ALL-EMBRACING SENSUOUSNESS

In Keats's magnificent fragment, _Hyperion_, there is a scene in which

the whole overthrown race of Titanic gods hold counsel in a dark,

underground cavern. Their chief, old Saturn, concludes his despondent

speech with the words:

"Yet ye are here,

O'erwhelm'd and spurred, and batter'd, ye are here!

O Titans, shall I say, 'Arise!'--Ye groan:

Shall I say 'Crouch!'--Ye groan. What can I then?

O Heaven wide! O unseen parent dear!

What can I? Tell me, all ye brethren Gods,

How we can war, how engine our great wrath!"

[Illustration: JOHN KEATS]

Then Oceanus, the thoughtful, meditative sea god, rises, shakes

his locks, no longer watery, and, in the murmuring voice which his

tongue has caught from the break of the waves on the shore, bids the

passion-stung deities take comfort from the thought that they have

fallen by the course of Nature's law, and not by the force of thunder

or of Jove:--

"Great Saturn, thou

Hast sifted well the atom-universe;

But for this reason, that thou art the King,

And only blind from sheer supremacy,

One avenue was shaded from thine eyes,

Through which I wandered to eternal truth.

And first, as thou wast not the first of powers,

So art thou not the last; it cannot be:

Thou art not the beginning nor the end.

From Chaos and parental Darkness came

Light, the first fruits of that intestine broil,

That sullen ferment, which for wondrous ends

Was ripening in itself. The ripe hour came,

And with it light, and light engendering

Upon its own producer, forthwith touch'd

The whole enormous matter into life.

Upon that very hour, our parentage,

The Heavens and the Earth, were manifest:

Then thou first-born, and we the giant race,

Found ourselves ruling new and beauteous realms.

Now comes the pain of truth, to whom 'tis pain;

O folly! for to bear all naked truths,

And to envisage circumstance, all calm,

That is the top of sovereignty. Mark well!

As Heaven and Earth are fairer, fairer far

Than Chaos and blank Darkness, though once chiefs;

And as we show beyond that Heaven and Earth

In form and shape compact and beautiful,

In will, in action free, companionship,

And thousand other signs of purer life;

So on our heels a fresh perfection treads,

A power more strong in beauty, born of us

And fated to excel us, as we pass

In glory that old Darkness: nor are we

Thereby more conquer'd, than by us the rule

Of shapeless Chaos. Say, doth the dull soil

Quarrel with the proud forests it hath fed,

And feedeth still, more comely than itself?

Can it deny the chiefdom of green groves?

Or shall the tree be envious of the dove

Because it cooeth, and hath snowy wings

To wander wherewithal and find its joys?

We are such forest-trees, and our fair boughs

Have bred forth, not pale solitary doves,

But eagles golden-feather'd, who do tower

Above us in their beauty, and must reign

In right thereof; for 'tis the eternal law

That first in beauty should be first in might:

Yea by that law, another race may drive

Our conquerors to mourn as we do now.

Have ye beheld the young God of the Seas,

My dispossessor? Have ye seen his face?

Have ye beheld his chariot, foam'd along

By noble winged creatures he hath made?

I saw him on the calmed waters scud,

With such a glow of beauty in his eyes,

That it enforc'd me to bid sad farewell

To all my empire."

Thus speaks Oceanus. And the fallen deities, either convinced or in

sullen anger, keep silence. At last one, of whom no one has thought,

the goddess Clymene, breaks the long silence, speaking timidly among

the fierce, with hectic lips and gentle glances:--

"O Father, I am here the simplest voice,

And all my knowledge is that joy is gone,

And this thing woe crept in among our hearts.

There to remain for ever, as I fear:

I would not bode of evil, if I thought

So weak a creature could turn off the help

Which by just right should come of mighty Gods;

Yet let me tell my sorrow, let me tell

Of what I heard, and how it made me weep,

And know that we had parted from all hope.--

I stood upon a shore, a pleasant shore,

Where a sweet clime was breathed from a land

Of fragrance, quietness, and trees, and flowers.

