly enlisted in the 15th Regiment of Light Dragoons, under the

name of Silas Titus Cumberback.[1] It certainly does not seem to have

been ambition (as in the case of Johannes Ewald a few years earlier)

which prompted him to try his fortune as a soldier, but simply want of

any other means of subsistence. He was only four months a dragoon. On

the stable wall underneath his saddle, he one day scribbled the Latin

lament:--

"Eheu quam infortuni miserrimum est fuisse felicem!"

This was discovered by his captain, who inquired into the position

of affairs, and arranged with Coleridge's family for his return to

Cambridge. On this followed the short period during which the young

poet was an anti-orthodox democrat. As such he could expect no

advancement in the University. His and Southey's glorification of

Robespierre (the first act of _The Fall of Robespierre_ was written

by Coleridge, the second and third are Southey's) and their wild

project of a communistic settlement have been already mentioned. The

little emigrant society they founded consisted only of themselves and

two other members, a young Quaker named Lovell, and George Burnet, a

school friend of Southey's. But the God Hymen had decided that the

year 1795 should witness the wreck of the plans which boded so ill

for society. In 1795 Coleridge went to lecture at Bristol, where he

displayed the eloquence which (as in the case of the similarly eloquent

and persuasive Welhaven) seems to have sapped his power of poetic

production. A young lady in the town of Bristol won his heart; and

before the year was over, Sara Fricker was married to Coleridge, her

sisters, Edith and Mary, to Lovell and Southey--and the emigration plan

was abandoned. Coleridge, who was without will-power all his life,

could never have carried out a plan laid so long beforehand. He never

succeeded in doing anything except what he had not determined to do, or

what, from its nature, could not be determined beforehand.

In 1796 the young man, who was still an enthusiastic Unitarian, allowed

himself to be persuaded by some other philanthropists--he is always

"persuaded"--to publish a weekly magazine called _The Watchman_, which

was to consist of thirty-two pages, large octavo, and to cost the

reasonable price of fourpence. Its flaming prospectus bore the motto,

"Knowledge is power." With the object of enlisting subscribers, the

young and ardent propagandist undertook a tour of the country between

Bristol and Sheffield, preaching in most of the great towns, "as an

hireless volunteer, in a blue coat and white waistcoat, that not a rag

of the woman of Babylon might be seen on me." The description he has

given of this, his Odyssey, shows us the young English Romanticist as

he was then and as he continued to be--imprudent in worldly matters,

enthusiastic in behalf now of this, now of that religious or political

half-truth, yet with a humorous appreciation of his own and others'

ridiculousness.

"My campaign commenced at Birmingham; and my first attack was on a

rigid Calvinist, a tallow-chandler by trade. He was a tall, dingy man,

in whom length was so predominant over breadth that he might almost

have been borrowed for a foundry poker. O that face! I have it before

me at this moment. The lank, black, twine-like hair, _pinguinitescent_,

cut in a straight line along the black stubble of his thin gunpowder

eyebrows, that looked like a scorched after-math from a last week's

shaving. His coat collar behind in perfect unison, both of colour and

lustre, with the coarse yet glib cordage that I suppose he called

his hair, and which with a bend inward at the nape of the neck (the

only approach to flexure in his whole figure) slunk in behind his

waistcoat; while the countenance, lank, dark, very hard, and with

strong perpendicular furrows, gave me a dim notion of some one looking

at me through a used gridiron, all soot, grease, and iron! But he was

one of the thorough-bred, a true lover of liberty, and (I was informed)

had proved to the satisfaction of many, that Mr. Pitt was one of

the horns of the second beast in the Revelation, _that spoke like a

dragon_." For half-an-hour Coleridge employed all the resources of his

eloquence--argued, described, promised, prophesied, beginning with the

captivity of nations and ending with the millennium. "My taper man of

lights listened with perseverance and praiseworthy patience, though (as

I was afterwards told on complaining of certain odours that were not

altogether ambrosial) it was a melting-day with him. 'And what, sir,'

he said, after a short pause, 'might the cost be?' 'Only fourpence,

only fourpence, sir, each number, to be published on every eighth day.'

'That comes to a good deal of money at the end of the year. And how

much did you say there was to be for the money?' 'Thirty-two pages,

sir! large octavo, closely printed.' 'Thirty and two pages? Bless me,

why, except what I does in a family way on the Sabbath, that's more

than I ever reads, sir! all the year round. I am as great a one as

any man in Brummagem, sir! for liberty and truth and all them sort of

things, but as to this, no offence, sir, I must beg to be excused.'"

