IV

The trouble with most of us is that we found our taste for poetry upon

particular authors, instead of upon literature as a whole, or, better yet,

upon life and reality. Hence we form standards instead of principles.

Standards are limited, rigid, uncompromising, while principles are

flexible, expansive, creative. If we are wedded to the Miltonic standard

of poetry, the classic standards, we shall have great difficulties with

Whitman; but if we have founded our taste upon natural principles--if we

have learned to approach literature through reality, instead of reality

through literature--we shall not be the victims of any one style or model;

we shall be made free of all. The real test of art, of any art, as Burke

long ago said, and as quoted by Mr. Howells in his trenchant little volume

called "Criticism and Fiction," is to be sought outside of art, namely, in

nature. "I can judge but poorly of anything while I measure it by no other

standard than itself. The true standard of the arts is in every man's

power; and an easy observation of the most common, sometimes of the

meanest, things in nature will give the truest lights." It is thought that

the preëminence of the Greek standards is settled when we say they are

natural. Yes, but Nature is not Greek. She is Asiatic, German, English, as

well.

V

In poetry, in art, a man must sustain a certain vital relation to his

work, and that work must sustain a certain vital relation to the laws of

mind and of life. That is all, and that leaves the doors very wide. We are

not to ask, Is it like this or like that? but, Is it vital, is it real, is

it a consistent, well-organized whole?

The poet must always interpret himself and nature after his own fashion.

Is his fashion adequate? Is the interpretation vivid and real? Do his

lines cut to the quick, and beget heat and joy in the soul? If we cannot

make the poet's ideal our own by sharing his enthusiasm for it, the

trouble is as likely to be in ourselves as in him. In any case he must be

a law unto himself.

The creative artist differs from the mere writer or thinker in this: he

sustains a direct personal relation to his subject through emotion,

intuition, will. The indirect, impersonal relation which works by

reflection, comparison, and analysis is that of the critic and

philosopher. The man is an artist when he gives us a concrete and

immediate impression of reality: from his hands we get the thing itself;

from the critic and thinker we get ideas _about_ the thing. The poet does

not merely say the world is beautiful; he shows it as beautiful: he does

not describe the flower; he places it before us. What are the enemies of

art? Reflection, didacticism, description, the turgid, the obscure. A poet

with a thesis to sustain is more or less barred from the freedom of pure

art. It is by direct and unconsidered expression, says Scherer, that art

communicates with reality. The things that make for art, then, are

feeling, intuition, sentiment, soul, a fresh and vigorous sense of real

things,--in fact, all that makes for life, health, and wholeness. Goethe

is more truly an artist in the first part of Faust than in the second;

Arnold has a more truly artistic mind than Lowell.

The principles of art are always the same in the respect I have indicated,

just as the principles of life are always the same, or of health and

longevity are always the same. No writer is an artist who is related to

his subject simply by mental or logical grip alone: he must have a certain

emotional affiliation and identity with it; he does not so much convey to

us ideas and principles as pictures, parables, impressions,--a lively

sense of real things. When we put Whitman outside the pale of art, we must

show his shortcomings here; we must show that he is not fluid and

generative,--that he paints instead of interprets, that he gives us

reasons instead of impulses, a stone when we ask for bread. "I do not

give a little charity," he says; "when I give, I give myself." This the

artist always does, not his mind merely, but his soul, his personality.

"Leaves of Grass" is as direct an emanation from a central personal force

as any book in literature, and always carries its own test and its own

proof. It never hardens into a system, it never ceases to be penetrated

with will and emotion, it never declines from the order of deeds to the

order of mere thoughts. All is movement, progress, evolution, picture,

parable, impulse.

It is on these grounds that Whitman, first of all, is an artist. He has

the artist temperament. His whole life was that of a man who lives to

ideal ends,--who lived to bestow himself upon others, to extract from life

its meaning and its joy.

Whitman: A Study · 第 75 / 140 题