SHELLEY

One of the reasons why we find it hard to read the great poets is that

they sadden us with their troubling beauty. Sadden us--and put us to

shame! They compel us to remember the days of our youth; and that

is more than most of us are able to bear! What memories! Ye gods,

what memories!

And this is true, above all, of Shelley. His verses, when we return to

them again, seem to have the very "perfume and suppliance" of the

Spring; of the Spring of our frost-bitten age. Their sweetness has a

poignancy and a pang; the sweetness of things too dear; of things

whose beauty brings aching and a sense of bitter loss. It is the

sudden uncovering of dead violets, with the memory of the soil they

were plucked from. It is the strain of music over wide waters--and

over wider years.

These verses always had something about them that went further

than their actual meaning. They were always a little like planetary

melodies, to which earthly words had been fitted. And now they

carry us, not only beyond words, but beyond thought,--"as doth

Eternity." There is, indeed, a sadness such as one cannot bear long

"and live" about Shelley's poetry.

It troubles our peace. It passes over the sterility of our poor comfort

like a lost child's cry. It beats upon the door. It rattles the shut

casement. It sobs with the rain upon the roof. This is partly because

Shelley, more than any poet, has entered into the loneliness of the

elements, and given up his heart to the wind, and his soul to the

outer darkness. The other poets can _describe_ these things, but he

_becomes_ what they are. Listening to him, we listen to them. And

who can bear to listen to them? Who, in cold blood, can receive the

sorrows of the "many waters"? Who can endure while the heavens,

that are "themselves so old," bend down with the burden of their

secret?

Not to "describe," but to share the life, or the death-in-life, of the

thing you write of, that is the true poetic way. The "arrowy odours"

of those first white violets he makes us feel, darting forth from

among the dead leaves, do they leave us content with the art of their

description? They provoke us with their fine essence. They trouble

us with a fatality we have to share. The passing from its "caverns of

rain" of the newborn cloud--we do not only follow it, obedient to the

spell of rhetoric; we are whirled forward with it, laughing at its

"cenotaph" and our own, into unimagined aerial spaces. One feels all

this and more under Shelley's influence--but alas! as soon as one has

felt it, the old cynical, realistic mood descends again, "heavy as

frost," and the vision of ourselves, poor, straggling, forked animals,

caught up into such regions, shows but as a pantomimic farce; and

we awake, shamed and clothed, and in our "right mind!"

With some poets, with Milton and Matthew Arnold, for example,

there is always a kind of implicit sub-reference, accompanying the

heroic gesture or the magical touch, to our poor normal humanity.

With others, with Tennyson or Browning, for instance, one is often

rather absurdly aware of the worthy Victorian Person, behind the

poetic mask, "singing" his ethical ditty--like a great, self-conscious

speckled thrush upon a prominent bough.

But with Shelley everything is forgotten. It is the authentic fury, the

divine madness; and we pass out of ourselves, and "suffer a

sea-change into something rich and strange." Into something "strange,"

perhaps, rather than something "rich"; for the temperament of

Shelley, like that of Corot, leads him to suppress the more glowing

threads of Nature's woof; leads him to dissolve everything in filmy

white light; in the light of an impossible dawn. Has it been noticed

how all material objects dissolve at his touch, and float away, as

mists and vapours? He has, it seems, an almost insane predilection

for _white_ things. White violets, white pansies, white wind-flowers,

white ghosts, white daisies and white moons thrill us, as we read,

with an almost unearthly awe. White Death, too; the shadow of

white Corruption, has her place there, and the appalling whiteness of

lepers and corpses. The liturgy he chants is the liturgy of the White

Mass, and the "white radiance" of Eternity is his Real Presence.

Weird and fantastic though Shelley's dreams may appear, it is more

than likely that some of them will be realized before we expect it.

His passionate advocacy of what now is called "Feminism," his

sublime revolutionary hopes for the proletariat, his denunciation of

war, his arraignment of so-called "Law" and "Order," his indictment

of conventional Morality, his onslaughts on outworn Institutions, his

invectives against Hypocrisy and Stupidity, are not by any means

the blind Utopian rhetoric that some have called them. That crafty

slur upon brave new thought which we know so well--that

"how-can-you-take-him-seriously" attitude of the "status-quo"

rascals--must not mislead us with regard to Shelley's philosophy.