Thus ended Coleridge's first attempt at recruiting for the war against

the Holy Trinity. His second he made in Manchester, where he tried to

enlist a stately and opulent wholesale dealer in cottons. This man

measured him from top to toe, and asked if he had any bill or invoice

of the thing. Coleridge presented him with the prospectus. He rapidly

skimmed and hummed over the first side, and still more rapidly the

second and concluding page, then most deliberately and significantly

rubbed and smoothed one part against the other, put it in his pocket,

turned his back with an "Overrun with these articles!" and retired into

his counting-house.

After these unsuccessful attempts, the young man gave up the plan of

canvassing from house to house, but nevertheless returned from this

memorable tour with almost a thousand names on his list of subscribers.

But, alas! the publication of the very first number was, as any one

knowing Coleridge might have expected, delayed beyond the day announced

for its appearance; the second, which contained an essay against

fast-days, lost him nearly five hundred subscribers at a blow; and the

two following numbers, which were full of attacks on French philosophy

and morals, and directed against those "who pleaded to the poor and

ignorant instead of pleading for them," made enemies of all his Jacobin

and democratic patrons. Coleridge, who communicates all these details

himself, does not seem to have any suspicion that he was only receiving

a natural punishment for his indecision--an indecision which consisted

in never being prepared to accept the consequences of his own theories.

He was undecided in politics, undecided in religion. Writing, as an old

man, of this time, he himself says: "My head was with Spinoza, though

my whole heart remained with Paul and John;" and he hastens to provide

his readers with those convincing proofs of the existence of God and

the Holy Trinity which he had not been capable of perceiving in his

youth.[2] After the appearance of about a dozen numbers, _The Watchman_

had to be given up, and Coleridge took to writing for the newspapers.

He began by attacking Pitt's Government, but in course of time, his

opinions tending ever more in a conservative direction, he became

its ardent supporter, and also, after the occupation of Switzerland

by the French, an enemy of France. So hostile to that country were

his articles in the _Morning Post_, that they even attracted the

attention of Napoleon, and Coleridge became the object of the First

Consul's special enmity. He would probably have been arrested during

his residence in Italy, if he had not received timely warning from the

Prussian ambassador, Wilhelm von Humboldt, and, through an inferior

official, from Napoleon's own uncle, Cardinal Fesch.

The year 1797, in the course of which Coleridge became acquainted with

Wordsworth, was, as regards his poetry, the most important in his life;

for it was in this year that he wrote his famous ballad, _The Ancient

Mariner_, and _Christabel_, the fragment which marks a new era in

English poetry.

_Christabel_ was planned as the first of a series of poetical romances,

the remainder of which never came into being. It is, without doubt, the

first English poem which is permeated by the genuine Romantic spirit;

and the new cadences, the new theme, the new style of versification,

the novelty generally, made a powerful impression on contemporary

poets. The irregular and yet melodious metre appealed so strongly to

Scott that he employed it in his first Romantic poem, _The Lay of the

Last Minstrel_. He frankly confesses how much he owed to the beautiful

and tantalising fragment, _Christabel_, which he, like the other poets

of the period, made acquaintance with in manuscript; for Coleridge

read it aloud in social gatherings for twenty years before it saw the

light as public property. Byron, too, heard it first on one of these

occasions. Before hearing it he had, in one of his longer poems (_The

Siege of Corinth_, xix.), written some lines which were not unlike some

in _Christabel_. To these lines he, on a future occasion, appended a

note in which he praises Coleridge's "wild and singularly original

and beautiful poem." But we see from Moore's _Life and Letters_ that

there were critics who refused the meed of admiration accorded to

_Christabel_ by Scott and Byron, and still more freely by Wordsworth.

Jeffrey and Moore himself consider it affected (_Memoirs_, ii 101;

iv. 48). Danish critics, thoroughly initiated into the mysteries of

this style by Tieck and the brothers Schlegel, and by their own poet

Ingemann, cannot possibly attach so much importance to this fragment.

Its excessive naïveté and simplicity, the intentional childishness

in style and tone, are to us what buns are to bakers' children. The

chief merit of the poem, apart from its full-toned, sweet melody, lies

in the peculiar power with which the nature of the wicked fairy is

presented to us, the _dæmonic_ element, which had never been present

in such force in English literature before. We must, however, remember

that, though the first part of the poem was written in 1797, the second

was written and the first revised in 1800--that is to say, _after_

Coleridge had travelled with Wordsworth in Germany, and there made

acquaintance with contemporary German poetry, its medieval ground-work,

and its latest tendency.

