WILLIAM CULLEN BRYANT AS

A LITERARY CRITIC

A

THESIS

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF ATLANTA UNIVERSITY IN

PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE REQUIREMENT FOR

THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS

BY

SUPORI M. GOSS

DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH

ATLANTA, GEORGIA

JUNE 1949 f-.v T PREFACE

William Cullen Bryant is both a new man and an old man. He is an old man in the sense that his quotable verse is known and recited by millions of people. He is a new man because his stature as America’s first important literary critic is not so well known and appreciated as it should be. It is the purpose of this thesis to acquaint the reader with Bryant the new man through the presentation of his literary theories regarding the writing and judging of the poetry and prose of selected

American, English, German, and Spanish writers. Such a wide range of reading on the part of Bryant attests to his universality of interest and wide knowledge of the literature of other nations as well as that of his own. In concentrating on Bryant’s literary criticism, the writer of this thesis, however, makes use of pertinent non-literary material found in

Bryant’s numerous journalistic essays dealing with economic and social problems. She has also drawn on Bryant's poems wherever they throw im¬ portant light on his theory or practice of criticism.

In the preparation of this thesis, the writer faced many difficulties, not the least of these difficulties was that dealing with working materials.

Materials on Bryant the poet were abundant enough, but those on Bryant the critic were conspicuously few. This difficulty will be readily grasped when one reads such illuminating statements from responsible critics as

Harry Hayden Clark and Robert E, Spiller, who say respectively:

Although Bryant wrote a great deal on literary theory and was our first important literary critic, there is no extended scholarly interpretation of this phase of his work....»

^Harry Hayden Clark, Manor American Poets (New York, 1936), p.797. Hayden Clark is one of the outstanding scholars in American literature. He is gen¬ eral editor of the American Writers Series, and a specific editor of iii

No biography of Bryant has been published in forty years, and critical estimates are not numerous. The standard life still re¬ mains Parke Godwin. A Biography of William Cullen Bryant with Extracts from His Private Correspondence (New York, 1883)....A good critical summary is Tremaine McDowell's introduction to William Cullen Bryant: Representative Selections (1935), pp. xii- lxviii.^

As a consequence of such a de«Tbh of material on Bryant the critic, the writer, plowing virgin fields, had very little in the way of guidance and stimulation from secondary sources, especially those sources having any¬ thing to say about Bryant the oritic. It may be observed throughout this thesis that the writer has, of course, drawn upon the following sources often, and she therefore suggests that readers further interested in

Bryant may consult them also: Godwin's Biography and Prose of Bryant, two volumes; McDowell's Bryant; Nevins Evening Post; and Spiller's Literary

History of the United States, III.

The writer has found in her study of Bryant two main facts : She found that Bryant's critical theories are based upon sound principles.

This faot is set forth in Chapter I. Secondly, she found that Bryant is a just and impartial interpreter and appraiser of literature, and that his practical criticism is both relatively consistent with his theory and in comparative harmony with other substantial critics. This second point is discussed in Chapters II and III. In Chapter III,also, the writer has attempted to point up Bryant's significance in American criticism and has suggested the need for further investigation of Bryant as a literary oritio.

Whittier, and Thomas Paine among other works. ^Robert E, Spiller, et* al. (eds.), Literary History of the United States (New York, 1948), TXX, 422-27. Spiller's is the most recent authoritative bibliography of American literature and is regarded by competent scholars as the best of its kind in the field. IV

The writer wishes to express her deepest gratitude to Professor

G. Lewis Chandler, whose patient attention to details and whose passion

for perfection have taught the writer a priceless lesson which will be

of practical value when applied to other tasks.

Further, the writer wishes to thank Mrs. E. B. Hawkins of The Atlanta

University Library, for her kind assistance in the search for materials. TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter , / 1 Page

PREFACE ii

I. BRYANT'S THEORY OF POETRY 1

II. BRYANT'S CRITICISM OF POETRY AND PROSE 25

III. BRYANT THE CRITIC: AN EVALUATION . 73

BIBLIOGRAPHY 86

v CHAPTER I

BRYANT'S THEORY OF POETRY

In tracing the gradual change in the growth and development of Ameri¬

can literary effort from the colonial period to the first half of the

nineteenth century, we may note three main facts. First, colonial litera¬

ture was primarily utilitarian and religious in tone and subject matter.’*’

The light and fanciful writings on subjects other than religion were con- 2 sidered the work of the devil. Second, we may observe how prominent the 3 clergy was in dictating the tone and subject matter of literature. This

condition prevailed until the turn of the eighteenth century which saw the

emergence of the middle classes through the rapidly expanding trade and

commerical life of the nation. In turn, these new forces wrested the

literary and political reigns of the nation from the old hands. The third

observation that may be made with respect to the growth and development of

American literary effort up to 1850 is that the American writer, timidly

at first, then boldly, attempted all forms of literature such as the essay,

the novel, history, the drama, and journalism to the end of expressing his

feelings of nationalism. These new feelings, engendered by an extreme

self-consciousness which the newly-won political independence and the rich natural resources of the country secured, gave the American writer a 4 cockiness and a boldness which spread to his writings. For the first

^"Ludwig Lewisohn, Expression in America (New York, 1932), p. 7; Moses Coit Tyler, A History of American Literature (New York, 1909), p. 290; Charles Angoff, A Literary History of the American People (New York, 1931), I, 56. 2Ibid., p. 58. 3 Ibid., p. 120. See also Vernon L. Parrington, Main Currents in Ameri¬ can Thought (New York, 1930), III, 302. 4 Moses Coit Tyler, op. cit., p. 560. See also Fred Lewis Patteej The First Century of American Literature, 1770-1870 (New York, 1935), pp. 75-77.

1 2 time -writers began to take writing seriously as a profession and as an art instead of as a sideline serving a utilitatian purpose. There followed, too vitriolic European denunciations which spurred all the more the striv¬ ings of the Americans for a native literature, creative and critical.

One of the first exponents of authochtony in American literature was

William Cullen Bryent. Well known to Americans and Europeans alike as a competent poet, Bryant was and is yet little known as a distinquished pioneer in the development of American literary criticism.^ Because so

little has been done on or known about Bryant as a critic, despite his con¬ scientious and significant efforts in the field of criticism, the main object of this study will to clarify and evaulate Bryant as a critic to the end of illuminating his position in American criticism.

In this chapter we shall study the critical theories of Bryant, the first important American critic to legislate rules for the writing of poetry.2 Serving as an incentive to American writers interested in this and other branches of literary effort, Bryant laid the groundwork for an

lA awakened interest^definite literary theories to govern forms of literary expression.

Tremaine McDowell, William Cullen Bryant (New York, 1935), lvii. Harry Hayden Clark says in this connection: Although Bryant wrote a great deal on literary theory and was our first important literary critic, there is no extended scholarly inter¬ pretation of this phase of his work. Harry Hayden Clark, loc. cit. 2 Thomas Jefferson's Thought on English Prosody was written around 1789, but few people had the privledge of reading it before the twentieth cen¬ tury. Jefferson concluded that Dr. Samuel Johnson's classical prosody, which was based on quantity and not on accent, did not suit English versi¬ fication. As a result, Jefferson worked out an accentual system which be¬ came the first American treatise on English prosody. Gay Wilson Allen, American Prosody (New York, 1935), p. 28. 3

In our study of Bryant's critical theories, it will be necessary and

pertinent to our purpose to draw upon certain of his poems from time to

time, as they reveal in actual expression the definite principles which he held.

For this purpose, then, let us examine first Bryant's "The Poet".

This poem embodies many of the cornerstones of the poet's theories which he later broadened and expressed in specific critical essays on poetry.

First of all, Bryant does not consider the poet as a race of men set apart

from the masses of mankind, nor does he minimize the importance of dili¬

gence and hard work in the writing of enduring poetry, for he saysî

Thou, who wouldst wear the name Of poet mid thy brethren of mankind, And clothe in words of flame Thoughts that shall live within the general mind! Deem not the framing of a deathless lay The pastime of a drowsy summer day.

Here the author specifically uses "brethren" and "mankind". These words

are indicative of the fact that Ervant acknowledged the social obligations

inherent in the poet as well as his denial that poets are God's elect and

therefore should be held in awe and set apart from mankind in general.^

Since the poet is not some supernatural being set apart and remote

William Cullen Bryant, "The Poet", Tremaine McDowell, op. cit., p. 129. All subsequent quotations from Bryant's poetry, unless otherwise stated, will refer to this source and will be designated by title and page only. 2 In this connection Bryant speaks, in his lecture "On Poetry in its Relation to Our Age and Country": of the ancient poets who, believing they were members of a celestial race of beings, so elevated themselves above creatures of earth that they were entirely void of sympathy—that attri¬ bute which humanizes poetry. William Cullen Bryant, "On Poetry in its Re¬ lation to Our Age and Country," Prose of William Cullen Bryant, ed. Parke Godwin (New York, 1884), I, 28. Subsequent quotations from the prose works of Bryant,unless otherwise stated, will be taken from this same source and designated by title, volume, and page only. 4 from his brethren, how, then, does he go about writing his poetry? What conditions are propitious for the exercise of his art? What should be 'the effect of the poet’s efforts upon his readers? Bryant has definite an¬ swers to these questions, for he says!

But gather all thy powers, And wreak them on the verse that thou dost weave, And in thy lonely hours, At silent morning or at wakeful eve, While the warm current tingles through thy veins, Set forth the burning words in fluent strains.

The secret wouldst thou know To touch the heart or fire the blood at will? let thine own eyes o'erflowj Let thy lips quiver with passionate thrill; Seize the great thought, ere yet its power be past, And bind in words, the fleet emotion fast.^-

Removing poetry further from the realm of play, the critic Bryant avisions solitude and no set hours for writing, intimating that toil and preparation are necessary!

...and in thy lonely hours, At silent morning or at wakeful eve...2

From the foregoing it seems clear that Bryant considers powerful feel¬ ings wtinged with fire” as the most effective when framed in verse.

He does not, however, consider just any passing feeling as being worthy of poetic treatment:

Yet let no empty, gust Of passion find an utterance in thy lay,

But feelings of calm power and mighty sweep,^

1 "The Poeti'. p. 130. 2Ibid., p. 131. ^Ibid. 5

Although earlier a devout worshipper of the Augustans, the poets who particularly favored a poetry of regularity and polish, Bryant felt in his maturer'*' years that artistry alone would not suffice to move the reader.

This ability to move the reader, he considers the primary function of poetry:

No smooth array of phrase, Artfully wrought and ordered though it be, • ••••••••••• Can wake the listless pulse to livelier speed Or fill with sudden tears the eyes that read.

It is very significant that Bryant's theories of poetry as expressed in his poetry is inextricably bound up with the emotions* For instance, fear, he would use to polish crude lines instead of artistry* The logical inference seems to be that poetry and pure elemental feelings are related when disciplined by reason.

The final cornerstone in “The Poet" is noteworthy also* Bryant, the

Amerioan nature poet reveals to all his secret for catching accurate pen descriptions of nature* Here, to Bryant, the poet's ability to use his

"inner eye" is of more importance than his ability to use his actual eyes.

