PREFACE.

The First Volume of these Poems has already been submitted to

general perusal. It was published, as an experiment which, I hoped,

might be of some use to ascertain, how far, by fitting to metrical

arrangement a selection of the real language of men in a state of

vivid sensation, that sort of pleasure and that quantity of pleasure

may be imparted, which a Poet may rationally endeavour to impart.

I had formed no very inaccurate estimate of the probable effect of

those Poems: I flattered myself that they who should be pleased with

them would read them with more than common pleasure: and on the

other hand I was well aware that by those who should dislike them

they would be read with more than common dislike. The result has

differed from my expectation in this only, that I have pleased a

greater number, than I ventured to hope I should please.

For the sake of variety and from a consciousness of my own weakness

I was induced to request the assistance of a Friend, who furnished me

with the Poems of the ANCIENT MARINER, the FOSTER-MOTHER'S TALE, the

NIGHTINGALE, the DUNGEON, and the Poem entitled LOVE. I should not,

however, have requested this assistance, had I not believed that the

poems of my Friend would in a great measure have the same tendency

as my own, and that, though there would be found a difference, there

would be found no discordance in the colours of our style; as our

opinions on the subject of poetry do almost entirely coincide.

Several of my Friends are anxious for the success of these Poems

from a belief, that if the views, with which they were composed,

were indeed realized, a class of Poetry would be produced, well

adapted to interest mankind permanently, and not unimportant in the

multiplicity and in the quality of its moral relations: and on this

account they have advised me to prefix a systematic defence of the

theory, upon which the poems were written. But I was unwilling to

undertake the task, because I knew that on this occasion the Reader

would look coldly upon my arguments, since I might be suspected of

having been principally influenced by the selfish and foolish hope

of _reasoning_ him into an approbation of these particular Poems:

and I was still more unwilling to undertake the task, because

adequately to display my opinions and fully to enforce my arguments

would require a space wholly disproportionate to the nature of a

preface. For to treat the subject with the clearness and coherence,

of which I believe it susceptible, it would be necessary to give a

full account of the present state of the public taste in this country,

and to determine how far this taste is healthy or depraved; which

again could not be determined, without pointing out, in what manner

language and the human mind act and react on each other, and without

retracing the revolutions not of literature alone but likewise of

society itself. I have therefore altogether declined to enter

regularly upon this defence; yet I am sensible, that there would be

some impropriety in abruptly obtruding upon the Public, without a

few words of introduction, Poems so materially different from those,

upon which general approbation is at present bestowed.

It is supposed, that by the act of writing in verse an Author makes

a formal engagement that he will gratify certain known habits of

association, that he not only thus apprizes the Reader that certain

classes of ideas and expressions will be found in his book, but that

others will be carefully excluded. This exponent or symbol held

forth by metrical language must in different aeras of literature

have excited very different expectations: for example, in the age of

Catullus Terence and Lucretius, and that of Statius or Claudian, and

in our own country, in the age of Shakespeare and Beaumont and

Fletcher, and that of Donne and Cowley, or Dryden, or Pope. I will

not take upon me to determine the exact import of the promise which

by the act of writing in verse an Author in the present day makes to

his Reader; but I am certain it will appear to many persons that I

have not fulfilled the terms of an engagement thus voluntarily

contracted. I hope therefore the Reader will not censure me, if I

attempt to state what I have proposed to myself to perform, and also,

(as far as the limits of a preface will permit) to explain some of

the chief reasons which have determined me in the choice of my

purpose: that at least he may be spared any unpleasant feeling of

disappointment, and that I myself may be protected from the most

dishonorable accusation which can be brought against an Author,

namely, that of an indolence which prevents him from endeavouring to

ascertain what is his duty, or, when his duty is ascertained

prevents him from performing it.