Full of calm joy it was, as I of grief;

Too full of joy and soft delicious warmth;

So that I felt a movement in my heart

To chide, and to reproach that solitude

With songs of misery, music of our woes;

And sat me down, and took a mouthed shell

And murmured into it, and made melody--

O melody no more! for while I sang,

And with poor skill let pass into the breeze

The dull shell's echo, from a bowery strand

Just opposite, an island of the sea,

There came enchantment with the shifting wind,

That did both drown and keep alive my ears.

I threw my shell away upon the sand,

And a wave fill'd it, as my sense was fill'd

With that new blissful golden melody,

A living death was in each gush of sounds,

Each family of rapturous hurried notes,

That fell, one after one, yet all at once,

Like pearl beads dropping sudden from their string:

And then another, then another strain,

Each like a dove leaving its olive perch,

With music wing'd instead of silent plumes,

To hover round my head, and make me sick

Of joy and grief at once. Grief overcame,

And I was stopping up my frantic ears,

When, past all hindrance of my trembling hands,

A voice came sweeter, sweeter than all tune,

And still it cried, 'Apollo! young Apollo!

The morning-bright Apollo! young Apollo!'

I fled, it followed me, and cried 'Apollo!'"

Keats has surpassed himself in this passage, which is as profound in

thought as it is beautiful. It is not only a proof of the quality of

his poetic gift, but the announcement of the appearance of a younger

generation of poets in the field held by the poets of the Lake School

and Scott. In the name of the reigning deities, the human intellect is

too often condemned to inactivity and stagnation. If there is to be

progress, a change of rulers is frequently called for. Wordsworth and

Scott were mighty Titans whose glory paled when the younger generation

appeared. Keats himself was the golden-feathered bird that rose high

into the air above Wordsworth's leafy old oak. And Byron--was not he

the new ocean god, who "troubled the waters" of passion with such

power that the greatest literary genius of the day abdicated in his

favour, assured that it was in vain to compete with him? And Shelley's

melodies, intoxicatingly sweet, unprecedentedly daring--were they not

borne on all the winds, and are they not still penetrating everywhere,

though many, like Clymene, stop their ears and refrain as long as

possible from listening to the new tones? The struggle is a vain one,

for now on every side resounds the cry: "Apollo! morning-bright Apollo!"

The old gods, as in the poem, assumed different attitudes at this

crisis in their fates. Scott, the noblest of them all, acknowledged

his defeat by Byron with an amiable dignity which still further

enhanced his reputation. Wordsworth retired to his Lakes, muttering

an accusation of plagiarism. Southey poured forth volleys of abuse.

Meanwhile the new, young gods mounted the thrones of the old, and round

their heads shone the bright halo of the light that they gave forth.

Keats was the youngest of the young race of giants, and he had

peculiar qualities and a peculiar domain of his own, into which none

of the others intruded. He is one of the many examples of singularly

delicate and refined organisms appearing in the most unlikely outward

surroundings and developing almost unaided by circumstances. This youth

who, dying at the age of twenty-six, has left behind him master-works

which none who read them can forget, and whose name is immortalised

in Shelley's _Adonais_, was the son of a London livery-stable keeper,

and was bred an apothecary. Few of the elder literary celebrities knew

him. Wordsworth, the only one among them on whom his eyes were steadily

turned, and with more reverence than was felt by any of the other young

men--even Wordsworth showed himself cold. At Haydon the painter's,

one evening, when Wordsworth was present, Keats was induced to repeat

to him the famous Hymn to Pan from the First Book of _Endymion_. The

"iron-grey poet" heard it to the end, and then only remarked that it

was "a pretty piece of paganism." And so, praise be to Keats, it is!

Wordsworth, however, meant nothing flattering by the remark. Such

was the verdict of the most influential member of the elder school

of poetry. The elder school of criticism was distinctly adverse.