Again feeling is stressed by the poet:

Seek'st thou in living lays. To limn the beauty of the earth and sky?

It is pertinent here to mention that Pope was, at first, chief among the poets to whom Bryant looked for style* He later gave his allegianoe to the romanticists: Blair, Cowper, and Thomson. Tremaine McDowell, op. cit., Ivii. 2"The Poet,» p. 131. ^McDowell feels that "fear" here is used to further indicate that Bryant felt that laborious revision of lines was undesirable unless the poet could recapture the original glow of the passion which prompted the first writing of the lines. McDowell, op. cit., p* 408* 6

Before thine inner gaze Let all that beauty in clear vision lie ‘ Look on it with exceeding love, and write The words inspired by wonder and delight.

Not only must the poet use his inner eye, but nature will withhold her most dazzling beauty from him who does not behold her with love! It is interesting to note here that Wordsworth, Bryant’s last and greatest master, echoes the same sentiments :

....Knowing that Nature never did betray The heart that loved her; 'tis her privilege; Through all the years of this our life, to lead From joy to joy: for she can so inform The mind that is within us, so impress With quietness and beauty, and so feed With lofty thoughts, that neither evil tongues, Rash judgments, nor the sneers of selfish man, Nor greetings where no kindness is, nor all The dreary intercourse of daily life, Shall e'er prevail against us, or disturb Our cheerful faith, that all which we behold O Is- full of blessings...

Having set forth the chief cornerstones of Bryant's poetical theories as expressed in his "The Poet," we must now fill in the broader outlines which will give definite form and an ordered substance to the critical theories which he held.

Just as the follower of any science will attempt, first of all, to establish the genealogy of his science as well as attempt to define what his science is before proceeding to annalyze it in all its various rami-

"The Poet," p. 130. ^William Wordsworth, "Lines Composed a Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey," Prose and Poetry of the Romantic Movement, ed. George B. Woods (Atlanta, 1929), p. 234. ’ 7 fications, so Bryant attempts the genealogy, definition and nature and function of poetry as well as its relation to the other arts»

In establishing the genealogy of poetry, Bryant does not depart from traditionalism. He takes into account and agrees with earlier^- statements

that poetry is the most ancient of the arts, and that it has claimed the at¬

tention of mankind in every age :

...I am to speak of the most ancient of all arts...one which has yet in no age of the world ceased to attract a large degree of the attention of mankind....^

Asserting that poetry is the.most venerable of arts, Bryant proceeds to de¬

fine poetry as :

...that art which selects and arranges the symbols of thought in suoh manner as to excite it most powerfully and delightfully....^

From the foregoing definition we shall observe increasingly Bryant's stress

upon the feelings and the understanding in his poetic theories as well as in

his application of these principles to his oriticism which we shall study

in our second chapter. It is to be further noted here that Bryant gives

expression to the belief that the vehicle of expression—language itself—

is of utmost importance. One should regard his use of the words "selects"

and "arranges." Their use alone gives ample witness to the fact that

Bryant considers the composition of poetry not "as the pastime of a drowsy

summer day," but as a work of the intellect that requires attention to de¬

tail as well as thought.

l"On the Nature of Poetry," I. 3. O Ibid. . In his Defense of Poesie, Sidney calls poetry "that which in the noblest nations and languages that are known, hath been the first light giver to ignorance...the chief both in antiquity and excellency." Sir Phillip Sidney, Defense of Poesie, ed. Albert S. Cook (Boston, 1890), pp. 6, 9. 8

Indeed, Bryant concedes the limitations of our language, but views these very limitations of the language over the objects and ideas it must repre¬ sent as being the basis for the magic of poetry, leaving the active pro¬ cesses of the mind free to supply through the workings of the inner imagi¬ nation its own images :

Language is still limited and imperfect....It is /this,? very limitation that poetry owes her magic. The most detailed of her descriptions.are composed of a few touches....These very touches act like a spell upon the imagination and awaken it to greater activity, and fill it...with greater delight than the best defined objects could do....*

Yfith this emphasis on freedom of the imagination set before his readers,

Bryant discusses the nature and function of poetry. Departing from the 2 Aristotelian theory that poetry is an imitative art, Bryant sees poetry rather as a suggestive art, and that where the imitative or graphic arts speak to the senses, poetry speaks directly to the mind. For painting and sculpture, while portraying sensible objects with vehicles of expression like themselves (ie., green paint to simulate grass; white paint, snow, etc.), poetry suggests both sensible objects and their associations or ideas associated with them by the use of vehicles of expression—word symbols —

•VHere the reader's attention is directed to the fact that Bryant's attention to the arrangements of language in poetry is in accord with Coleridge's ,/poetry is/ "the best words in the best order." Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Coleridge's Literary Criticism, ed, J. Vf, Mackail (London, 1908), p. 4. 2 ^Aristotle believed that art and music, as well as poetry, were imita¬ tive arts, for he says î For there are persons, who by conscious art or mere habit, imitate and represent various objects through the medium of color, form, or again by the voice; so in the arts above mentioned /poetry is among them/, taken as a whole, the imitation is produced by rhythm, language, or 'harmony,' either singly or combined. Aristotle's "Poetics," Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Arts, tr. by S. H. Butcher (4th ed.; London, 1932), p. 9. 9 unlike themselves. (There are no words, in the sense of colors, to por¬ tray a drowsy, sunshiny day, for example; yet words properly chosen may create this mental illusion, as 7;ell as the association of one's self lying beneath his favorite shade tree either in reverie or in the contemplation of nature). Hence poetry may suggest as many associations to itself as the many varied thoughts which each mind holds at the moment of perusal :

I would call poetry a suggestive art....It is owing to its operation by means of suggestion that affects different minds with such different degrees of force. In a picture or a statue the colors and forms employed by the artist impress the senses with the greatest distinctions. In painting there is little—in sculpture, there is less—for the imagination to supply. It is true that dif¬ ferent minds, according to their several degrees of cultivation, will receive different degrees of pleasure from the productions of these arts. Still the impression made on the senses is in all cases the same and are seen by all beholders alike....1

Regarding the relationship of poetry to the other arts, Bryant sees an affinity between sculpture and painting which he expresses in the foregoing; 2 however, other arts he also discusses in relation to poetry.

Prose is given a wide range of divergence from poetry. The first ap¬ parent difference is the metrical arrangement of poetry. A difference of greater significance is in the matter which each treats. Relegated to the realm of prose are those subjects which "dusgust, all that tasks and fa- 3 tigues the understanding," and such subjects as are too trivial and common

^"On the Nature of Poetry," p. 5. p In this matter showing relationship between poetry and other arts, compare Lanier's thesis: "The laws governing versification and music are not only similar, but they are precisely the same laws." See Sidney Lanier, Science of English Verse (New York, 1880), pp. 21-23; quoted in G. W. Allen, op. cit., pp. 272-278. ^"On the Nature of Poetry," p. 13. 10 to excite emotion. From the foregoing we see that Bryant not only be¬

lieves that there is such a thing as poetic subject but also considers poetic subject matter as more special and discriminating than that of prose:

It /poetry/ differs from prose...by excluding all that dis¬ gusts, all that fatigues the understanding and all matters that are too trivial and common to excite any emotion whatever....^

Respecting ornamentation in poetry, Bryant cautions against the use

of figurative language unless the ornaments are "naturally suggested by the subject." He concedes its use to heighten the effect of poetic matter. Ornamentation he sees as an exercise of the mind warmed by thought, but unless used with caution it is a means of achieving a forced, strained

poetry:

...the language of passion is naturally figurative, but its figures are employed to heighten the intensity of the express¬ ion; they are never introduced for their own sake....®

or:

...a desire to treat agreeably or impressively a subject by which the writer himself is little moved, leads him into great mistakes about the means of effecting its purpose. This is the origin of cold conceits...of the opposite extremes of tameness and extravagance....4

In summarizing Bryant's theories on the nature of poetry, we see that,

to Bryant, poetry is a suggestive art rather than an imitative one; that

^Ibid. 2 Ibid., p.. 10. Coleridge, in his examination of the tenets of Words¬ worth regarding rustic life and the use of ornamental diction, is in ac¬ cord with Bryant: "...In his Preface, /Wordsworth/contended for a refor¬ mation of our poetic diction...and...has pointed out...that state into which the reader's mind is thrown by the pleasurable confusion of thought from an unaccustomed train of words and images; and that state which is induced by the natural language of impassioned feeling." Coleridge, op. cit., p. 28. ®"0n the Nature of Poetry," p. 9. 4Ibid. 11

poetry appeals directly to the mind; that while poetry is related to the

graphic arts, painting and sculpture, its effect upon its readers is sug¬

gestive allowing exercise of the imagination through stimulation of the pas¬

sions. Further, figurative language should never be employed as an ornament

alone, but only to heighten the effect the poet tries to produce; that prose

and poetry differ mainly (aside from the metrics of verse) in the subject

matter treated—the former, treating mean dispassionate subjects; the lat¬

ter, treating subjects v/hich are elevated and likely to arouse the emotions."

That Bryant assigns to poetry a high office is revealed in his assur¬

ance that poetry contributes to human welfare and happiness. In short, 2 poetry is assigned a moral value. Bryant summarily disposes of the appeal

of1 poetry to the imagination as merely an exeroise or excitation, a pre- 3 occupation of the imaginative faculty involving no passion, merely an ex¬

ercise of excitation, a state of placidity and repose. In this instance

poetry contributes to an attitude of virtue. Hence this is that kind of

poetry which "regulates," cultivates," and "directs" the imagination.

Here it is significant to point out that Bryant considers the imagination as being not only continually at work; but, more important, he admits that the

imagination exercises itself upon the thoughts both of a base and of a sor¬

did nature. It is this use of poetry—to preoccupy the imagination with

exercises of a more ennobling nature—that Bryant identifies the poetic

^-Ibid., p. 13. o ^Bradley, in accounting for the moral tone in Bryant’s poetry itself as well as the stress upon the moral element in his critioal theory, says : He never...totally outgrew the effects of his Puritan upbringing and these sentiments...continued...to colour his verse with a fervour of moral and religious feeling. William Aspenwall Bradley, William Cullen Bryant (New York, 1926), p. 12. See also Alfred Kreymborg, A History of American Poetry (New York, 1934), p. 49. ^"On the Nature of Poetry," p. 16. 12 passion with the moral:

...is it not well, therefore, to substitute something better in place of these^Tjase appetites, ridiculous passions/or, at least to preoccupy the mind with what may prevent their entrance, and to create imaginative habits that may lead us to regard them with con¬ tempt and disgust?"!

Poetry, then, acts as a disciplinary agent, a monitor against impure thoughts

so as to strengthen one in his fight against them. Further, poetry is al¬ ways ennobling, for "it utters nothing that cannot be spoken without shame.

