IN writing this brief sketch of the Life of Tennyson, and this attempt to
appreciate his work, I have rested almost entirely on the Biography by
Lord Tennyson (with his kind permission) and on the text of the Poems.
As to the Life, doubtless current anecdotes, not given in the Biography,
are known to me, and to most people. But as they must also be familiar
to the author of the Biography, I have not thought it desirable to
include what he rejected. The works of the “localisers” I have not read:
Tennyson disliked these researches, as a rule, and they appear to be
unessential, and often hazardous. The professed commentators I have not
consulted. It appeared better to give one’s own impressions of the
Poems, unaffected by the impressions of others, except in one or two
cases where matters of fact rather than of taste seemed to be in
question. Thus on two or three points I have ventured to differ from a
distinguished living critic, and have given the reasons for my dissent.
Professor Bradley’s _Commentary on In Memoriam_ {1} came out after this
sketch was in print. Many of the comments cited by Mr Bradley from his
predecessors appear to justify my neglect of these curious inquirers.
The “difficulties” which they raise are not likely, as a rule, to present
themselves to persons who read poetry “for human pleasure.”
I have not often dwelt on parallels to be found in the works of earlier
poets. In many cases Tennyson deliberately reproduced passages from
Greek, Latin, and old Italian writers, just as Virgil did in the case of
Homer, Theocritus, Apollonius Rhodius, and others. There are, doubtless,
instances in which a phrase is unconsciously reproduced by automatic
memory, from an English poet. But I am less inclined than Mr Bradley to
think that unconscious reminiscence is more common in Tennyson than in
the poets generally. I have not closely examined Keats and Shelley, for
example, to see how far they were influenced by unconscious memory. But
Scott, confessedly, was apt to reproduce the phrases of others, and once
unwittingly borrowed from a poem by the valet of one of his friends! I
believe that many of the alleged borrowings in Tennyson are either no
true parallels at all or are the unavoidable coincidences of expression
which must inevitably occur. The poet himself stated, in a lively
phrase, his opinion of the hunters after parallels, and I confess that I
am much of his mind. They often remind me of Mr Punch’s parody on an
unfriendly review of Alexander Smith—
“Most _women_ have _no character_ at all.”—POPE.
“No _character_ that servant _woman_ asked.”—SMITH.
I have to thank Mr Edmund Gosse and Mr Vernon Rendall for their kindness
in reading my proof-sheets. They have saved me from some errors, but I
may have occasionally retained matter which, for one reason or another,
did not recommend itself to them. In no case are they responsible for
the opinions expressed, or for the critical estimates. They are those of
a Tennysonian, and, no doubt, would be other than they are if the writer
were younger than he is. It does not follow that they would necessarily
be more correct, though probably they would be more in vogue. The point
of view must shift with each generation of readers, as ideas or beliefs
go in or out of fashion, are accepted, rejected, or rehabilitated. To
one age Tennyson may seem weakly superstitious; to another needlessly
sceptical. After all, what he must live by is, not his opinions, but his
poetry. The poetry of Milton survives his ideas; whatever may be the
fate of the ideas of Tennyson his poetry must endure.