He is a genuine philosopher, as well as a dreamer. Or shall we say

he is the only kind of philosopher who _must_ be taken seriously--the

philosopher who creates the dreams of the young?

Shelley is, indeed, a most rare and invaluable thinker, as well as a

most exquisite poet. His thought and his poetry can no more be

separated than could the thought and poetry of the Book of Job. His

poetry is the embodiment of his thought, its swift and splendid

incarnation.

Strange though it may seem, there are not very many poets who

have the particular kind of _ice-cold intellect_ necessary if one is to

detach one's self completely from the idols of the market-place.

Indeed, the poetic temperament is only too apt, out of the very

warmth of its sensitive humanity, to idealize the old traditions and

throw a glamour around them. That is why, both in politics and

religion, there have been, ever since Aristophanes, so many great

reactionary poets. Their warmth of human sympathy, their "nihil

alienum" attitude; nay! their very sense of humour, have made this

inevitable. There is so often, too, something chilly and "unhomely,"

something pitiless and cruel, about quite rational reform, which

alienates the poetic mind. It must be remembered that the very thing

that makes so many objects poetical--I mean their _traditional

association_ with normal human life--is the thing that _has to be

destroyed_ if the new birth is to take place. The ice-cold austerity of

mind, indicated in the superb contempt of the Nietzschean phrase,

"human, too human," is a mood essential, if the world is to cast off

its "weeds outworn." Change and growth, when they are living and

organic, imply the element of destruction. It is easy enough to talk

smoothly about natural "evolution." What Nature herself does, as we

are beginning to realize at last, is to advance by leaps and bounds.

One of these mad leaps having produced the human brain, it is for us

to follow her example and slough off another Past. Man is _that

which has to be left behind!_ We thus begin to see what I must be

allowed to call the essential inhumanity of the true prophet. The

false prophet is known by nothing so easily as by his crying "peace"--his

crying, "hands off! enough!"

It is tragic to think how little the world has changed since Shelley's

time, and how horribly relevant to the present hour are his outcries

against militarism, capitalism and privilege. If evidence were

wanted of the profound moral value of Shelley's revolutionary

thought, one has only to read the proclamations of any international

school of socialistic propaganda, and find how they are fighting now

what he fought then. His ideas have never been more necessary than

they are today. Tolstoi has preached some of them, Bernard Shaw

others, and Mr. Wells yet others. But none of our modern rebels

have managed to give to their new thought quite the comprehensiveness

and daring which we find in him.

And he has achieved this by the intensity of his devotion. Modern

literary anarchists are so inclined to fall into jocularity, and irony,

and "human, too human" humour. Their Hamlet-like consciousness

of the "many mansions" of truth tends to paralyse the impetus of

their challenge. They are so often, too, dramatists and novelists

rather than prophets, and their work, while it gains in sympathy and

subtlety, loses in directness. The immense encouragement given to

really drastic, original thought by Nietzsche's writings is an evidence

of the importance of what might be called _cruel positivity_ in

human thinking. Shelley has, however, an advantage over Nietzsche

in his recognition of the transformative power of love. In this respect,

iconoclast though he is, he is rather with the Buddha and the Christ

than with the modern antinomians.

His _mania_ for "love"--one can call it nothing else--frees his

revolutionary thought from that arbitrary isolation, that savage

subjectivity, which one notes in many philosophical anarchists. His

Platonic insistence, too, on the more spiritual aspects of love

separates his anti-Christian "immorality" from the easy-going,

pleasant hedonism of such a bold individualist as Remy de

Gourmont.

Shelley's individualism is always a thing with open doors; a thing

with corridors into Eternity. It never conveys that sad, cynical,

pessimistic sense of "eating and drinking" before we die, which one

is so familiar with just now.

It is precisely this fact that those who reprobate Shelley's

"immorality" should remember. With him "love" was truly a

mystical initiation, a religious sacrament, a means of getting into

touch with the cosmic secret, a path--and perhaps the only path--to

the Beatific Vision.

It is not wise to turn away from Shelley because of his lack of

"humour," of his lack of a "sense of proportion." The mystery of the

world, whatever it may be, shows itself sometimes quite as

indifferent as Shelley to these little nuances. We hear it crying aloud

in the night with no humorous cry; and it is too often to stop our ears

to what we hear, that we jest so lightly! It is doubtful whether

Nature cares greatly for our "sense of proportion."