Recognizing that the imagination and the passions are so closely inter¬

related that separation is difficult, Bryant states that in these two parti¬

culars poetry contributes a most vital factor to the welfare of society:

...the excitement of the imagination awakens the feelings, and the excitement of the feelings kindles the imagination. It is the dominion of poetry over the feelings and passions of men that gives it its most important bearing upon the virtue and welfare of society • • • • 3

Bryant feels, further, that our feelings are a direct source of our moral

education, and whatever contributes to this education is a step forward in

the perfection of moral discipline.^

1Ibid., p. 17. 2 "On the Value and Uses of Poetry," p. 16. The further discussion of morality and poetry is continued in Chapter II as the third basic critical principle. This discussion involves nineteenth century moralism. This idea carried over into all forms of artistic expression, but is more famil¬ iarly recognized in the novelists of the century in their adherence to the practice of allowing the virtuous suitor to win the heroine. In this same connection, the private lives of certain English and German poets suffered attack during this time. Among them are Byron, Thomas Moore, and Schiller. William Charvat, The Origins of American Critical Thought (Philadelphia, 1936), pp. 13-15. ^"On the Value and Uses of Poetry," p. 16. 4 p. 20. An equal emphasis is placed upon virtue by Sidney who says : ...that a man might better spend his time is a reason indeed.... I affirm, that no learning is so good as that which teachth and mov- eth to virtue, and that none can both teach and move thereto so much as poesy.... Sir Philip Sidney, op. cit., p. 35. 13

While cognizant of the differences of opinion as to whether poetry-

influences moral conduct for good or whether it influences it for evil.

Bryant defends the former by restating that poetry has no connection with whatever is degrading; hence, the emotion poetry inspires is ennobling and

therefore good.

Other uses of poetry which add to the happiness and welfare of mankind

are the salutary effects it has upon such abstract qualities as its power

to inspire compassion, patriotism, and bravery.'*' Further there is a didac¬

tic use of poetry: to keep before man the Holy history of his being, the

transitory nature of his existence, and to point the way to hope and be¬

lief in immorality:

It /poetry/ loves uo point man to the beginning and end of his days, and to the short swift passage between; to linger about the cradle and the grave, and to lift the veil of another life.2

Defending its power against another point at issue among moralists—

that of the good effects of the love for glory—Bryant does not say that

the love of glory is good in itself; but he intimates that if a greater

good is engenered through the love of glory—such as the tendency to in-

«2 spire great and generous actions’3—then love of glory is justified. Fur¬

ther in this connection, Bryant sees society as being benefited by the

fruits of the love for glory—the desire to stand well in the eyes of one's

■*-"0n the Value and Uses of Poetry," p. 20. According to Coleridge, Shakespeare bends poetry to this noble use: Shakespeare avails himself of every opportunity to effect the great object of the historic drama, that, namely of familiarizing the people to the great names of their country, and thereby exciting a respect for all those fundamental institutions of social life, which bind men together. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, op. cit., p. 219. ^"On the Value and Uses of Poetry," p. 20. 3Ibid. 14 fellows :

...a regard for the good opinion of our fellow-creatures... is of so much value to the order and welfare of society...that I cannot bring myself to think ill of anything that encourages and directs it....^

Continuing the discussion on the value and uses of poetry, Bryant states that it inspires humility and reverence of Cod through the oon- 2 templation of the natural manifestations of Cod's power; for he sees a correspondence between nature and morality in that nature has an aura of morality and an innocence suffusing it so much co that beholders are mor¬ ally chastened and cleansed. Thus, he who studies nature is morally improved.^

We see that poetry regulates and directs the imagination from baser thoughts that might assail it. However this address of poetry to the imagination is merely a surface or an active process, for it is only in its respect to the feelings or passions that poetry is effective over the moral 4 and virtuous aspects of man's life. Let us now follow Bryant in his theo¬ ries concerning the value and uses of poetry as it addresses itself to the

^Ibid., p, 19. ^Ibid. It is typical of Bryant to include religion among the ways which poetry contributes to the welfare and happiness of mankind. Strong says that Bryant's "poetry is not intentionally theological," because Bryant himself "was no professed theologian." Yet the rectitude of his life and actions had morality at their roots finding expression in his poetry, and forming the fundamentals of his beliefs. Augustus Hopkins Strong, American Poets and Their Theology (Philadelphia, 1916), pp. 19, 20. 3"0n the Value and Uses of Poetry," p. 21. 4 Ibid. Cf. Poe's statement in this connection: I need scarcely observe that a poem deserves its title only inas¬ much as it excites by elevating the soul. The value of the poem is in the ratio of this elevating excitement. Edgar Allen Poe, "The Poetic Principle," Edgar Allen Poe, ed. Philip Van Doren Stern (New York, 1945), p. 568. Note also: ,vMore and more mankind will discover that we have to turn to poetry to interpret life for us, to console us, to sustain us," Matthew Arnold, "The Study of Poetry," Matthew Arnold's Prose and Poetry, ed. Archibald L. Bouton (New York, 1927), p. 76. 15

unders tanding.

By presenting truths -which are so universal and instinctive poetry

affects the understanding in a most wholesome way. Here Bryant interposes

a distrubing truth, though; for he admits that the power poetry has over

the mind might be aborted to a wrong use.'*' Even within this wrong use,

Bryant sees the fundamental good just as he sees the fundamental good in

other "heavenly gifts" which also hold within themselves both the seeds of 2 construction and of destruction. In the destructive and constructive po¬

tentialities of such gifts as fire, the sun, and rain, Bryant draws an

analogy between the potential good and evil in poetry and the potential

good and evil inherent in the sun, fire, and rain:

...when you speak of the beneficent influence of the sun, why do they not meet you with the scorched, barren deserts of Africa, with diseases born under^this heat, the plague of Europe, and the yellow fever of America?0

Similarly, Bryant finds that in works censored for their immoral influences

the very elemental portions of man's nature are so inextricably bound up with any poetry that the immoral therein is capable—through contrast—of 4 enhancing the good therein to a greater degree of brilliancy.

Finally, poetry "refines our views of life and happiness5 thereby

rendering society a most valuable service.

That Bryant does not consider this valuable service of poetry to society

an arrested force because of the mental and moral degeneracy of man due to

scientific and industrial progress, is revealed in his refutation,

■'■"On the Value and Uses of Poetry," p. 19. ^Ibid., p. 20. 5Ibid. ^Ibid., p. 22. 5Ibid. 16

of three serious accusations against poetry: (l) that the comforts pro¬

duced by industry and science tend to dull the imagination/ (E) that modern poetry, generally, could never rival that of the ancients, that

American poetry particularly could hope for no distinction in this quarter;

and (3), that poetry has fulfilled its mission -when it nurtured man in his

infancy leaving his further education to the vicissitudes of life. Bryant

approaches his attack upon these allegations by stating that:

...all the sources of poetry in the mind, and all the qualities to -which it owes its power over the mind are...left us....2

If such indifference in poetry has afflicted men at all, Bryant says that

the cause may be found in the increased intellectual pursuits which a widen¬

ing world has forced upon man, and not in any basic change in man's facul¬

ties themselves. For further substantiation of his statement, Bryant looks

into the physical world which fostered poetry in ancient times and finds

that ancient poetry nourished itself on unexplained natural phenomenon.

In his attempt to find a rational explanation for these, ancient man in¬

stituted the system of myths. On the other hand, Bryant finds that the very

vastness of knowledge unlocked by scientific investiagation stimulates the

mind to greater imaginative exercise. He sums up his beliefs in these words:

...everything which it knows introduces to its/the mind's/ ob¬ servation a greater multitude of things which it does not know; the clearing up of one mystery conducts it to another; all its discoveries are bounded by a circle of doubt and ignorance which is wide in proportion to the knowledge it enfolds. It is a pledge of the immoral distinies of the human intellect that it is forever drawn by a strong attraction to the darker edge of this

-*-Ibid. Cf. the theme of industrialism in Lanier's "Corn" and Moody's "The Brute" in vdiich these authors indict industrialism for perverting man's tastes. 2"Poetry in its Relation to our Age and Country," p. 31. 17

circle, and forever attempting to penetrate the obscurities beyond.^

Hence, Bryant finds that the ancients had their mysteries while we through wider knowledge have loftier mysteries merged with the spiritual. Here

Bryant hastens to add that he does not doubt that myths are beautiful and delightful, but that the ready attempt of mythology to account for all in nature left nothing to the imagination, hence defeated itself. The final summation in his argument is that the mythological poetry. While it de- lighted the imagination "neither the imagination nor the feelings were stirred from their utmost depths.The foregoing statement further points up Bryant's belief that the office of poetry is not only to delight the imagination, but also to stir up deep and profound feelings which might lead to some action either mental or physical.5 it iS this lack of sympathe¬ tic feeling that renders ancient poetry cold and sterile:

...That system /mythology/ gave us the story of a superior and celestial race of beings...who were, like ourselves, susceptible of suffering, but it elevated them so far above the creatures of earth in power and knowledge, and in security from the calamities of our condition, that they could be the subjects of little sym¬ pathy. Therefore it is that the mythological poetry of the an-

Ibid., p. 28. In this connection, Matthew Arnold says: ..the question is raised whether, to meet the needs of our mod¬ ern life, the predominance ought not now to pass from letters to science....A man of letters, it will perhaps be said, is not compe¬ tent to discuss the comparative merits of letters and natural science... the civilized world is to be regarded as now being, for intellectual... purposes, one gréât confederation, bound to a joint action and working to a common result." Matthew Arnold, op. cit., pp. 54,55. g "Poetry in its Relation to our Age and Country," p. 30. Ibid., p. -33. 4 Ibid., p. 34. Bryant repeats related sentiments in this connection in his essay "On the Value and Uses of Poetry": "Poetry that is unfeeling and indifferent to suffering is no poetry at all." "On the Value and Uses of Poetry," p. 21. ^Ibid., p. 35. 18 dents is as cold as it is “beautiful, as unaffecting as it is fault¬ less....

In this same connection, Bryant feels that poetry and poets of his own era fell into error because, instead of writing from feelings overflowing with love and sympathy inspired by contact with nature herself, the poets chose to express the various emotions with symbols belonging to an older race 2 thereby producing a false, insincere poetry liable to attack and ridicule.

Bryant feels that the use of traditional superstitions could be justified only upon one condition: that suoh material be used to give as many dif- 3 ferent settings to the main attractions, man and nature, as possible.

Hence Bryant would use such material, if at all, to enhance and illuminate human nature.^

Finally Bryant's concept of poetry as being a special gift among the peoples of a special tradition reveals his catholicity of belief in the goodness and bounty of God. He feels that in the absence of a native tra¬ dition or theme, the poet has a right to draw upon the tradition of other countries. As support for his view, he gives the names of poets from the front-rank roster who used borrowed material:

...the best English poets have done this /borrowed material/. The events of Spenser's celebrated poem take place within the shadowy limits of fairyland; Shakespeare has laid the scenes of many of his finest tragedies in foreign countries. Milton went out of the world for the subject of his two epics. Byron has

1Ibid. O Ibid. In this connection Bryant continues: It is long since the authority of great names was disregarded in matters of science. Ages ago the schools shook themselves loose from the fetters of Aristotle. He no more now delivers the oracle of philosophy... ."Why should the chains of authority be worn any longer by the heart and the imagination than by the reason?" "On Originality and Imitation, I, 42. "On the Value and Uses of Poetry," p. 12. *"0n Originality and Imitation," p. 14. 19

taken the incidents of all his poems from outside England..»