The principal object then which I proposed to myself in these Poems

was to make the incidents of common life interesting by tracing in

them, truly though not ostentatiously, the primary laws of our nature:

chiefly as far as regards the manner in which we associate ideas in

a state of excitement. Low and rustic life was generally chosen

because in that situation the essential passions of the heart find a

better soil in which they can attain their maturity, are less under

restraint, and speak a plainer and more emphatic language; because

in that situation our elementary feelings exist in a state of

greater simplicity and consequently may be more accurately

contemplated and more forcibly communicated; because the manners of

rural life germinate from those elementary feelings; and from the

necessary character of rural occupations are more easily comprehended;

and are more durable; and lastly, because in that situation the

passions of men are incorporated with the beautiful and permanent

forms of nature. The language too of these men is adopted (purified

indeed from what appear to be its real defects, from all lasting and

rational causes of dislike or disgust) because such men hourly

communicate with the best objects from which the best part of

language is originally derived; and because, from their rank in

society and the sameness and narrow circle of their intercourse,

being less under the action of social vanity they convey their

feelings and notions in simple and unelaborated expressions.

Accordingly such a language arising out of repeated experience and

regular feelings is a more permanent and a far more philosophical

language than that which is frequently substituted for it by Poets,

who think that they are conferring honour upon themselves and their

art in proportion as they separate themselves from the sympathies of

men, and indulge in arbitrary and capricious habits of expression in

order to furnish food for fickle tastes and fickle appetites of

their own creation.[1]

[Footnote 1: It is worth while here to observe that the affecting

parts of Chaucer are almost always expressed in language pure and

universally intelligible even to this day.]

I cannot be insensible of the present outcry against the triviality

and meanness both of thought and language, which some of my

contemporaries have occasionally introduced into their metrical

compositions; and I acknowledge that this defect where it exists, is

more dishonorable to the Writer's own character than false

refinement or arbitrary innovation, though I should contend at the

same time that it is far less pernicious in the sum of its

consequences. From such verses the Poems in these volumes will be

found distinguished at least by one mark of difference, that each of

them has a worthy _purpose_. Not that I mean to say, that I always

began to write with a distinct purpose formally conceived; but I

believe that my habits of meditation have so formed my feelings, as

that my descriptions of such objects as strongly excite those

feelings, will be found to carry along with them a _purpose_. If in

this opinion I am mistaken I can have little right to the name of a

Poet. For all good poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful

feelings; but though this be true, Poems to which any value can be

attached, were never produced on any variety of subjects but by a

man who being possessed of more than usual organic sensibility had

also thought long and deeply. For our continued influxes of feeling

are modified and directed by our thoughts, which are indeed the

representatives of all our past feelings; and as by contemplating

the relation of these general representatives to each other, we

discover what is really important to men, so by the repetition and

continuance of this act feelings connected with important subjects

will be nourished, till at length, if we be originally possessed of

much organic sensibility, such habits of mind will be produced that

by obeying blindly and mechanically the impulses of those habits we

shall describe objects and utter sentiments of such a nature and in

such connection with each other, that the understanding of the being

to whom we address ourselves, if he be in a healthful state of

association, must necessarily be in some degree enlightened, his

taste exalted, and his affections ameliorated.

I have said that each of these poems has a purpose. I have also

informed my Reader what this purpose will be found principally to be:

namely to illustrate the manner in which our feelings and ideas are

associated in a state of excitement. But speaking in less general

language, it is to follow the fluxes and refluxes of the mind when

agitated by the great and simple affections of our nature. This

object I have endeavoured in these short essays to attain by various

means; by tracing the maternal passion through many of its more

subtle windings, as in the poems of the IDIOT BOY and the MAD MOTHER;

by accompanying the last struggles of a human being at the approach

of death, cleaving in solitude to life and society, as in the Poem

of the FORSAKEN INDIAN; by shewing, as in the Stanzas entitled WE

ARE SEVEN, the perplexity and obscurity which in childhood attend

our notion of death, or rather our utter inability to admit that

notion; or by displaying the strength of fraternal, or to speak more

philosophically, of moral attachment when early associated with the

great and beautiful objects of nature, as in THE BROTHERS; or, as in

the Incident of SIMON LEE, by placing my Reader in the way of

receiving from ordinary moral sensations another and more salutary

impression than we are accustomed to receive from them. It has also

been part of my general purpose to attempt to sketch characters

under the influence of less impassioned feelings, as in the OLD MAN

TRAVELLING, THE TWO THIEVES, &c. characters of which the elements

are simple, belonging rather to nature than to manners, such as

exist now and will probably always exist, and which from their

constitution may be distinctly and profitably contemplated. I will

not abuse the indulgence of my Reader by dwelling longer upon this

subject; but it is proper that I should mention one other

circumstance which distinguishes these Poems from the popular Poetry

of the day; it is this, that the feeling therein developed gives

importance to the action and situation and not the action and

situation to the feeling. My meaning will be rendered perfectly

intelligible by referring my Reader to the Poems entitled POOR SUSAN

and the CHILDLESS FATHER, particularly to the last Stanza of the

latter Poem.