Its verdict was harsh and scathing. Both the _Quarterly Review_ and

_Blackwood's Magazine_ jeered foolishly at _Endymion_. The author was

told that "it is a better and a wiser thing to be a starved apothecary

than a starved poet," and was bidden "back to his gallipots." Calmly as

the young poet writes of the ignominious treatment he received, there

can be no doubt that the sting rankled deeply. It is most improbable

that the report spread among Keats's acquaintances of the ruinous

effect of these criticisms on his health, was, as is now maintained,

entirely without foundation. He certainly was not, as Byron in _Don

Juan_ declares him to have been, killed by a savage article in the

_Quarterly_; and his own utterances give ample proof of his profound

contempt for these disparagements of his art and his personality; but

his ambition was excessive, his susceptibility equally so, and his body

contained the germs of a fatal disease; and it would be surprising if

rancorous attacks from without had not affected an organism which was

preyed upon from within by consuming passion and consuming disease.

John Keats was born in October 1795. At the age of nine he lost his

father. His mother sent him to a good school; but she, too, to his

inexpressible grief, died while he was still a boy. His appearance

corresponded to the impression which his poetry makes on us. Whilst

the feminine and ethereal Shelley had a slender, slightly-built,

narrow-chested figure and a shrill voice, the heavier footed, more

earth-bound Keats was deep-chested and broad-shouldered; his lower

limbs were small in comparison with the upper; and he had a deep, grave

voice. His small head was covered with thick brown curls; the eyes were

large and of a dark, on occasion glowing, blue; the handsome mouth had

a projecting lower lip, which gave the face a defiant and pugnacious

expression. And as a matter of fact he was, as a boy, a perfect little

terrier for resoluteness and pugnacity, and seemed much more likely to

distinguish himself in war than in literature. He early displayed great

personal courage, and was an adept in all athletic exercises; just

before he was attacked by consumption he thrashed an insolent butcher

in a regular stand-up fight.

At the age of fifteen he left school, and was apprenticed by his

relations to a clever surgeon-apothecary at Edmonton, with whom he

remained till he was twenty, when he began, as a medical student, to

walk the London hospitals. He soon, however, gave up medicine for

literature, and lived for several years in close companionship with

some of the rising young literary men and artists of the day. Then he

was attacked by the disease which had carried off his mother and his

younger brother. The absence of any prospect of earning a living, and

the ever-increasing pressure of poverty, favoured its development,

which was farther hastened by a violent and hopeless passion for a

young Anglo-Indian lady--a passion only rendered hopeless by Keats's

poverty and ill-health--his love being returned. His health obliged him

to quit the neighbourhood of his beloved and take a journey to Italy,

where he died.

Glancing over the non-literary part of Keats's life, we distinguish

three facts of leading importance--his want of any real prospect of

gaining a livelihood (he had thoughts of emigrating to South America,

or applying for a post as surgeon on an Indiaman); the ardent and

hopeless passion for the woman without whom life was worthless to him;

and the wasting disease.

Miss Fanny Brawne was eighteen, five years younger than Keats, when he

made her acquaintance in 1818. He and his friend, Brown, had settled

at Hampstead, in a semidetached house, the other half of which was

occupied by Miss Brawne and her mother. The first six months after he

fell in love were to Keats months of real happiness. In December 1818

he began _Hyperion_. In February 1819, the most fruitful month in his

life, he wrote the _Ode to Psyche, The Eve of St Agnes_, and great part

of _Hyperion_. And early in the spring, sitting under a plum-tree in

the Brawnes' garden, he wrote his _Ode to the Nightingale_. In other

words--his most beautiful poetry was written in the half year during

which he took long walks with Fanny, and was still a healthy man.

Unfortunately, it being possible for him to see his beloved every day,

we have not a single love-letter dating from this, his short period of

happiness. In July 1819 he wrote to her for the first time; and all the

letters which he sent her from that date until the time of his death

were published in 1878.

They are not melancholy to begin with. In one of the earliest he

writes: "I want a brighter word than bright, a fairer word than fair;"

and to some objection made by her he answers: "Why may I not speak of

your Beauty, since without that I could never have lov'd you?--I cannot

conceive any beginning of such love as I have for you but Beauty. There

may be a sort of love for which, without the least sneer at it, I have

the highest respect and can admire it in others; but it has not the

richness, the bloom, the full form, the enchantment of love after my

own heart."