Thus we see that Bryant sees that there is no true originality in the 2 strictest sense of the word. His essay "On Originality and Imitation"

states additional points in this connection. At the very outset in this

essay, Bryant makes his terminology clear as to what he means by imitation.

He does not mean, as he says, "what is technically called the imitation of

* nature, but the studying and copying of models of poetic composition.

For while he lauds originality as essential to good poetry and the poets

who strive after it as entirely within their right, he nevertheless ascribes

to its pursuit the many poetic monstrosities such as those produced by the

sixteenth century' euphuistic craze and the far-fetched conceits of the

seventeenth century metaphysicals. Further justifying imitation, Bryant ac¬

knowledges that the poetic art, as any other art, does not spring full

bloom into real perfection^, but is dependent upon the trial and error ex¬

perimentation whioh is essential to any art, and a poet must of necessity

use the wisdom and experience of his predecessors*

...genius, therefore, with all its pride in its own strength, is but a dependent quality, and cannot put forth its whole powers nor claim all its honors without an amount of aid from the talents and labors of others which it is difficult to calculate....®

^•IbidUj p* 33. 2Ibid. 3 Ibid* Coleridge pays tribute to Shakespeare in the matter of imita- 'ting his models, but in "studying patiently, meditating deeply, and under¬ standing minutely until his knowledge beoame habitual and intuitive*..and at length gave birth to that stupendous power, by which he stands alone." Samuel Taylor Coleridge, op. oit,, p* 174* Note that Bryant not only stress¬ es perfect understanding, but also thorough assimilation of knowledge to the point where it becomes intuitive* 4"On Originality and Imitation," p. 36. ^Ibid., p, 38 * 20

Her© Bryant cites several notable examples of his paint. Chaucer, for in¬ stance, he cites as having been greatly influenced by his Italian masters,

Dante and the Provencals.^ Lucretius, Horace and Vergil were disciples of the Greeks; in turn, the Greeks had no known instructors, but Bryant is reasonably sure that her early minstrels and fables provided the spark from which the poetry of Greece sprang.2

Indeed, Bryant continues, any nation which seeks to bar outside models limits itself in richness and nutriment to its literary efforts. The Pro-

•2 vencals are specifically cited as an example of such insularity.

How then are the examples and works of others made use of in adding to the sturdy growth of the genius a poet already possesses? Bryant answers this question by stating that the poet should not make a slavish follower of any one master; but rather, he should use the electic method;

...no better rule has been given for this purpose than to take no particular poem or poet, nor class of poets, as a pattern ©f poetic composition, but to study the beauties of all. All good poems have their peculiar merits and faults, all great poets their points of strength and weakness. All schools of poetry their agree¬ ments with good taste and their offenses against it. To confine the attention and limit the admiration to one particular sort of excel¬ lence, not only tends to narrow the range of the intellectual powers, but most surely brings along with it the peculiar defects to which that sort of excellence is allied, and to which it is most apt to deviate...A

Ibid., p. 42. 2Ibid. ibid., p. 43. 4 Ibid., p. 41. Arnold says in this connection: But if we conceive thus highly of the destinies of poetry, we must also set our standard for poetry high; /poetry/ ...must be poetry of a high order of excellence. We must accustom ourselves to a high stan¬ dard and to a strict judgement. Matthew Arnold, op., cit., 76. In this same instance compare: ...the cloud of glory playing round a classic is a mist as dangerous to the future of literature as it is intolerable for the purposes of history. It hinders us from seeing more than one single point, the 21

Continuing Bryant saysj

...Thus, a poet of the Lake school, by endeavoring too earnestly after simplicity, may run into childishness ; a follower of Byron, in his pursuit of energy of thought, and the intense expression of passion, may degenerate into abruptness...; a disciple of Scott, in his zeal for easy writing, may find himself indicting something little better than doggerel, or, at least, very dull and feeble verse...and a poet of the school of Pope may write very polished, well balanced verses with a great deal of antithesis and very little true feeling....^

Not deprecating the value and excellence of each of these schools or

any one of the poets, Bryant admonishes the writer to study them all for

their faults as well as for their virtues so that he may form a higher

standard of excellence free of the defects and imperfections of his models.

Aside from having definite theories and opinions regarding the general

practice of poetry, its subject matter and treatment, Bryant also has defi-

*2 nite theories regarding prosody. These prosodic theories are embodied mainly in his essay, "On Trisyllabic feet in Iambic Measure." The roots of this plea for a return to the uses of trisyllabic feet gained greater momen¬ tum during the English romantic movement when Percy's Reliques and Words¬ worth's Lyrical Ballads struck the keynote for this freedom.^ This move¬ ment was in direct opposition to the restricted line of Pope with his ad- 5 herence to a fixed syllabic arrangement. Bryant sayst

Where the ear is inured to the regular iambic, and to pauses at the end of every couplet, and, whenever it is possible, at the end of every line, it perceives nothing but harshness and irregu-

culminating and exceptional point, summary...of a thought and of a work. Words of Marot's critic, M. Charles Hericault, quoted in Matthew Arnold, Ibid., p, 80. ^""On Originality and Imitation," p. 41. ^Ibid., p. 42. 3 Gay Wilson Allen, op. cit., p. 28. ^Ibid., xxxix. ^"On Trisyllabic Feet in Iambic Measure," p. 63. 22

larity in more -varied pauses and a greater license of prosody....

Legislating against the strict adherence of the iambus being the basis strictly of the ten syllable line and of the trochee as the basis of the seven syllable line, Bryant admits that until become accustomed to new cadences, innovations are certain to be unpleasing. However, he cites from older practices in poetry to prove that the right of variation is the poet's privilege.

Mentioning Shakespeare's blank verse as proof that pure trisyllabic feet are possible in iambic measure, Bryant maintains that their use gives natural melody. Notice the examples of trisyllabic feet which Bryant quotes from Shakespeare:

Thou ever young, fresh, loved, and delicate wooer Whose blush doth thaw the consecrated snow That lies in Dian's lap', thou visible god That solderest close impossibilities And mak'st them kiss'.^

Milton, whom Bryant calls "the most perfect master of poetic modulation

...a man whom nature had given an exquisite ear" is warmly commended for his use of trisyllabic feet in iambic meter:

And when the river of bliss,. through midst of heaven Rolls o'er Elysian flowers her amber streams, With these, that never fade, the spirits elect Bind their resplendent locks inreathed with beams.

Young, Bryant censures for his slavish following of Pope in his "Night

Thoughts." He dismisses Young's efforts with: "He was probably afraid to use feet of three syllables, because he did not find them in the works of

'''Ibid., p. 60. 2Ibid., p. 62. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid., p. 63. 23 his master."

In turn, Armstrong and Cowper are cited as apostates in license of versification which sweetened their blank vepse so that "...their spirited irregularity refreshes and relives me, like the sight of eminences and forests breaking the uniformity of the landscape."

If, then trisyllabic feet are used with such happy effect in blank verse, why asks Bryant, should not other verse forms profit from their use?

Bryant sees poetry as being in greater need than prose of such measures to make the distinction between the two more marked.

In concluding his essay on trisyllabic feet, Bryant states that his position in the matter is not to legislate rules regarding the use of tri¬ syllabic feet, but "...to show that it is an ancient birthright of the poets which ought to be given up."^

In summarizing our first chapter, we find that when American writers began to take writing seriously as an art, the need arose for a set of definite literary theories to govern writing. Bryant supplied much of the groundwork for these theories, the chief cornerstones of which are several.

First, to write enduring poetry demanded thought, preparation, intelligence and a certain amount of solitude. Second, the poet must seize upon power¬ ful emotion lest he depend upon artistry alone for his effects. Third, the poet should study and commune with nature in order to entice her to reveal her true self.

Regarding the nature, function, value and uses of poetry, Bryant is also articulate: Poetry, he believes, addresses itself to the mind and through suggestive associations allows each mind freedom of exercise according to its

''’Ibid., p. 67. 24 own experiences. Further, poetry contributes to human welfare and happiness by supplying a moral ground in which seeds of good may be planted, reaping a rich harvest in attitudes of virtue; it inspires humility and reverence for God. Finally, knowledge does not hinder the appreciation of poetry; rather, it is an asset and adds to the enjoyment of poetry.

Proceeding on the basic theories just enumerated, let us in the follow¬ ing chapter illuminate the application of these basic principles in Bryant’s criticisms of both native and foreign poets and their writings. CHAPTER II

BRYANT'S CRITICISM OF POETRY AND PROSE

William Cullen Bryant, the first American poet to stand the gaze of

cosmopolitan standards^-, was interested in explaining and defining the

significance and function of poets and poetry. Our setting forth of this

significance and of these Sanctions has been the subject of the first

chapter of this thesis. Before we set out to show how Bryant’s critical theories are demonstrated in his estimate of native and foreign poets and their works, let us meet two very important questions which might be in the reader's minds What is Bryant's equipment for the office of critic?

What special qualifications does the man possess which permit him the title of critic? The answers to these questions are found in the poet's

life itself; for wide knowledge, universal sympathy with just causes as well as with mankind in general, a genuine love of nature, an impartial judgment of men and events, and a respectable degree of proficiency in the exercise of the poetic art, constitute Bryant's chief equipment for the role of critic.

With regard to wide knowledge, the records of Bryant's early life re¬ veal the foundation upon which his later knowledge rested and which broadened to embrace poetry, the law, criticism, and journalism. For born 2 into a home well stocked with books, and born to parents whose interests

■'■Tremaine McDowell, op. oit.,lxiii. ^Parke Godwin, op. cit., I, 54. Godwin says that Bryant's father collected books, botanical specimens, and curiosities of all kinds. Ibid. , p. 3. Subsequent quotations from Godwin's life of Bryant will be designated Life. Quotations from Bryant’s prose will be designated Prose, followed by volume and page.

25 26 were sufficiently cultural'*' to foster and develop his thirst for scholar¬ ly pursuits, Bryant's ambition to become a poet was formed at the very early age of nine when his grandfather urged upon him the Book of Job to turn into verse. Bryant says that he "put the whole of the narrative into herioc couplets."^ Stimulated by the books in his father's library,

Bryant's imagination was especially fired by his readings in Pope's trans¬ lation of the Iliad. In turn, Bryant read Shakespeare, Milton, and Spenser from his father's shelves, but at this time his sole delight was in Pope

'Z whose influences overtopped the rest. Ample substantiation of Bryant's reading is recorded by many critics who base Bryant's early poetic style upon the impressions received through his early reading. McDowell says of Bryant's reading:

Devotedly he studied "Johnson deep" and "Addison refined", but most ardently he pored over the pages where shone "Pope's celestial fire"....^

Bradley, too, gives evidence on Bryant'3 wide reading, and reaffirms Pope's supremacy among the early influences on Bryant:

There were other books in the house besides Pope's Iliad, among them such classics as Shakespeare, Milton and Spenser...but Pope overtopped the rest in interest and influence.®

Pattee, however, gives credit to other masters than Pope to whom Bryant apprenticed himself. Pattee says:

^•Ibid., pp. 55,56. Bryants mother was also a strong cultural influence upon her son. She was influential in the improvement of schools in her community, and kept a diary of the happenings in her neighborhood. Ibid., p. 58. 2 11 Ibid., p. 59. See also William A. Bradley, op. oit., p. 13. 5Ibid., p. 14. ^McDowell, op. cit., xv. C — °Bradley, op. cit., p. 14. 27

Then /at seventeen/ had come into his life the first really molding literary influence: his father brought home from Boston The Remains of Henry Kirke White....Other books and poems Bryant found interesting also; among them were Southey's poems as well as Cowper's "The Task. nl

Strong, in agreement with McDowell and Bradley, mentions that "the stateli- 2 ness of Pope and the somberness of Wordsworth made their mark upon him."