I will not suffer a sense of false modesty to prevent me from

asserting, that I point my Reader's attention to this mark of

distinction far less for the sake of these particular Poems than

from the general importance of the subject. The subject is indeed

important! For the human mind is capable of excitement without the

application of gross and violent stimulants; and he must have a very

faint perception of its beauty and dignity who does not know this,

and who does not further know that one being is elevated above

another in proportion as he possesses this capability. It has

therefore appeared to me that to endeavour to produce or enlarge

this capability is one of the best services in which, at any period,

a Writer can be engaged; but this service, excellent at all times,

is especially so at the present day. For a multitude of causes

unknown to former times are now acting with a combined force to

blunt the discriminating powers of the mind, and unfitting it for

all voluntary exertion to reduce it to a state of almost savage

torpor. The most effective of these causes are the great national

events which are daily taking place, and the encreasing accumulation

of men in cities, where the uniformity of their occupations produces

a craving for extraordinary incident which the rapid communication

of intelligence hourly gratifies. To this tendency of life and

manners the literature and theatrical exhibitions of the country have

conformed themselves. The invaluable works of our elder writers, I

had almost said the works of Shakespeare and Milton, are driven into

neglect by frantic novels, sickly and stupid German Tragedies, and

deluges of idle and extravagant stories in verse.--When I think upon

this degrading thirst after outrageous stimulation I am almost

ashamed to have spoken of the feeble effort with which I have

endeavoured to counteract it; and reflecting upon the magnitude of

the general evil, I should be oppressed with no dishonorable

melancholy, had I not a deep impression of certain inherent and

indestructible qualities of the human mind, and likewise of certain

powers in the great and permanent objects that act upon it which are

equally inherent and indestructible; and did I not further add to

this impression a belief that the time is approaching when the evil

will be systematically opposed by men of greater powers and with far

more distinguished success.

Having dwelt thus long on the subjects and aim of these Poems, I

shall request the Reader's permission to apprize him of a few

circumstances relating to their _style_, in order, among other

reasons, that I may not be censured for not having performed what I

never attempted. Except in a very few instances the Reader will find

no personifications of abstract ideas in these volumes, not that I

mean to censure such personifications: they may be well fitted for

certain sorts of composition, but in these Poems I propose to myself

to imitate, and, as far as possible, to adopt the very language of

men, and I do not find that such personifications make any regular

or natural part of that language. I wish to keep my Reader in the

company of flesh and blood, persuaded that by so doing I shall

interest him. Not but that I believe that others who pursue a

different track may interest him likewise: I do not interfere with

their claim, I only wish to prefer a different claim of my own.

There will also be found in these volumes little of what is usually

called poetic diction; I have taken as much pains to avoid it as

others ordinarily take to produce it; this I have done for the

reason already alleged, to bring my language near to the language of

men, and further, because the pleasure which I have proposed to

myself to impart is of a kind very different from that which is

supposed by many persons to be the proper object of poetry. I do not

know how without being culpably particular I can give my Reader a

more exact notion of the style in which I wished these poems to be

written than by informing him that I have at all times endeavoured

to look steadily at my subject, consequently I hope it will be found

that there is in these Poems little falsehood of description, and

that my ideas are expressed in language fitted to their respective

importance. Something I must have gained by this practice, as it is

friendly to one property of all good poetry, namely good sense; but

it has necessarily cut me off from a large portion of phrases and

figures of speech which from father to son have long been regarded

as the common inheritance of Poets. I have also thought it expedient

to restrict myself still further, having abstained from the use of

many expressions, in themselves proper and beautiful, but which have

been foolishly repeated by bad Poets till such feelings of disgust

are connected with them as it is scarcely possible by any art of

association to overpower.