To return to his poetry, as poetry. The remarkable thing about

Shelley's verse is the manner in which his whole physical and

psychic temperament has passed into it. This is so in a measure with

all poets, but it is so especially with him. His beautiful epicene face,

his boyish figure, his unearthly sensitiveness, haunt us as we read

his lines. They allure and baffle us, as the smile on the lips of the

Mona Lisa. One has the impression of listening to a being who has

really traversed the ways of the sea and returned with its secret. How

else could those indescribable pearly shimmerings, those opal tints

and rosy shadows, be communicated to our poor language? The very

purity of his nature, that ethereal quality in it that strikes a chill into

the heart of "normal humanity," lends a magic, like the reflection of

moonlight upon ice, to these inter-lunar melodies. The same ethereal

transparency of passion which excites, by reason of its sublime

"immorality," the gross fury of the cynical and the base, gives an

immortal beauty, cold and distant and beyond "the shadow of our

night," to his planetary melodies. It is, indeed, the old Pythagorean

"music of the spheres" audible at last again. Such sounds has the

_silence_ that descends upon us when we look up, above the roofs

of the city, at Arcturus or Aldebaran! To return to Shelley from the

turmoil of our gross excitements and cramped domesticities is to

bathe our foreheads in the "dew of the morning" and cool our hands

in the ultimate Sea. Whatever in us transcends the vicious circle of

personal desire; whatever in us belongs to that Life which lasts

while we and our individual cravings perish; whatever in us

underlies and overlooks this mad procession of "births and

forgettings;" whatever in us "beacons from the abode where the

Eternal are" rises to meet this celestial harmony, and sloughs off the

"muddy vesture" that would "grossly close it in." What separates

Shelley from all other poets is that with them "art" is the paramount

concern, and, after "art," morality.

With him one thinks little of art, little of the substance of any

material "teaching;" one is simply transported into the high, cold

regions where the creative gods build, like children, domes of

"many-coloured glass," wherewith to "stain the white radiance of

eternity." And after such a plunge into the antenatal reservoirs of life,

we may, if we can, go on spitting venom and raking in the gutter

with the old too-human zest, and let the "ineffectual" madman pass

and be forgotten!

I said that the effect of his writing is to trouble and sadden us. It was

as a man I spoke. That in us which responds to Shelley's verse is

precisely what dreams of the transmutation of "man" into "beyond-man."

That which saddens humanity beyond words is the daily food

of the immortals.

And yet, even in the circle of our natural moods, there is something,

sometimes, that responds to such strains as "When the lamp is

shattered" and "One word is too often profaned." Perhaps only those

who have known what it is to love as children love, and to lose hope

with the absoluteness wherewith children lose it, can enter

completely into this delicate despair. It is, indeed, the long, pitiful,

sobbing cry of bewildered disenchantment that breaks the heart of

youth when it first learns of what gross clay earth and men are made.

And the artless simplicity of Shelley's technique--much more really

simple than the conscious "childishness" exquisite though that is, of

a Blake or Verlaine--lends itself so wonderfully to the expression of

youth's eternal sorrow. His best lyrics use words that fall into their

places with the "dying fall" of an actual fit of sobbing. And they are

so naturally chosen, his images and metaphors! Even when they

seem most remote, they are such as frail young hearts cannot help

happening upon, as they soothe their "love-laden souls" in "secret

hour."

The infallible test of genuine poetry is that it forces us to recall

emotions that we ourselves have had, with the very form and

circumstance of their passion. And who can read the verses of

Shelley without recalling such? That peculiar poignancy of memory,

like a sharp spear, which arrests us at the smell of certain plants or

mosses, or nameless earth-mould, or "growths by the margins of

pond-waters;" that poignancy which brings back the indescribable

balm of Spring and the bitter-sweetness of irremediable loss; who

can communicate it like Shelley?

There are lovely touches of foreign scenery in his poems,

particularly of the vineyards and olive gardens and clear-cut hill

towns of Italy; but for English readers it will always be the rosemary

"that is for remembrance" and the pansies that "are for thoughts" that

give their perfume to the feelings he excites.

Other poets may be remembered at other times, but it is when the

sun-warmed woods smell of the first primroses, and the daffodils,

coming "before the swallow dares," lift up their heads above the

grass, that the sting of this sweetness, too exquisite to last beyond a

moment, brings its intolerable hope and its intolerable regret.

Visions and Revisions: A Book of Literary Devotions · 第 19 / 35 题