Supplementing his indoor reading with an avid interest in an outdoor

exploration of nature and her workings first hand, Bryant reveled in the

scenery and woods about Cummington and, later, Great Barrington. He noted

with care the droughts and thundershowers of midsummer, the storms of January.

Thus his ear was early attuned to nature which gave his poetry a substan¬

tial basis; for through observation, Bryant knew the name and habitat of 3 every tree and flower in his native section. These same changes of season

and knowledge of flowers Bryant incorporates into such of his pieces as

"When Winter Comes," "The Death of the Flowers," "The Yellow Violet," "The

Rivulet," and others of his nature poems which show an intimacy with nature.

Bradley pays tribute to the poet's sensitivity and acquaintance with nature

and the surrounding beauties of his home in these words:

In natural environment no place could have been selected more suited for the spiritual nurture of one who was to deal freshly for the first time with the aspects of American land-

'''Pattee, op. cit.,. pp. 301-2. 2 Strong, op. cit., p. 13. 3 McDowell, op. cit., xxxii, xxxiii. Further evidence of Bryant's wide knowledge of nature is revealed in his conversations with the painter, Eaton, who did a portrait of Bryant. Eaton says; Bryant's conversation would often center around nature, and particularly was he well versed in facts concerning Canadian trees. Whenever such conversations arose, Bryant's face could be observed to glow, and his eyes to sparkle as if he derived the keenest pleasure from the discussion. W. Eaton, "Recollections of Ar.erican Poets," Century, LXVI (October, 1902), 843-4. 28

scape and to observe and describe the birds and trees and flowers...peculiar to our northern climate.-

Godivln records further evidence of Bryant's intimacies with nature in

reporting the poet's own words to his brother who had written some lines,

and had been in error regarding a point of natural history:

I saw some lines by you to the skylark. Did you ever see such a bird? Let me counsel you to draw on your own images in describing nature...The skylark is an English bird...and your description of it is imperfect.

Notwithstanding, love of nature and knowledge of her workings would

not alone certify Bryant's proficiency either as a writer of verses or as

a capable critic; however, he possesses in addition to these assets, a o technical, though limited, mastery of the prosodic theory of versifi¬

cation. Allen says of him that he was "Conservative in the use of stanzàic

devices...but he is eminently important iri the history of American versi¬

fication because his technique was finished, effective, and truly artis- 4 tic." McDowell, too, recognizes Bryant's competency in this field; for

in his- essay concerning Bryant's practice in composition, he says: "No

American before Pope had a sounder mastery of both the theory and practice

of versification."

Bradley, op. cit., p. 8. 2 Quoted in Prose, I, 281. Leonard also says in this connection: He knew the way of the mist on the river and mountain- crest, all tints of sunset, the rising and setting of the constellations, every twig, and berry...the common insects and wild creatures especially the birds and flowers. William Ellery Leonard, "Bryant and the Minor Poets," CHAL (New York, 1901), I, 271-72. 3 McDowell, op. cit., lvi. Other critics are cognizant of Bryant's limitations also, for Bradley says: He lacked fullness and flow of mind...a narrative and dramatic interest. Bradley, op. cit., pp. 62, 71, 95. See also Kreymborg, op. cit., p. 29. 4 Allen, 0£. cit., p. 52. 5Ibid. 29

However limited his mastery, aside from reporting accurately what he sees as a result of his wide botanical studies and close observation of nature, Bryant continually experiments with new and varied verse forms.

His ability to resort to variations in order to avoid monotony in his

"Thanatopsis" is an indication of skill. The later portion of this same work written six years after the first, shows Bryant’s turn from an ex¬ cessive use of monosyllables giving a masculine rhythm and longer pauses and breath sweeps, to a more fluid blank verse. His translation of Homer employs the same metrical devices as his early blank verse ekcept for a noticeable decline in the skilled use of pause variations.^

After his skilled use of blank verse, Bryant next favors the four- stress iambic quatrain which he uses in "The Yellow Violet." Other di¬ stinctive examples of Bryant's proficiency in .the protfodic field are his use of trisyllabic feet, the use of the sonnet form for his "To—,"

"Midsummer," "October," the use of the Spenserian stanza in his "The Age," and "After a Tempest," and an experimenting with the Alexandrine in "Wait¬ ing by the Gate"—all attest to a conservative though competent use of stanziac devices. Not only does Allen concede Bryant’s competency in this field, but he also intimates that its presence dates from an early age:

Bryant’s essays and reviews among which are "Nostradamus Provencal Poets," "Moriscan Romances," "Female Troubadours," and his introduction to the anthology, A New Library of Poetry and Song indicate that Bryant was a competent student of pro¬ sody during practically his whole lifetime.2

Bryant's knowledge of nature is built, as it is well known, upon a firm

^Ibid. For an important estimate of Bryant's proficiency,see William B. Cairns, "British Criticisms of American Writings, 1815-1833," The Uni¬ versity§ of Wisconsin Studies (Madison, 1922), pp. 168, 170; 180. Allen, op. cit., p. 27. 30 foundation of first-hand knowledge and observation of nature. His know¬

ledge of human beings also was gained through direct contact and through his legal occupation. This experience gave him an opportunity and a readiness to judge men and to weigh contemporary events in their true light.

This same ability to judge human nature is apparent in his message to his mother concerning his selection of a wife:

Mother, I looked...for goodness of heart, an ingenuous disposition, a good understanding...and the character of my wife is too frank, and single-hearted to suffer me to fear that I may be disappointed.1

Seeing a threat to human security in the unstable financial status of the

country, again Bryant's astuteness in judging events is apparent in his

editorial of October 4, 1832, on "The Corrupting Influence of the Bank,”

in which he warns the public that:

A monied institution, headed by an active, subtle and insinuating leader, has thrown itself with its capital of thirty millions into the arena of political strife....The Saviour of the world was betrayed for thirty pieces of silver.^

Early realizing the sordidness of the law profession and of his lack

of interest in it, Bryant decided tc devote his energies to the emanci¬ pation of mankind when the opportunity presented itself. The editorship

of the Evening. Post offered such an opportunity; and through numerous

William Cullen Bryant, "Letter to His Mother," Good Housekeeping, CXXVIII (January, 1949), p. 18. ' ^Allan Nevins, The Evening Post (New York, 1922), p. 98. g Ibid. At the urging of Henry Sedgwick, brother of Catherine Sedgwick, Bryant came to New York to try his hand at writing for the Athenaeum. For a while he reviewed books; then he was offered a tempo- rary position with the Post. Following an accident to the co-editor, Mr. Coleman, who had come to lean more heavily on Bryant, he received the editorship in 1829. At once the paper improved. More book reviews ap¬ peared, a noticeable interest in art emerged while a clearer characteri¬ zation of public men could be seen. Ibid., p. 134. 31 editorials, Bryant unwraps his interest in freedom as well as his uni¬ versality of feeling with others.1 His "Song of the Greek Amazons," and his "ttaly" reveal his sympathies with the struggles of Greece and of

O Italy. In an address delivered at the Academy of Music in Few York in

1871, Bryant says in his address on Italian Unity:

We are assembled to celebrate a new and signal triumph of liberty and constitutional government—not a victory obtained by one religious denomination over another, but the successful assertion of rights which are the natural inheritance of every man born into the world—rights of which no man can divest himself, and which no possible form of government should be allowed to deny its subjects.3

In this salute to Italian freedom, Bryant calls upon nature to re-echo the glad cry:

Sweeping Arno, swelling Po, Murmer freedom to their meads.

Send strange whispers from their reads, "Italy Shall be free!"4

Equally as devoted to the cause of freedom at home, Bryant's edi¬ torials in the Post show him to be a moral liberal who regards the right selection of men in high places as the first step to good government.

This attention to leadership is exhibited in his giving his support to

Andrew Jackson, whom he says "possesses incorruptible honesty...and a strong sense of justice.

^Farrington, op. cit., p. 246. 2 Bradley, op. cit., p. 60. See also Parrington, op. cit., p. 244; Prose, I, 235; Pattee, op. cit., p. 79. 3Prose, II, 274. ^"ltaly," p. 122. 5 Prose, I, 242. Bryant was very outspoken in his favor of the immediate emancipation of the slaves, and felt the results of the Civil 'War would I3® "That the extinction of slavery would form a part of it." Kevins, op. cit., p. 294. 32

Both matters of individual moral character and contemporary events of scope found in him a champion. His editorial campaigns conducted

against unintelligent legislation in matters of crime and punishment

currency and banking,c arid free speech, among others, reveal his ïvide

and liberal sympathy with all men and with all just causes.

The foregoing, then, constitute Bryant's chief qualifications for the

office of critic: wide knowledge; universal sympathy with just causes as well as with mankind in general; a genuine love for and understanding of nature, and a considerable degree of proficiency as a writer of verses.

For a greater degree of clarity before \ve study the application of

Bryant's critical theories to native and European poets and poetry, as well as to their prose, let us set forth briefly the basic critical

principles which prevailed during the early years of the nineteenth

century, and to which most.critics of the time, including Bryant, held.

This brief study may further illuminate Bryant's character and early ro¬ mantic leanings in their revelation of Bryant as an occasional apostate

from the critical standards of his day.

Certain practices of critical thinking were fairly common throughout

the period and may be observed as we proceed. Many of these modes of

thinking changed or faded with the advent of romanticism, but others have

come down to us as typically American, and "have been basic in the main

"''Allan Nevins(ed.), American Press Opinion from Washington to Coolidge (New York, 1928"J^ p^ 467. It is valuable to observe here that Kevins records that Bryant’s paper, The Evening Post, was very influ¬ ential in reshaping prison discipline in New York, and in helping to abolish capital punishment in that state. Ibid. Neving, The Evening Post, Bryant advocated that national currency be maintained on a sound basis, and that lotteries be outlawed. Ibid,, p. 296. 33 currents of American criticism.