If in a Poem there should be found a series of lines, or even a

single line, in which the language, though naturally arranged and

according to the strict laws of metre, does not differ from that of

prose, there is a numerous class of critics who, when they stumble

upon these prosaisms as they call them, imagine that they have made

a notable discovery, and exult over the Poet as over a man ignorant

of his own profession. Now these men would establish a canon of

criticism which the Reader will conclude he must utterly reject if he

wishes to be pleased with these volumes. And it would be a most easy

task to prove to him that not only the language of a large portion

of every good poem, even of the most elevated character, must

necessarily, except with reference to the metre, in no respect

differ from that of good prose, but likewise that some of the most

interesting parts of the best poems will be found to be strictly the

language of prose when prose is well written. The truth of this

assertion might be demonstrated by innumerable passages from almost

all the poetical writings, even of Milton himself. I have not space

for much quotation; but, to illustrate the subject in a general

manner, I will here adduce a short composition of Gray, who was at

the head of those who by their reasonings have attempted to widen

the space of separation betwixt Prose and Metrical composition, and

was more than any other man curiously elaborate in the structure of

his own poetic diction.

In vain to me the smiling mornings shine,

And reddening Phoebus lifts his golden fire:

The birds in vain their amorous descant join,

Or chearful fields resume their green attire:

These ears alas! for other notes repine;

_A different object do these eyes require;

My lonely anguish melts no heart but mine;

And in my breast the imperfect joys expire;_

Yet Morning smiles the busy race to cheer,

And new-born pleasure brings to happier men;

The fields to all their wonted tribute bear;

To warm their little loves the birds complain.

_I fruitless mourn to him that cannot hear

And weep the more because I weep in vain._

It will easily be perceived that the only part of this Sonnet which

is of any value is the lines printed in Italics: it is equally

obvious that except in the rhyme, and in the use of the single word

"fruitless" for fruitlessly, which is so far a defect, the language

of these lines does in no respect differ from that of prose.

Is there then, it will be asked, no essential difference between the

language of prose and metrical composition? I answer that there

neither is nor can be any essential difference. We are fond of

tracing the resemblance between Poetry and Painting, and, accordingly,

we call them Sisters: but where shall we find bonds of connection

sufficiently strict to typify the affinity betwixt metrical and

prose composition? They both speak by and to the same organs; the

bodies in which both of them are clothed may be said to be of the

same substance, their affections are kindred and almost identical,

not necessarily differing even in degree; Poetry [2] sheds no tears

"such as Angels weep," but natural and human tears; she can boast of

no celestial Ichor that distinguishes her vital juices from those of

prose; the same human blood circulates through the veins of them both.

[Footnote 2: I here use the word "Poetry" (though against my own

judgment) as opposed to the word Prose, and synonomous with metrical

composition. But much confusion has been introduced into criticism

by this contradistinction of Poetry and Prose, instead of the more

philosophical one of Poetry and Science. The only strict antithesis

to Prose is Metre.]