Coleridge's one other poem of any length, _The Ancient Mariner_, which

is even more artificially naïve in style than _Christabel_, and is

provided, in the manner of the medieval ballads retailed in the little

shops in back streets, with a prose index of contents on the margin

of the pages, is now the most popular of all his poems, although it

was fiercely attacked on its first appearance. On a very unnatural

introduction (three guests on their way to a wedding are stopped,

and one of them is led to forget his destination, so eloquent is the

ancient mariner--"and on the street, too," as Falstaff says) follows a

story of all the horrors, ghostly and material, which ensue, because

one of the sailors on a ship has been thoughtless enough to kill an

albatross which had alighted on the rigging. The whole crew, with

the exception of this one man, die, as a punishment for the act of

inhospitality. Swinburne tells that, when the poem was new, the English

critics were greatly occupied with the question whether its moral (that

one should not shoot albatrosses) was not so preponderant that it

destroyed the fantastic effect of the poem; whilst others maintained

that the defect of the poem was its want of a practical moral. Long

afterwards the same matter formed the subject of a dispute between

Freiligrath and Julian Schmidt. Modern criticism would willingly excuse

the absence of any moral in the ballad if it could find a poetic

central idea in it.

A comparison may serve to show its chief shortcoming. In a collection

of poems by the Austrian lyric poet, Moritz Hartmann, entitled

_Zeitlosen_, there is to be found one which, although it does not

profess to owe its origin to _The Ancient Mariner_, at first sight

strikes the reader as being a direct imitation of it. The metrical form

is the same, and in the theme there is a close resemblance. _Der Camao_

is the title of the poem. The Camao, which answers to Coleridge's

albatross, is a bird which, in the Middle Ages, was kept in every

house in the Pyrenean Peninsula, and treated with a reverence which

had its source in a widespread superstition. It was believed, namely,

that this bird could not thrive in a house on which rested the stain

of a wife's infidelity; it died if there was even the slightest spot

on the honour of its master. Its beautiful cage generally hung in the

entrance chamber. In Hartmann's poem the old, deranged man who answers

to Coleridge's demented mariner, tells how he, as a page, was seized

with a violent passion for his master's wife, and how, every time he

rushed from her presence, in despair at her coldness and displeasure,

he was tortured as he left her apartments by the bird's song in honour

of the chastity of the lady to whom it owed its life. The master of the

house returns from the war bringing with him his friend, a handsome

young minstrel and hero, whom the lady honours with her friendship, and

who is, in consequence, soon hated by the jealous page. Quite beside

himself, the young man denounces the lady and her friend to his master;

but the latter calmly answers that Camao is still alive, and at that

moment singing in his mistress's honour. In his jealous, vindictive

rage the page kills the bird; Vasco kills his wife; and thenceforward

the criminal wanders, demented and restless, from country to country,

seeking rest, but finding it nowhere.

As regards virtuosity and originality in the matter of diction, _Der

Camao_ is not for a moment to be compared with _The Ancient Mariner_;

but as regards the poetic central idea, the German poem is not only

much superior to its English model, but is in itself a complete,

satisfactory criticism of Coleridge's ballad and all the artificial

English theories which it represents. In _Der Camao_ the slaughter of

the bird is a real human action performed with a real human motive; the

punishment is not a caprice, but a just and natural consequence of the

misdeed. The misfortune which the killing of the bird brings to Vasco

and his wife has a natural cause and effect connection with that deed,

whilst the death of the whole ship's crew, as the result of the cruelty

shown to the albatross, is folly. The comparison assists us to a clear

understanding of the difference between a true poetical conception of

the superstitious idea and a Romantic treatment of it. The story in

both poems is founded on a superstition. Hartmann has no desire to

submit the superstition to the criticism of reason; but he forces it

upon no one; the beauty of his poem is quite independent of the belief

or disbelief of his reader in the miraculous susceptibility of the

Camao. Romantic extravagance, on the other hand, proclaims reverence

for the marvellous and inexplicable to be the sum and substance of all

wisdom and of all poetry.

But though _The Ancient Mariner_ may not take a high place when

compared with poetry which has extricated itself from Romantic

swaddling-bands, it stands high above most of the kindred productions

of German Romanticism. In spite of all its Romantic fictitiousness, it

breathes of the sea, the real, natural sea, whose changing moods and

whose terrifying, menacing immensity it describes. The fresh breeze,

the seething foam, the horrible fog, and the hot, copper-coloured

evening sky with its blood-red sun--all these elements are nature's

own; and the misery of the men tossing helplessly on the ocean, the

starvation, the burning thirst that drives them to suck the blood from

their own arms, the pallid countenances, the terrible death-rattle, the

horrible putrefaction--all these elements are realities, represented

with English realistic force.