First among these basic thoughts is the conception of the critic's function as that of a judge. Many of the early nineteenth century critics felt that their duty was to suppress the works of any writer whose views

threatened the existing social order. These standards were formulated mainly upon those of the founders of the Edinburgh Review^ headed by

Francis Jeffrey, whose avowed purpose was "to erect a higher standard of merit and secure a bolder and purer taste in literature...to apply philo so phi cal principles and the maxims of truth and humanity to politics."1^

These principles were enthusiastically received and satisfied the tastes of the day; however, political expediency often prevented the true appli¬

cation of their philosophy.* The vitriolic attacks of Jeffrey's reviews of the lake poets suggest, in great measure, how far below the standards

set for the paper his estimations of these poets were. His main objections

Charvat, op. cit., p. 7. 2 Ibid., p. 53. While only the Edinburgh: is here mentioned in its in¬ fluence upon American critical thought, and its editor, Francis Jeffrey, the only Scottish critic referred to, the reader is not to be misled in¬ to thinking that this one periodical and .its editor constituted the only forceful exponents in this critical influence. For the Quarterly was another political and literary conservative magazine which, along with the Edinburgh, was a chief influence, like the Edinburgh, the Quarterly was interested in preserving the status quo of the upper classes. These periodicals served as official organs for such critics as Sydney Smith, John Gibson lockhart, John Wilson Crolcer, and William Gifford, who tried vainly in their reviews of the romanticists' works (Byron, Shelley, Wordsworth, and Keats among others) to stem the tide of advancing roman¬ ticism through their vitriolic reviews. Two liberal periodicals, how¬ ever, which espoused the cause of romanticism, were the London Magazine and Frazier.' s. These advanced the cause of romanticism by their belief that taste and feeling are the only true guides in criticism. Charvat, op. cit., pp. 56-5S-. 3 Quoted in Charvat, op. cit., p. 62.

Ibid* 34 to the Lake poets were with respect to their mysticism, their subjectivity, their democratic realism, and to the absence of the ever-present moral in their writings. These views of Jeffrey's were satisfactory to our

American critics whose inherited tendencies toward the TlVhig party made them applaud Jeffrey's patrician attitude, his aversion to subjectivity, and mysticism, and his love of the moral. Hence, bent upon preserving», the power of the upper classes, their motive was paternalistic. As a result, they felt that all literary forms should be closely censored as to con¬ tent. Some among the most reactionary critics, including Dr. McHenry and

Joseph Dennie, felt that only the Augustans—Addison and Johnson—could write criticism fit to direct public taste because of their restraint and cool avoidance of conflict material inimical to the country.

The second belief was that literature must not truckle with rebel¬ lion of any sort. Apropos of this, Churvat highlights the fact that al¬ most all of the critics were members of the Federalist party.^ They tried, as did Dennie in his Port Folio, to align themselves against any kind of change in the social pattern and against the mob. From 1801 to 1827, the Port Folio of Dennie ms the most influential review in America.

Edited by Joseph Dennie, Boston born aristocrat who adhered to individual¬ istic principles, the Folio reflected its editor's revolutionary feelings

(Dennie was born during the Revolutionary period,1768-1812), and their effect remained with him. Alternately reading law and Addison, Dennie

■^-McDowell, op. cit«, xix. McDowell states that Bryant was at first a Federalist, later shifting his allegiance to the Democrat- Republicans; finally, he became a democrat. Ibid., xvi. ^Charvat, op, cit., p. 10. "Mob" here is used to mean the common people. Ibid. 35 steeped himself in eighteenth century belletristic literature. Abandon¬ ing the law to edit the Farmer's Museum in Walpole, New Hampshire, he soon gathered a coterie of men about him whose interests were similar to his. In 1802, the Port Folio was dedicated to the avowed purpose of leading the tastes of people "conducted by men who are avowed Partizans

/sxcj and Martinets in Religion, Politics and Literature...."^ Dennie's description of the ideal editor of the South Carolina Courir /sic/ shows how he views change:

A gentleman and a scholar....He will be contemptuously careless of the "distant din" of democracy; and he will treat the French republican party as Natural brute beasts in his dealings with them.2

These sentiments may be recognized as those marking the spirit of the late eighteenth century.

Third, literature must not contain anything derogatory, expressed or implied, to religious ideals and moral standards. This tendency to ex¬ cessive moralism may be observed in the many attacks which Byron suffered regarding his private life, as well as the censure under which Thomas

More's and Leigh Hunt's voluptuous poetry fell. Censure of morals gave way to concentrated effort against the works of authors which, reputedly, made vice attractive, and the word, "bad," formerly employed by critics, changed to "ugly."^ Bryant exposes his position on the matter by stating:

"There is no poetry in vice, cruelty, injustice and selfishness."^

Fourth, literature should be optimistic; it should not condone pessi¬ mism or skepticism. This idea is prevalent in the literary criticisms of

Quoted in Pattee, op. cit., p. 187. 2 Ibid., p. 188. 5Ibid., p. 92. ^"On the Value and Uses of Poetry," p. 87. 36

George Bancroft, who sees in Goethe's works an attempt to depict and throw

into focus the "sorrows of life" rather than an attempt to describe "the

sentiments of joy and tenderness."-^ That this tendency is typical of the

criticism of the day is borne out by the adverse critical reviews of the

works of Byron, Schiller, and others. Bryant agrees with the cultivation of

the cheerful disposition, but he goes further and states that an awareness

of the sorrows and evils in life gives balance and dignity to character.^

Here we find the romantic iconoclast in Bryant, for most critics believed

that gloom is a selfish thing and that such gloom comes about as a result

of too much self-centeredness, engendering a lack of social feeling.^ Such

views were held as disrupting to the safety and peace of mind of the coun¬

try. In this same connection Rousseau's and Godwin’s doctrine of perfecti¬ bility was deeply distrusted as a source of individualistic thinking which would cause men to become too aware of their own private troubles, and to for¬

get the total good of society. In short, pessimism was held to be a threat

to the existing order of society."

The fifth critical tenet was that literature should deal with the in¬ telligible and not with mystical or obscure. In the beginning, the mystical

poetry of Coleridge, Wordsworth, and Shelley was unintelligible to the older

critics .who had been brought up on the traditional concept of diction and

poetry. As time passed,however, and as romanticism gained a firmer foot¬

hold, the works of hordsworth and of Coleridge were recognized and accepted

Excerpt from the North American Review, XIX (1816), 314. Quoted in Charvat, op. cit., p. 18. 2 Ibid., p, 236. o Ibid., p. 21. 4 Ibid. 37 with reservations,-'- for it was found that Wordsworth's poetry expressed and clarified ideas whioh Plato and other philosophers had expressed but whioh had lain dormant for centuries»

The sixth and last critical belief held was that literature should be social in point of view and not egocentric. For this reason, American critics aligned themselves against individualism such as that which

Rousseau's philosophy advocated. This individualism, the critics felt, led to egotism. They felt that poetry was concerned with the social as¬ pects of man's life, and not with the writer's own private feelings.^ In this belief, there were apostates among the critics. Some believed that subjectivity, while it spawned poetry, was in itself unwholesome. In this same regard sprang up such expressions as a man* s poetry being a "journal of himself."3 The foregoing six critical tenets, while permitting many divergences, "set the tone of critical work of the period.”4 It is inter¬ esting to observe here that’Bryant departed from these tenets in particular phases, such as in his rebellion against the existing social order;^ but

-^-George B. Woods, op. oit., p. 1372. With reference to this point, Charvat also states that Coleridge was too metaphysical; Shelly was ignored because of his unintelligibility. Charvat, op. oit., p. 22. 2Ibid. Lowell’s essays on Thoreau, Rousseau and Percival utter the same sentiment. See James Russell Lowell, My Study Windows (Boston, 1892), pp. 150,179^193. For greater clarification of the implication of individualism or subjectivity, the following definition is offered: The subjective element in literature is an expression often used in criticism to denote writing which is expressive of an in¬ tensely personal manner of the inner convictions, beliefs, dreams, or ideals of the author. Subjective writing is imper¬ sonal...and the individuality of the author is more likely to find its best expression in subjective work. William Thrall and Addison Hibbard, A Handbook to Literature (Hew York, 1936), p. 426. 3Kreymborg, op. oit., p. 224. “^Charvat, op. oit., p. 27. This rebellion has been discussed in part in the preceding pages, and is fully discussed in Nevins'sEvening Post, chapters V, VI, and VIII. 38

he, nevertheless, was in accord with and influenced by most of these

critical beliefs, especially with that which relates to the place of the moral in literature.^"

In our approach to Bryant’s application of his critioal theories,we

have arranged the critical material in a form which we consider to be a

descending order in point of interest to the American reader* Firsts we

shall discuss Bryant’s criticism of early American verse, and follow this

discussion with his estimate of individual American authors of both prose and verse (among whom are Cooper, Irving, and Fitz-Greene Halleck). In the final block of his critical estimates of American authorship, we shall

discuss Bryant's criticism of American society as a field for fiction.

This has been chosen to conclude the American block of critical material because it ends on a characteristically hopeful note, and hope is what

Bryant intended to give young American writers.

Our discussion of the second phase of Bryant’s critical estimates will follow the same pattern of arrangement as the block on American literature, and will deal with Bryant's estimates of English poets and

O poetry,"T which will be followed by his estimate of individual English authors among whom are Shakespeare, Burns, Scott, Oldham, and Cowley*

Our treatment of the third phase of critical estimates will concern

Bryant’s brief, but illuminating, discussion of German literature followed by individual estimates of Germany’s leading poets, Goethe and Schiller*

Our fourth and last point will take into account such miscellaneous critical estimates as Bryant's Spanish (Moriscan Romances), and his

^McDowell, op, cit«, xxiii. See also Prose, I, 14^ • ^This entire chapter is taken from Bryant's "introduction" to The New Library of Poetry and Song and will be so entered following discussion. 39

Italian (Provencal) translation, his comments on tragedy, and his dis¬ cussion of the use of scriptural characters in dramatic presentation.

In an effort to arrive at a just and impartial estimate of early

American verse, Bryant shows his cognizance of the prejudice, on the one hand, and of chauvinism, on the other, which beset both British and

American critics respectively.I On the point of prejudiced Britons,

Bryant sees lack of knowledge about Americans and about America as the major fault? and on the point of Chauvinism by American critics, Bryant sees pompous pretensions and braggadocio as a contributing cause of dis¬ like of the Americans by the British.2 In his decision as to what criteria should be used for judging a work Bryant offers no quarter to either side, but impartially states:

Whatever is mediocre is mediocre should not receive rewards due to excellence. Praise based on patriotic feelings warps our writers by leading them to expect their countrymen to overlook their deficiencies. Only literature based on genuis, taste and diligence should be encouraged? not that based on nationalistic grounds.^

Continuing as to why poetry rose So slowly among Americans, Bryant says:

No particular attention was paid poets and poetry in early America. Patronage had to be sought in the Mother Country, and previous to our war of Independence, there was no natural poetry at all--we contented ourselves

■'-Pro se, I, 184. See Sidney Smith's famous statement which reads: - ...,who reads an American book....?...Literature the Americans have none., .it is all imported....When these questions are answered, their /the Americans/ laudatory epithets may be allowed--but until that can be done, we...advise them to keep clear of superlatives. Sidney Smith, "Annals of the United States," The Edinburgh Review, XXIII (January, 1820), 179, Prose, I, 45. Pattee states that British criticisms of American writings were justified, and that this fact angered the Americans all the more because they were true. He says: wOut of the battle came the first regular school of American criticism." Pattee, op. cit«, p. 269. ^"On Originality and Imitation," p. 64. 40

with perpetuating the learning, fame, and glory of the Mother Country....Only after our independence was es¬ tablished a different spirit pervaded our country: we became ambitious to distinguish ourselves in the eyes of the Mother Country.