Very soon, however, the jealousy which was to have such a wearing

effect upon the lover appears in his letters. Again and again he exacts

promises of eternal devotion. Though not yet ill, he has a vague

presentiment that his end is not far off. "I have two luxuries to brood

over in my walks," he writes; "your Loveliness and the hour of my

death. O that I could have possession of them both in the same minute!"

Her letters had really only a depressing effect on him. He read them

so often that each sentence assumed a distorted proportion; and

they seemed to him now cold, now full of reproaches. He tortured

first himself and then her with his suspicious irritableness and

perversity; he would, for example, pass her door without going in,

though he was longing to see her, and knew that his not appearing

was a disappointment to her. There are a few perfectly happy, tender

letters, dated October 1819. But in February 1820 commences a period

of miserable excitement. He begins to spit blood, and "reads his

death-warrant in its colour." After this the letters are short, some of

them still playful and hopeful, others suspicious and violent in their

jealousy--all brimming over with passion. Here is a fragment: "You

know our situation--what hope is there if I should be recovered ever

so soon--my very health will not suffer me to make any great exertion.

I am recommended not even to read poetry, much less write it. I cannot

say forget me--but I would mention that there are impossibilities in

the world. No more of this. I am not strong enough to be weaned--take

no notice of it in your goodnight."

During his apparent convalescence he is constantly begging her to come

and show herself only for half a minute outside of the window through

which he can see her, or to walk a little in the garden. Then he asks

her not to come every day, because he cannot always bear to see her.

But when, according to his wish, she does not come, he is restless and

jealous.

As the end approaches, the letters become ever sadder and more

distressing to read. The last of them are positively harrowing. He is

as wild and helpless in his passionate despair as a child who believes

himself forgotten. It is the mental death-struggle preceding the

physical.

Fanny Brawne's tenderness for her lover never wavered. It is now

evident that, as was only natural, this young girl with the touch of

coquetry in her nature had no suspicion whatever of the gifts and

powers of the poor consumptive youth who worshipped and tortured her.

But she loved him for his own sake, and when, from the last letter,

she learned in what a sad condition he really was, she and her mother

would no longer leave him to the care of his friend, but took him into

their own house in Wentworth Place, where he lived for the last month

before he left for Italy. A stay in that country had been prescribed,

as giving him a last chance of recovery.

The man to whom, in other circumstances, the prospect of seeing the

country for which he had always longed, and whose gods he had awakened

from the dead, would have given supreme happiness, now writes: "This

journey to Italy wakes me at daylight every morning, and haunts me

horribly. I shall endeavour to go, though it be with the sensation of

marching up against a Battery." On board ship he writes, referring

to his attachment to Miss Brawne: "Even if my body would recover of

itself, this would prevent it. The very thing which I want to live

most for will be a great occasion of my death. I cannot help it.... I

wish for death every day and night to deliver me from these pains, and

then I wish death away, for death would destroy even those pains which

are better than nothing. Land and sea, weakness and decline, are great

separators, but death is the great divorcer for ever.... I seldom

think of my brother and sister in America. The thought of leaving Miss

Brawne is beyond everything horrible--the sense of darkness coming over

me--I eternally see her figure eternally vanishing." And in another

letter he writes: "The persuasion that I shall see her no more will

kill me. My dear Brown, I should have had her when I was in health,

and I should have remained well. I can bear to die--I cannot bear to

leave her. O God! God! God! Everything I have in my trunks that reminds

me of her goes through me like a spear. The silk lining she put in my

travelling cap scalds my head. My imagination is horribly vivid about

her--I see her--I hear her. There is nothing in the world of sufficient

interest to divert me from her for a moment.... I cannot say a word

about Naples; I do not feel at all concerned in the thousand novelties

around me. I am afraid to write to her--I should like her to know that

I do not forget her. Oh, Brown, I have coals of fire in my breast. It

surprises me that the human heart is capable of containing and bearing

so much misery. Was I born for this end?"