If it be affirmed that rhyme and metrical arrangement of themselves

constitute a distinction which overturns what I have been saying on

the strict affinity of metrical language with that of prose, and

paves the way for other distinctions which the mind voluntarily

admits, I answer that the distinction of rhyme and metre is regular

and uniform, and not, like that which is produced by what is usually

called poetic diction, arbitrary and subject to infinite caprices

upon which no calculation whatever can be made. In the one case

the Reader is utterly at the mercy of the Poet respecting what

imagery or diction he may choose to connect with the passion,

whereas in the other the metre obeys certain laws, to which the

Poet and Reader both willingly submit because they are certain,

and because no interference is made by them with the passion but

such as the concurring testimony of ages has shewn to heighten

and improve the pleasure which co-exists with it. It will now

be proper to answer an obvious question, namely, why, professing

these opinions have I written in verse? To this in the first place

I reply, because, however I may have restricted myself, there is

still left open to me what confessedly constitutes the most valuable

object of all writing whether in prose or verse, the great and

universal passions of men, the most general and interesting of

their occupations, and the entire world of nature, from which I am

at liberty to supply myself with endless combinations of forms and

imagery. Now, granting for a moment that whatever is interesting in

these objects may be as vividly described in prose, why am I to be

condemned if to such description I have endeavoured to superadd the

charm which by the consent of all nations is acknowledged to exist

in metrical language? To this it will be answered, that a very small

part of the pleasure given by Poetry depends upon the metre, and

that it is injudicious to write in metre unless it be accompanied

with the other artificial distinctions of style with which metre is

usually accompanied, and that by such deviation more will be lost

from the shock which will be thereby given to the Reader's

associations than will be counterbalanced by any pleasure which he

can derive from the general power of numbers. In answer to those who

thus contend for the necessity of accompanying metre with certain

appropriate colours of style in order to the accomplishment of its

appropriate end, and who also, in my opinion, greatly under-rate the

power of metre in itself, it might perhaps be almost sufficient to

observe that poems are extant, written upon more humble subjects,

and in a more naked and simple style than what I have aimed at,

which poems have continued to give pleasure from generation to

generation. Now, if nakedness and simplicity be a defect, the fact

here mentioned affords a strong presumption that poems somewhat less

naked and simple are capable of affording pleasure at the present day;

and all that I am now attempting is to justify myself for having

written under the impression of this belief.

But I might point out various causes why, when the style is manly,

and the subject of some importance, words metrically arranged will

long continue to impart such a pleasure to mankind as he who is

sensible of the extent of that pleasure will be desirous to impart.

The end of Poetry is to produce excitement in coexistence with an

overbalance of pleasure. Now, by the supposition, excitement is an

unusual and irregular state of the mind; ideas and feelings do not

in that state succeed each other in accustomed order. But if the

words by which this excitement is produced are in themselves powerful,

or the images and feelings have an undue proportion of pain connected

with them, there is some danger that the excitement may be carried

beyond its proper bounds. Now the co-presence of something regular,

something to which the mind has been accustomed when in an unexcited

or a less excited state, cannot but have great efficacy in tempering

and restraining the passion by an intertexture of ordinary feeling.

This may be illustrated by appealing to the Reader's own experience

of the reluctance with which he comes to the re-perusal of the

distressful parts of Clarissa Harlowe, or the Gamester. While

Shakespeare's writings, in the most pathetic scenes, never act upon

us as pathetic beyond the bounds of pleasure--an effect which is in

a great degree to be ascribed to small, but continual and regular

impulses of pleasurable surprise from the metrical arrangement.--On

the other hand (what it must be allowed will much more frequently

happen) if the Poet's words should be incommensurate with the passion,

and inadequate to raise the Reader to a height of desirable

excitement, then, (unless the Poet's choice of his metre has been

grossly injudicious) in the feelings of pleasure which the Reader

has been accustomed to connect with metre in general, and in the

feeling, whether chearful or melancholy, which he has been

accustomed to connect with that particular movement of metre, there

will be found something which will greatly contribute to impart

passion to the words, and to effect the complex end which the Poet

proposes to himself.

If I had undertaken a systematic defence of the theory upon which

these poems are written, it would have been my duty to develope the

various causes upon which the pleasure received from metrical

language depends. Among the chief of these causes is to be reckoned

a principle which must be well known to those who have made any of

the Arts the object of accurate reflection; I mean the pleasure

which the mind derives from the perception of similitude in

dissimilitude. This principle is the great spring of the activity of

our minds and their chief feeder. From this principle the direction

of the sexual appetite, and all the passions connected with it take

their origin: It is the life of our ordinary conversation; and upon

the accuracy with which similitude in dissimilitude, and

dissimilitude in similitude are perceived, depend our taste and our

moral feelings. It would not have been a useless employment to have

applied this principle to the consideration of metre, and to have

shewn that metre is hence enabled to afford much pleasure, and to

have pointed out in what manner that pleasure is produced. But my

limits will not permit me to enter upon this subject, and I must

content myself with a general summary.