Bryant blames the desire to stand well in the eyes of the Mother Country as responsible for our writers adopting what he called the "declamatory 2 manner—an artifice which allows tne imaginative faculties of the writer no exercise—which confines the imagination to "one chain of mannerism, a wearying regularity." He feels that for young aspiring American writers the best method to follow in teaching them to write is to point out the fault of those writers' preceding them: "He must be taught what to avoid as well as what to imitate."^

After taking this impartial stand regarding the literary controversy which raged between Britain and America, Bryant next turns his critical attention to individual poets prominent in the rise of American poetry, and states his estimate of the merits as well as the faults of their works.

Glossing over the poetic efforts for the first century after the settlement of the country, Bryant dismisses this era as one which produced specimens which "are merely objects of curiosity,^ and begins with the early eighteenth century and the works of Rev. John Adams. Adams's works,

lib id. 2Ibid. SProse, Ci Sti 4"Early American Verse", p. 28Lln the opinion of many critics, among whom are Kreymborg, Pattee, Bradley, and Parrington, the first century of American literature has a signal importance in that it moulded the thinking of later writers. Kreymborg says: By reverting to the Greek root for the word poet, one feels that many of the men who laid out the Colonies and eventually wrested the soil from the British Empire were makers...one learns that action above all else sang the poetry of the Ages. Kreymborg,op. cit., p. 6. 5lbid. 41

Bryant feels, show the "dawnings of an ambition to correctness and ele¬

gance."-'- Around this time in the works of Joseph Green, Bryant notices

some rude beginnings of humor manifesting itself though not nearly so

marked as in the works of Green's contemporary, Francis Hopkinson, whose ballads, "though deficient in vigor, are not inelegant."*5

Bryant devotes little attention to Freneau, whom he calls "a writer

in verse of inferior note who employed his pen in many political discuss¬

ions of a coarse nature.The only virtue Bryant finds in Freneau's works is their reference to "passing events."^ Bryant is virtually alone

in his underestimation, of Freneau's importance, for many critics accord

him a signal place in American literary development. Grant C, Knight sees

him as a transitional figure whose use of insignificant subject matter marks the approaching transition fhom classicism to romanticism. Further, he says of Freneau, "The war and political strife interrupted., .the truer growth of Freneau's genius."® Charvat goes further and ascribes to Fren¬

eau . important innovations :

Freneau, the period's brightest hope in poetry, spent his energies in the battle for republicanism, and his valuable contributions to dictional technique in poetry were ignored by the critics in their disgust with his politics.®

"Early American Verse," p. 29. 2 Ibid. 3 hid, Bryant's estimate of Freneau differs widely from those of other of our modern critics who have viewed Freneau in a different light. Pattee calls Freneau: One of the pioneers In the dimly-lighted region which was soon to be exploited by Coleridge and Poe.,..And his poetry is surely the first distinctly romantic note heard in America, Pattee, op. cit., p. 33. ^"Early American Verse," p. 31. 5 Grant C. Knight, op, cit., p. 94. 6Ibid., p. 53. 42

Other writers who employed their talents for political purposes as

did Freneau, Bryant discusses more in detail. The "Connecticut Wits"—

Dwight, Barlow, Humphries and Hopkins—are called "poets of patriotism."

Regarding Hopkin's satire, "The Anarchaid," Bryant lists its faults as

a coarseness of style, lack of polish, and as too imitative of the

English poets of the period.

Of Barlow's "Hasty Pudding," and of his "Columbiad," Bryant sees the

chief faults of these to be (1) an uninteresting plan, and (2) too dec¬

orative in imitation of foreign masters.^

Dwight, Bryant finds, while imitative and "almost unrelieved by mono¬

tony, does, in his "Conquest of Canaan," write many splendid passages

o even though the poet is lacking in poetical fancy." 3 In connection with the point of impure diction, Bryant says that

Trumbull's "McFingal" is marred by this fault and by its lack of "fertile

allusion."^ On the other hand, his "Progress of Dulness" Bryant considers

as having a more finished style and is freer from imitation of eighteenth

century English contemporary writers than the works of the other Wits. In

general, Bryant's estimate of Trumbull's genius and of the other Wits is

in line with that of many modern authors; even some of these modern authors

tend to give Trumbull and his colleagues more praise than Bryant was will¬

ing to give. Halleck, for example, calls him "the greatest of the Hartford

lMEarly American Verse," p. 52. 2Ibid. 3 Ibid. This distinction between "pure" poetry and "rhetorical" poetry puzzled Bryant as well as other poets. Bryant thought eloquence basic in both forms; yet he did not conceive of this eloquence as being logical ar¬ gument as did Aristotle; but for Bryant, eloquence means "flowers" plus moral conviction. Marvin T. Herrick, "Rhetoric and Poetry in Bryant", American Literature, VII (May, 1935), 188-94. ^"Early American Verse," p. 32. 43

Yfits. ,,^/ône whoT7occupied the first rank of the satiric writers of that age

....Trumbull's "MoFingal" is a worthy predecessor of Lowell’s Biglow Papers.11-

In summarizing the relative excellencies and faults of the Connecti¬

cut Wits, Bryant finds them servile imitators of the neo-classics who

"confined the imagination to one trodden circle, and whose versification is

formed upon the same...wearisome regularity."c Nevertheless, a poet arose

in 1800 who offered, Bryant finds, great promise, William Clifton is

praised for his greater variety of imagery, and his wider flexibility of

style which possesses "a more faithful adherence to nature than commonly

found"® His diction, too, Btyant commends as having an "unusual degree

of purity.

, In estimating Robert Treat Paine, Bryant finds that the poet possesses a fertile fancy, but obscures this virtue by an over epigrammatic style and by a lack of appeal to the heart.® Finally, Bryant calls Paine "a

fine but misguided genius."®

In his discussion of Fitz-Greene Halleck, Bryant is more detailed in his treatment. In his approach to Halleck, Bryant adheres to his belief

Robert P. Halleck, History of American Literature (New York, 1902), .p. 96. 2 "Early American Verse," p. 33. With relation to the wearisome poetry written during this period, Bredvold and McKillop see the ennui, which the age suffered because of excessive formalism, as leading directly to a great¬ er subjectivity and hence a greater feeling into eighteenth century poetry. Louis I. Bredvold and Allan D. McKillop (eds.), Eighteenth Century Prose and Poe tip/ (New York, 1939), xxiv. ®"Early American Verse," p. 33. 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid. Increasingly in his estimates of the various poets, Bryant stresses lack of feeling or appeal to the heart as being a major defect. McDowell says that "from youth to old age Bryant believed that all true poetry has its origin in the emotions of the poet." Tremaine McDowell, "Bryant’s Practice in Composition and Revision", PRIA, LII (June, 1937), 47s“. 6 "Early American Verse," p. 47. 44

that a poet is "affected by surroundings and that a sense of beauty or

grandeur is nourished in the young mind...by the scenery which surround

childhood. Bryant describes the southern shore of the Connecticut bor¬

dering on Inng Island Sound as a beautiful region.^ Here among the beau¬

ties of this section Fitz-Greene Halleck was born and grew to manhood.

3ryant says of him that he "was not precocious, and did not begin to write

verses prematurely. For some young men verse writing is like a children's

disease and as easily cured....As a rule precocity in this department of

letters is no sign of genius."®

Practical to a great degree, Halleck did not confine himself to the writing of poetry for his livelihood. He ms, in fact, an excellent ac¬

countant; but Bryant states that practicality is no barrier to the writing

of good poetry:

Perhaps the habit of exactness in this vocation led to an exactness in his dealings with all men. His example is an encouraging one for poets and Wits, since it teaches that a lively fancy and practical good sense do not necessarily stand in each other's way.4

Commenting upon Halleek's preparation for good poetic production,

Bryant states that Halleck's verses between 1809 and 1810 are not marked by the grace and spirit of his later pieces, for "his fancy had been quick¬

ened into new life; he had learned to wield his native language...; and

his voice had acquired that sweetness and variety of modulation which afterward distinguished it."®

Prose, II, 370. . 2 Ibid. Bryant cites, however, Halleck’s lack of recognition of the beauties of his home region in his poetry. Ibid., p. 371.

5Ibid., p. 372. "Prose, I, 379. 5Ibid., p. 373. 45

Reflecting this same variety and modulation, Halleck's satire,

’’Fanny,t is praised for its rich lyrical passages, and in comparing Hal- leck with Byron as satirists, Bryant does not find Halleck so cynical,

Halleck's satire is tempered with gaiety and mirthfulness infused by the poet's own personality.^- The delineation of Indian character Bryant, in his estimate of Halleck's Red Jacket, calls "vigorous,” "spirited," and

"original"; especially does he find noteworthy the vices, the savage vir¬ tues, and the rude and strong qualities of the savage mind as described by

Halleck, Again, Bryant calls Halleck's tribute, "Bums," "nearly the fin-? est poem in which one author celebrates another.In praise of Halleck's eulogistic writing, Bryant reacts favorably to his contemporary's style which he finds characterized by a certain "ease of versification, a natural flow and sweetness of language,..Horatian playfulness, and felicity of jest as well as an uhpredictible propensity to surprises,"^ Moreover, "his conversational vein of animated discussion, his delight in ludicrous con¬ trasts produced by bringing nobleness of the ideal world into comparison with the homeliness of the actual"^—all conspired to make Halleck a popu¬ lar poet.

1 Ibid, In connection with Halleck's personality, Pattee makes a simi¬ lar observations "These papers are light stuff, unquestionably entertain¬ ing, spicy, winged often with good-natured personalities." Fred Lewis Pattee, op. cit., p. 367. 2 Prose, I, 383. 3 "Early American Verse," p. 385. 4 Ibid. Other critics of Halleck's day speak of his popularity and great following. Griswold says of him in 1842: "Halleck is the only one of our poets who possesses a decided local popularity." Pattee, op. cit., p. 377. 46

Bringing into sharp foous one of his main critical tenets, Bryant says of Halleck: "He wrote little. Great authors often overlay and almost smother their own fame by the voluminousness of their writings

The final summation of Bryant's estimate of Halleck's genius is that his popularity is due to the choice of subjects : ”He wrote of things and events with which everybody in Hew York is more or less acquainted

...matters which are the talk of the fireside'.'^

Bryant's favorable attitude towards Halleck was not unusual.

Other early American critics also looked with favor on this Knicker¬ bocker poet. Even foreign commentators, usually hostile to American production and authorship, wrote glowing tributes to Halleck's artis¬ try. The English periodical, Specimens of American Poets, in placing

Halleck "next to Bryant... for his powers as for his variety," states:

We do not hesitate to rank the anonymous author of "Fanny," which along with its many obvious blemishes, unites in it al¬ most every promising essential to poetic excellence.3

From the Edinburg Mterary Journal, we find Halleck listed as "among the four poets of greatest eminence which America has at present."^

(Percival, Bryant, and Paulding are the other three).