On the last day of November 1820, Keats wrote his last letter. His

intimate old friend, Dr. Clark, a skilful physician, preserved his life

till the end of the winter. While in Naples, Keats received a letter

from his brother poet, Shelley, inviting him to come to Pisa, where

he would be nursed and cared for in every way. But this invitation he

did not accept. After several weeks of great suffering came rest and

sleep, resignation and tranquillity. He desired that a letter from

his beloved, which he had not dared to read, along with a purse and a

letter which he had received from his sister, should be placed in his

coffin; and that on his gravestone should be inscribed:

"Here lies one whose name was writ in water."

The touch of Shelley's magic wand stiffened the water into crystal, and

the name stands inscribed for all time.[1]

Keats's poetry is the most fragrant flower of English Naturalism.

Before he appeared, this Naturalism had had a long period of vigorous

growth. Its active principle had been evolved by Wordsworth, who

developed it so methodically that he divided his poems into groups,

corresponding to the different periods of human life and the different

faculties of the soul. Coleridge provided it with the support of a

philosophy of nature which had a strong resemblance to Schelling's.

In Scott it assumes the highly successful form of a study of men,

manners, and scenery, inspired by patriotism, by interest in history,

and by a wonderful apprehension of the significance of race. Both in

Moore and Keats it takes the form of gorgeous sensuousness, is the

literary expression of the perceptions of beings whose sensitiveness

to impressions of the beauty of the external world makes that of the

average human being seem blunt and dull. But the sensuousness of

Moore's poetry, which reveals itself artistically in his warm, bright

colouring, is confined to the erotic domain, and is of a light and

playful character. Keats's is full-blooded, serious sensuousness,

by no means specially erotic, but all-embracing, and, in this its

comprehensiveness, one of the most admirable developments of English

Naturalism. This Naturalism led Wordsworth into one extreme, which

has already been referred to; Keats it led into a different and more

poetical one.

Keats was more of the artist than any of his English brother poets.

He troubled himself less about principles than any of them. There is

no groundwork of patriotism in his poetry as there is in Scott's and

Moore's; no message of liberty, as in Shelley's and Byron's; it is pure

art, owing its origin to nothing but the power of imagination. It was

one of his favourite sayings, that the poet should have no principles,

no morality, _no self_. Why? Because the true poet enjoys both light

and shade--has as much delight in conceiving an Iago as an Imogen.

All poets who have forgotten themselves in the theme of their flights

of fancy, have, when engaged in production, to the best of their

ability banished their private peculiarities and preferences. Few have

managed to make such a clean sweep as Keats of their personal hopes,

enthusiasms, and principles. His study was, as one of his admirers has

said, "a painter's studio with very little in it besides the easel."

Keats's poetical indifference to theories and principles was, however,

in itself a theory and a principle--was the philosophy which has its

foundation in poetic worship of nature. To the consistent pantheistic

poet all forms, all shapes, all expressions of life on earth which

engage the imagination, are precious, and all equally precious. Keats,

as poet, recognises no truth of the kind that means improvement or

exclusion; but he has an almost religious faith in imagination as the

source of truth. In one of his letters he expresses himself thus:--"I

am certain of nothing but of the holiness of the heart's affections,

and the truth of Imagination. What the Imagination seizes as Beauty

must be Truth, whether it existed before or not;--for I have the same

idea of all our passions as of Love: they are all, in their sublime,

creative of essential Beauty.... The Imagination may be compared

to Adam's dream; he awoke and found it truth." He enlarges on the

difference between this kind of truth and the truth arrived at by

consecutive reasoning, and concludes with an exclamation which is a

key to the whole of his poetry:--"However it may be, O for a life of

sensations rather than of thoughts!"

He led in great part a life of passive sensation, of pleasure and pain

through the senses. "Take," says Masson, "a book of physiology and go

over the so-called classes of sensations one by one--the sensations

of the mere muscular states; the sensations connected with such vital

processes as circulation, alimentation, respiration, and electrical

intercommunication with surrounding bodies; the sensations of taste;

those of odour; those of hearing; and those of sight--and Keats will be

found to have been unusually endowed in them all."