And it is a very English trait that Coleridge himself should have

been thoroughly capable of seeing the weak points of such a poem as

his own famous ballad. The national quality of humour assisted him to

this independence of judgment. We have the following anecdote from his

own pen. "An amateur performer in verse expressed a strong desire to

be introduced to me, but hesitated in accepting my friend's immediate

offer, on the score that he was, he must acknowledge, the author of a

confounded severe epigram on my _Ancient Mariner_, which had given me

great pain. I assured my friend that if the epigram was a good one, it

would only increase my desire to become acquainted with the author, and

begged to hear it recited, when, to my no less surprise than amusement,

it proved to be one which I had myself inserted in the _Morning Post_."

When Coleridge tells us, too, that he himself wrote three sonnets

expressly for the purpose of exciting a good-natured laugh at the

artificial simplicity and doleful egotism of the new poetical tendency,

and that he took the elaborate and swelling language and imagery of

these sonnets from his own poems, we cannot deny that his endeavours to

keep free from the entanglement in theories which was the weak point in

German Romanticism, bespeak rare intellectual superiority.

It was, nevertheless, from Germany that Coleridge's intellect received

its most invigorating and essential nourishment. He was the first

Englishman who penetrated into the forest of German literature, which

was as yet unexplored by foreigners; he made his way into it about

the same time as Madame de Staël, the pioneer of the Latin races.

Whilst he was producing the famous poems just described, he began the

study of German. Schiller and Kant attracted him first. In 1798 he

and Wordsworth went to Germany on a literary voyage of discovery. In

Hamburg they visited the patriarch Klopstock, who praised Bürger to

them, but spoke coldly and disparagingly of the rest of the younger

literary men, and especially of Coleridge's idols, Kant and Schiller.

The latter's _Die Räuber_ he professed himself unable to read. But

he had plenty to say on the subject of _The Messiah_ and his extreme

satisfaction with the English translations of it. While in Germany,

Coleridge studied the Gothic language, and read the Meistersingers and

Hans Sachs; and on his return he published a translation of Schiller's

_Wallenstein_, the play which Benjamin Constant was soon afterwards to

adapt for the French stage.

It was about this time that Coleridge settled in the _Lake_ district,

where Wordsworth and Southey had already taken up their abode--the

district which gave its name to the literary school constituted, as

their contemporaries chose to consider, by these three poets. The

name, as a matter of fact, does not mean much more than if, in Denmark

in 1830, Hauch, Ingemann, Wilster, and Peder Hjort, had been dubbed

Sorists. The English poets of the Lake School were quite as unlike

each other in their gifts as were these Sorö professors[3] But the

criticism of the day always coupled Coleridge's name with Wordsworth's

and Southey's because it was known that he was on intimate and friendly

terms with them, because he never missed an opportunity of praising

them, nor they of praising him, and because he and the other Lakists

were crowned every three months with fresh laurels in the _Quarterly

Review_, whilst the sinner Byron was chastised with fresh scorpions.

Though Coleridge published almost nothing, Wordsworth and Southey were

hardly ever under the cascade of criticism without some drops of it

falling upon him. The circumstance that the Lake poets aimed (in much

the same manner as the Pre-Raphaelite and the Nazarene painters) at

poetic intensity, a childlike disposition and a childlike faith, pious

blandness and priestly unction, exposed the man who could not but be

regarded as the teacher of the school to much satire and derision. As

a youth, in his poem _Fire, Famine, and Slaughter_, Coleridge had made

all the horrors, one by one, reply to the question: Who bid you rage?

with the following refrain, applying to Pitt:--

"Who bade you do't?

The same! the same!

Letters four do form his name.

He let me loose, and cried Halloo!

To him alone the praise is due."

Now he was Mr. Pitt's journalistic henchman, and, like all the other

members of the Lake School, a strict Tory, the enemy of liberal

opinions in everything relating to church and state. What wonder that

he was classed along with the others in the constant party attacks made

by the Liberals! And yet it would have been so easy and so natural

to distinguish him as a poet from all the others, and to pay him the

honour which was due to his originality. The few poems which he wrote

in the course of a comparatively long life are distinguished by the

exquisite melodiousness of their language; their harmonies are not only

delicate and insinuating like Shelley's, but contrapuntally constructed

and rich; they have a peculiar, ponderous sweetness; each line has

the taste and weight of a drop of honey. In poems such as _Love_ and

_Lewti_, which are the two sweetest, and in an Oriental fantasy like

_Kubla Khan_, which was inspired by a dream, we hear Coleridge flute

and pipe and sing with all the changing cadences of the most exquisite

nightingale voice. It is Swinburne who makes the apt remark that, in

the matter of harmonies, Shelley is, compared with Coleridge, what a

lark is compared with a nightingale.