I have said that Poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful

feelings: it takes its origin from emotion recollected in

tranquillity: the emotion is contemplated till by a species of

reaction the tranquillity gradually disappears, and an emotion,

similar to that which was before the subject of contemplation, is

gradually produced, and does itself actually exist in the mind. In

this mood successful composition generally begins, and in a mood

similar to this it is carried on; but the emotion, of whatever kind

and in whatever degree, from various causes is qualified by various

pleasures, so that in describing any passions whatsoever, which are

voluntarily described, the mind will upon the whole be in a state of

enjoyment. Now if Nature be thus cautious in preserving in a state

of enjoyment a being thus employed, the Poet ought to profit by the

lesson thus held forth to him, and ought especially to take care,

that whatever passions he communicates to his Reader, those passions,

if his Reader's mind be sound and vigorous, should always be

accompanied with an overbalance of pleasure. Now the music of

harmonious metrical language, the sense of difficulty overcome, and

the blind association of pleasure which has been previously received

from works of rhyme or metre of the same or similar construction,

all these imperceptibly make up a complex feeling of delight, which

is of the most important use in tempering the painful feeling which

will always be found intermingled with powerful descriptions of the

deeper passions. This effect is always produced in pathetic and

impassioned poetry; while in lighter compositions the ease and

gracefulness with which the Poet manages his numbers are themselves

confessedly a principal source of the gratification of the Reader. I

might perhaps include all which it is _necessary_ to say upon this

subject by affirming what few persons will deny, that of two

descriptions either of passions, manners, or characters, each of

them equally well executed, the one in prose and the other in verse,

the verse will be read a hundred times where the prose is read once.

We see that Pope by the power of verse alone, has contrived to

render the plainest common sense interesting, and even frequently to

invest it with the appearance of passion. In consequence of these

convictions I related in metre the Tale of GOODY BLAKE and HARRY GILL,

which is one of the rudest of this collection. I wished to draw

attention to the truth that the power of the human imagination is

sufficient to produce such changes even in our physical nature as

might almost appear miraculous. The truth is an important one; the

fact (for it is a _fact_) is a valuable illustration of it. And I

have the satisfaction of knowing that it has been communicated to

many hundreds of people who would never have heard of it, had it not

been narrated as a Ballad, and in a more impressive metre than is

usual in Ballads.

Having thus adverted to a few of the reasons why I have written in

verse, and why I have chosen subjects from common life, and

endeavoured to bring my language near to the real language of men,

if I have been too minute in pleading my own cause, I have at the

same time been treating a subject of general interest; and it is for

this reason that I request the Reader's permission to add a few

words with reference solely to these particular poems, and to some

defects which will probably be found in them. I am sensible that my

associations must have sometimes been particular instead of general,

and that, consequently, giving to things a false importance,

sometimes from diseased impulses I may have written upon unworthy

subject; but I am less apprehensive on this account, than that my

language may frequently have suffered from those arbitrary

connections of feelings and ideas with particular words, from which

no man can altogether protect himself. Hence I have no doubt that in

some instances feelings even of the ludicrous may be given to my

Readers by expressions which appeared to me tender and pathetic.

Such faulty expressions, were I convinced they were faulty at present,

and that they must necessarily continue to be so, I would willingly

take all reasonable pains to correct. But it is dangerous to make

these alterations on the simple authority of a few individuals, or

even of certain classes of men; for where the understanding of an

Author is not convinced, or his feelings altered, this cannot be

done without great injury to himself: for his own feelings are his

stay and support, and if he sets them aside in one instance, he may

be induced to repeat this act till his mind loses all confidence in

itself and becomes utterly debilitated. To this it may be added,

that the Reader ought never to forget that he is himself exposed to

the same errors as the Poet, and perhaps in a much greater degree:

for there can be no presumption in saying that it is not probable he

will be so well acquainted with the various stages of meaning

through which words have passed, or with the fickleness or stability

of the relations of particular ideas to each other; and above all,

since he is so much less interested in the subject, he may decide

lightly and carelessly.

Long as I have detained my Reader, I hope he will permit me to

caution him against a mode of false criticism which has been applied

to Poetry in which the language closely resembles that of life and

nature. Such verses have been triumphed over in parodies of which

Dr. Johnson's Stanza is a fair specimen.

"I put my hat upon my head,

And walk'd into the Strand,

And there I met another man

Whose hat was in his hand."

Immediately under these lines I will place one of the most justly

admired stanzas of the "_Babes_ in the Wood."

"These pretty Babes with hand in hand

Went wandering up and down;

But never more they saw the Man

Approaching from the Town."

In both of these stanzas the words, and the order of the words, in

no respect differ from the most unimpassioned conversation. There

are words in both, for example, "the Strand," and "the Town,"

connected with none but the most familiar ideas; yet the one stanza

we admit as admirable, and the other as a fair example of the

superlatively contemptible. Whence arises this difference? Not from

the metre, not from the language, not from the order of the words;

but the _matter_ expressed in Dr. Johnson's stanza is contemptible.