He had, for example, an extreme sensitiveness to the pleasures of the

palate, and tried to heighten them by extraordinary stimulants. A

friend tells us that he once saw Keats covering his tongue with cayenne

pepper, that he might enjoy the delicious sensation of a draught of

cold claret after it. "Talking of pleasure," he says himself in one

of his letters, "this moment I was writing with one hand and with the

other holding to my mouth a nectarine." It is therefore not surprising

that imagery drawn from the domain of the sense of taste is of frequent

occurrence in Keats's poetry. In his deservedly famous _Ode to

Melancholy_ we are told that this goddess has her sovran shrine in the

very temple of Delight--

"Though seen of none save him _whose strenuous tongue_

_Can burst Joy's grape against his palate fine!_"

And in one of his last sonnets he characteristically mentions "the

palate of my mind losing its gust" as an indication of approaching

death.

Naturally the senses of hearing and sight provided him with a much

greater proportion of his imagery than the inferior, less noble senses.

He had a musician's love of music and a painter's eye for variations

of light and colour. And for all the different kinds of sound and

smell and taste and sensations of touch, he possessed a store of words

which any of the greatest poets might have envied. In short, he was by

nature endowed with qualities which in combination, and in their full

development, constituted supreme capacity to perceive and to reproduce

all the beauty of nature.

To be able to reproduce it was from the very beginning his dream;

and the man who affirmed that, except in the matter of art, he had

no "opinions," expressed enthusiastic approval of the revolution of

opinion in regard to the artificial, so-called classical, poetry of

the eighteenth century, which had been brought about by Wordsworth

and Coleridge. Spenser was Keats's idol, the classic poets were his

aversion. In his poem, _Sleep and Poetry_, he has embodied an artistic

confession of faith in language which could not well be more violent.

After describing the old poetic triumphs of England, he exclaims:

"Could all this be forgotten? Yes, a schism

Nurtured by foppery and barbarism

Made great Apollo blush for this his land.

Men were thought wise who could not understand

His glories; with a puling infant's force

They sway'd about upon a rocking-horse

And thought it Pegasus. Ah! Dismal-soul'd!

The winds of heaven blew, the ocean roll'd

Its gathering waves; ye felt it not. The blue

Bared its eternal bosom, and the dew

Of summer night collected still to make

The morning precious; Beauty was awake!

Why were _ye_ not awake? . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . No, they went about.

Holding a poor decrepit standard out,

Mark'd with most flimsy mottoes, and, in large,

The name of one Boileau!"

Long before the French assault upon this ancient, honoured name, Keats

blows the war-trumpet! Théophile Gautier himself does not treat it with

greater contempt.

It was probably the above passage, the energetic style of which reminds

one of that picture of Kaulbach's in Munich, in which the artist of

the rococo period is painted asleep with the lay-figure in his arms,

which gave occasion to Byron's repeated thrusts at Keats as the

traducer of Pope. For Keats never published a line against Pope; and

when Countess Guiccioli, in her naïve work on Byron, refers to attacks

which infuriated her lover, she is only repeating vague remarks she has

heard. It is, however, highly probable that Keats included Pope among

those whom he reproached with being deaf to the music of the waves and

the winds, and with sleeping whilst the morning unfolded its beauties.

He himself was not of that company. If we examine the distinctive

individuality of Keats's genius, we find its determining element to be

the all-embracing sensuousness already alluded to. Read this stanza of

the _Ode to a Nightingale_:--

"O, for a draught of vintage! that hath been

Cool'd a long age in the deep-delvèd earth,

Tasting of Flora and the country green,

Dance, and Provençal song, and sun-burnt mirth!

O for a beaker full of the warm South,

Full of the true, the blushful Hippocrene,

With beaded bubbles winking at the brim,

And purple-stainèd mouth;

That I might drink, and leave the world unseen,

And with thee fade away into the forest dim."

Main Currents in Nineteenth Century Literature - 4. Naturalism in England · 第 32 / 73 题