But Coleridge's poetry is as unplastic as it is melodious, and as

unimpassioned as it is mellifluous. It is of the fantastic Romantic

order; that is to say, it neither expresses strong, personally

experienced emotions, nor reproduces what the author has observed in

the surrounding world. In this last connection it is interesting to

know that Coleridge's long tour in the south was altogether without

results as far as his poetry was concerned. The only poem he brought

home with him, the _Hymn Before Sunrise in the Vale of Chamouni_, a

valley in which he never set foot, was composed with the assistance

of the description of the locality given by the well-known Danish

authoress, Friederike Brun. His historic sense was as defective as his

sense of locality. He says himself: "Dear Sir Walter Scott and myself

are exact, but harmonious opposites in this--that every old ruin,

hill, river, or tree called up in his mind a host of historical or

biographical associations ... whereas for myself, I believe I should

walk on the plain of Marathon without taking more interest in it than

in any other plain of similar features.... Charles Lamb wrote an essay

on a man who lived in past time:--I thought of adding another to it

on one who lived not _in time_ at all, past, present, or future--but

beside or collaterally."[4] His poetry is, thence, in the literal sense

of the word, visionary; the poem which the best critics consider the

finest, he composed in a dream.

In his own life there was as little of will and plan as in a dream.

Somewhat indolent by nature, he became more and more procrastinating

as years went on; and the result of his procrastination was an

accumulation of difficulties which he had not energy and application

enough to overcome. To relieve physical suffering he had recourse to

opium, and soon became a confirmed opium-eater, thereby increasing his

incapacity to carry out any plan. After a period of wandering, living

first in one, then in another friend's house, and either writing for

magazines or giving lectures on the history of literature, he decided

that he was unfit to manage himself and his affairs, and from 1816

onwards he lived at Highgate in the house and under the control of a

doctor named Gillman--separated from his own family, whom he left to

the care of his friend and brother-in-law, Southey.

On the indulgence in opium followed remorse and self-reproach and

increasingly orthodox piety. Most of what Coleridge now wrote was

written with the object of refuting the heresies of his youth and

defending the doctrine of the Trinity and the Church of England against

all attacks.[5] Emerson, who paid him a visit, describes him as "old

and preoccupied"; enraged by the effrontery with which a handful of

Priestleians dared to attack the doctrine of the Trinity propounded

by Paul and accepted unchallenged for centuries; and falling in his

talk into all manner of commonplaces. Eighteen years passed, spent

in dreaming, talking, and composing edifying essays. His influence

during this period was due much less to his productive power than to

the manner in which he incited to production. He stimulated and goaded

others to the pitch of expressing themselves publicly. Residing close

to London, and constantly visited, because of his conversational

powers, by the best writers of the day--Charles Lamb, Wordsworth,

Southey, Leigh Hunt, Hazlitt, Carlyle--he was a looker-on on life

during the years when the great representatives of the opposite

intellectual tendency to his, Shelley and Byron, were pouring forth

their fiery denunciations of the order of society and state which he

considered so excellent. Without will of his own, under control, and

himself protected like a child, Coleridge became ever more and more the

would-be protector of society, whilst the two great poets of liberty,

banished from their homes and thrown entirely on their own resources,

developed an independence unexampled in the history of literature, and,

protected neither by themselves nor any one else, were shattered long

before their time by the ardour of conflict. The right of personal

investigation and personal liberty were as precious treasures to them

as the Church of England was to Coleridge.

[1] "Being at a loss, when suddenly asked my name, I answered

Cumberback; and verily my habits were so little equestrian, that my

horse, I doubt not, was of that opinion."

[2] See _Biographia Literaria_.

[3] Sorö Akademi is a Danish public school. (Transcriber's note.)

[4] _Specimens of the Table Talk of the Late Samuel T. Coleridge_, ii

225.

[5] "On the Constitution of Church and State according to the Ideal of

Each": _Lay Sermons_.

Main Currents in Nineteenth Century Literature - 4. Naturalism in England · 第 23 / 73 题