The proper method of treating trivial and simple verses to which

Dr. Johnson's stanza would be a fair parallelism is not to say this

is a bad kind of poetry, or this is not poetry, but this wants sense;

it is neither interesting in itself, nor can _lead_ to any thing

interesting; the images neither originate in that sane state of

feeling which arises out of thought, nor can excite thought or

feeling in the Reader. This is the only sensible manner of dealing

with such verses: Why trouble yourself about the species till you

have previously decided upon the genus? Why take pains to prove that

an Ape is not a Newton when it is self-evident that he is not a man.

I have one request to make of my Reader, which is, that in judging

these Poems he would decide by his own feelings genuinely, and not

by reflection upon what will probably be the judgment of others. How

common is it to hear a person say, "I myself do not object to this

style of composition or this or that expression, but to such and

such classes of people it will appear mean or ludicrous." This mode

of criticism so destructive of all sound unadulterated judgment is

almost universal: I have therefore to request that the Reader would

abide independently by his own feelings, and that if he finds

himself affected he would not suffer such conjectures to interfere

with his pleasure.

If an Author by any single composition has impressed us with respect

for his talents, it is useful to consider this as affording a

presumption, that, on other occasions where we have been displeased,

he nevertheless may not have written ill or absurdly; and, further,

to give him so much credit for this one composition as may induce us

to review what has displeased us with more care than we should

otherwise have bestowed upon it. This is not only an act of justice,

but in our decisions upon poetry especially, may conduce in a high

degree to the improvement of our own taste: for an _accurate_ taste

in Poetry and in all the other arts, as Sir Joshua Reynolds has

observed, is an _acquired_ talent, which can only be produced by

thought and a long continued intercourse with the best models of

composition. This is mentioned not with so ridiculous a purpose as

to prevent the most inexperienced Reader from judging for himself,

(I have already said that I wish him to judge for himself;) but

merely to temper the rashness of decision, and to suggest that if

Poetry be a subject on which much time has not been bestowed, the

judgment may be erroneous, and that in many cases it necessarily

will be so.

I know that nothing would have so effectually contributed to further

the end which I have in view as to have shewn of what kind the

pleasure is, and how the pleasure is produced which is confessedly

produced by metrical composition essentially different from what I

have here endeavoured to recommend; for the Reader will say that he

has been pleased by such composition and what can I do more for him?

The power of any art is limited and he will suspect that if I propose

to furnish him with new friends it is only upon condition of his

abandoning his old friends. Besides, as I have said, the Reader is

himself conscious of the pleasure which he has received from such

composition, composition to which he has peculiarly attached the

endearing name of Poetry; and all men feel an habitual gratitude,

and something of an honorable bigotry for the objects which have

long continued to please them: we not only wish to be pleased, but

to be pleased in that particular way in which we have been

accustomed to be pleased. There is a host of arguments in these

feelings; and I should be the less able to combat them successfully,

as I am willing to allow, that, in order entirely to enjoy the

Poetry which I am recommending, it would be necessary to give up

much of what is ordinarily enjoyed. But would my limits have

permitted me to point out how this pleasure is produced, I might

have removed many obstacles, and assisted my Reader in perceiving

that the powers of language are not so limited as he may suppose; and

that it is possible that poetry may give other enjoyments, of a purer,

more lasting, and more exquisite nature. But this part of my subject

I have been obliged altogether to omit: as it has been less my

present aim to prove that the interest excited by some other kinds

of poetry is less vivid, and less worthy of the nobler powers of the

mind, than to offer reasons for presuming, that, if the object which

I have proposed to myself were adequately attained, a species of

poetry would be produced, which is genuine poetry; in its nature

well adapted to interest mankind permanently, and likewise important

in the multiplicity and quality of its moral relations. From what

has been said, and from a perusal of the Poems, the Reader will be

able clearly to perceive the object which I have proposed to myself:

he will determine how far I have attained this object; and, what is

a much more important question, whether it be worth attaining; and

upon the decision of these two questions will rest my claim to the

approbation of the public.

Lyrical Ballads, with Other Poems, 1800, Volume 1 · 第 7 / 57 题