Bradley, too, is in accord with other critics relative to Halleck's personality and genius* for he says:

Graceful and sprightly in mind and in manner, he was the type of town wit everyone loves...led an easy irresponsible sort of existence, writing very little, but achieving a pop¬ ularity ...which Poe rated third only to that of Bryant and Longfellow.^

^-Prose,I, 383. 2Ibid. Cairns, op. oit., p. 1S7. ~Ibid., p. 173. ^Bradley, op, ait., p. 93. 47

The foregoing discussion summarizes Bryant's chief criticism of the merits and defects of the verse of early American poets. He finds that servile imitation, lack of preparation, and inartistic distortion are the chief defects. Optimistically, though, he says: "l/ïhat should hinder our native works, if equal in merit, from meeting an equally favorable reception?"''’

Among the individual American writers of prose whom Bryant estimates is James Fenimore Cooper. Taking the critical viewpoint that a writer's life and background yield a great number of impressions which the writer incorporates into his work, Bryant in his commemorative address on Cooper gives his birth as "near vast forests where Indians roamed, 2 and where the bear, wolf, and the panther lurked." Here Bryant shows how Cooper's early life moulded the manliness and fearlessness of his character. At thirteen, Cooper joined the navy and went to sea where 3 he "mastered sea imagery which later figured in his sea romances."

After leaving the navy in 1811, Cooper married and wrote The Spy in

1821. This work was well received every place and by everyone, except by some American critics who said its plot was too crude. Bryant says of it, as he says of others of Cooper's works, "there are. certainly de¬ fects in construction, but these are overshadowed by the author's ability 4 to sustain interest."

■'■"Early American Verse," p. 47. , ^Prose, II, 301. 3 Ibid., p. 302. Parrington says of Cooper: The contrast everywhere between the real and the ideal took hold of his mind as an obsession...his romantic art suffered from the intrusion of realism; the romancer was constantly impelled to turn critic." Parrington, op. cit., p. 225. 4 Prose, II, 311. Steeves says that Cooper deals principally in types and "presents human nature only in its broadest aspects, and without re- 48

Among Cooper's sea stories which Bryant discusses first are The

Pilot, and Wing and Wing, Bryant praises Cooper's skill in drawing materials for romance from the materials of the sea. In The Pilot, the characterization of Tom Coffin is skillfully drawn; further, Bryant likes the vividness and power with which these sea fights are described.*

Similarly, in Red Rover and in the Naval History of the United States,

Cooper's descriptive powers are again praised; but the superiority of the descriptive incidents of Red Rover over the History is emphasized.

In connection with the History, too, Bryant praises Cooper for possessing imaginative genius enough to digest the information of American naval history so thoroughly as to render it into narrative form.

The Leatherstocking Series, which includes The Last of the Mohicans,

The Pioneers, and The Prairie, trace the character delineation of Lea¬ therstocking from his youth as a warrior in The Last of the Mohicans through his prowess as a hunter in The Pioneers to his old age as a trapper in The Prairie. Bryant readily admits that the most glaring de- 2 feot in the Series is in construction; however, Bryant reiterates that

Cooper's ability to hold interest makes the reader unconscious of such structural defects. Here again Bryant concerns himself with characteri¬ zation, for he believes Leatherstocking to be more boldly drawn in The finement and observation." Harrison R. Steeves, Literary Aims and Art (New York, 1927), p. 33. The reader should note this diversity of opin¬ ion. *E£OS<3, II, 312. ^Ibid. In the matter of construction, Edgar says that many modern critics, following Poe, have placed great emphasis upon construction. Pelham Edgar, The Art of the Novel from 1700 to the Present (New York, 1934), p. 16. 49

Last of the Mohicans than he is in The Pioneers. He says that Leather- t stocking though lacking book learning, possesses nobility and generosity of character, that Leatherstocking is one of the most original characters of fiction.*

Again, Bryant commends Cooper's powers of description in The Pioneers.

He continues by stating that the scenes and characters pass before the reader like a movie, even the seasonal changes are admirably described in all their aspects; the occupations of the people, their grappling with the wild life and the stubbon soil in order to wrest from them sustenance--all the scenes of rural life are spread before the reader.2 In power and at¬ mosphere, Bryant compares The Pioneers with the pastoral poetry of Theo- 3 critus and of Hesiod.

The last in the series, The Prairies, is a faithful depiction of the vastness and of the sublimity of the prairies. This work Bryant praises as Cooper's salute to the vast and growing westward expansion and develop¬ ment of the country.

It has been shown that while Bryant recognizes the structural weak¬ nesses in Cooper's works, he credits the writer with excellent powers of character delineation, vividness $nd power of natural description, skill in the drawing of his material from familiar subjects, and an unusual power of holding the reader's interest—all of these merits, Bryant feels, out¬ rank the structural defects of Cooper's works.

1Prose, II, 311. 2 Ibid. Regarding Cooper's depiotion of the frontier, Parrington says1 2 3 No writer has set down a more stern indictment of the frontier than Cooper, and he set it down because the frontier seemed to him the muddy source of the vulgar leveling he hated so much. Parrington op. cit., p. 232. 3Prose, I, 321. 50

Modem critics are also in accord with Bryant on this point. Leisy,in these words .credits Cooper with a great degree of artistic genius:

His defects as a narrative artist are patent, and have been pointed out to a wearisome extent. But the author of American Democrat and The Spy wrote a vigorous prose....His faults are, to a degree, not always understood....Cooper is the creator of a few unforgettable characters.. .which triumph over their de¬ fects by virtue of the rich energy of their creator.^

Foerster further highlights this significance and ability of Cooper:

He was unscholastic in his art, untutored in his writing, often given to lapses in style and in grammar. He set out merely to tell a story. Born narrator that he was, he told it so well that his books were more widely read than those of any other author.2

Bryant next appraises Cooper's economic novels, Satanstoe, The

Chain Bearer, and The Red-Skins, which reveal Cooper's passionate de¬ votion to the cause of freedom. However, Bryant finds these novels for' the most part didactic, and "lacking in a sense of freedom of invention."^

Throwing light upon Cooper's personality, Bryant mentions Cooper's role in the Anglo-American controversy which raged at the time.

Cooper, in his "Notions of the Americans by a Travelling Bachelor,'.' refutes British insinuations regarding America by giving an aocount of

our institutions and their purposes. Answering the Revue Britannique's

statements to the effect that the United States is the most expensive and the most taxed country in the world, Cooper was so vehement in his

Howard Mumford Jones and Ernest E. Leisy (eds.), Major American V/riters (New York, 1944), p. 276. 2 Norman Foerster (ed.), American Prose and Poetry (New York, 1934), p. 232. 2 Prose, I, 231, These novels are on the anti-rent question and show that Cooper thought the denial of property rights a very grave error. 51 denials of such allegations that he incurred the lasting enmity of the

French.1

In estimating Cooper's acceptance. Bryant credits his appeal to a reading public of men and women in ordinary walks of life as a main¬

spring of his popularity. The roots of this personal appeal are found

in Cooper's happy knack of writing about familiar subjects.

As to Cooper's style. Bryant does not find that his contemporary has a "special variety and compass of expression;" and in this matter, many critics agree with him. Lewisohn. for instance, says:

...invention in regard to pursuit and capture and physical combat are all that Cooper has ta offer. His books are redeem¬ ed by no beauty of style...3

Hal leek is also in agreement with both Bryant and Lewisohn:

His Plots were not carefully planned in advance; they often seem to have been suggested by an inspiration of the moment.... The narrative carries one forward with such a rush that one does not take notice of a single blemish in plot or style.^

Indeed. Bryant stresses again and again that while Cooper's plots

•*•31:id. Despite the hea-vy disapproval which his clash with the French evoked. Cooper, true to his inborn characteristic of persistence, incurred the enrolty of the American press as well. That Cooper loved his native land there is little doubt, and this intense devotion to her caused him to censure her when she needed it, and to praise her when she deserved it. Therefore his "Home as Found" brought forth such bit¬ terness from his readers that he was involved in a bitter fight with American newspaper editors. Prosecuting with relentless ferocity those editors whom he felt to have maligned his character, Cooper was, never¬ theless, magnanimous in his leniency toward his foes. Ibid., p. 362. ^Ibid., p. 362. For further estimates of Cooper's style, see Parrington , op. cit., p. 672; Foerster, American Critiosm (Hew York, 1928), p. 168: Cairns, op. cit., p. 193, 3Ludwig Lewisohn^The Story of American Literature (Hew York, 1939), pp. 56-68. ^Halleck, op. cit., p. 134. 52 have their structural defects, his ability to maintain interest once he

catches it, compensates for all structural defects.

/ Bryant's approach to Irving is the same as his approach to Cooper.

Similarly, Irving's background is sketched in the light of its influence

upon his works. Placing his early life and parentage first, Bryant states

that Irving was born a few days after independence was won. Influenced.

by the noble examples which the Revoluntionary leaders had set before him,

Irving grew up in the ,then»thinly populated New York, peopled with a

mingled and mixed citizenery which facinated and piqued the imagination

of the boy Irving. He loved to visit among the Dutch settlers, as well

as to visit any scene which horror or devastation had visited. These

factors combined to mould and influence Irving's character and writings,

and later when he returned home from Europe more urbane and witty than before, these same factors went into the writing of the Salmagundi Papers.

These papers satirized the follies and ridiculed the humors of the

time with good nature.'*' Influenced by The Spectator and The Tatler,

the Salmagundi Papers, Bryant asserts, have little or no imitation. He 2 says that their "gaiety and style are their own," and are a reflection

of Irving's temperament. Mary Litchfield in her "introduction" to her

edition of Irving's Sketch Book quakes a similar comment and estimate •

Like all true artists, Irving at his best has a style that defies analysis. It is the expression of the whole nature of the man. His goodness, his kindliness, his love of beauty, his sense of humor—all these and something more go to produce

Prose, II, 341. The Salmagundi Papers were written by Washington Irving in collaboration with William Irving and James K. Paulding. The writers set about to instruct, reform, and correct the manners and morals of the day. Pattee, op. cit., p. 238. 2Prose, II, 343. 53

what we know as Irving's style.4

Knight also recognizes these qualities in his estimate of Irving’s style1

As for style, he is especially recommended by amiability, for the selection of words that lure us on with insistent grace and good humor....All these things combine to make up what we are pleased to call I taring ' s style.^

Tracing Irving’s flow' of humor from a subtle gaiety in the Salmagundi

Papers to a broad hilarity in his Kniekerboeker History, Bryant says it 3 carries the reader forward to the conclusion without weariness or satiety."

As to its mirth, Bryant finds it of the transparent sort, its phraseology quaint, "reminiscent of Chaucer end Spenser."4 Bryant admits, however, that some phraseology and some passages need changing, but that the general merits of the work override its defects.

It is significant to note here that in his appraisal of Irving's works, Bryant throws an interesting sidelight on the change in tone of

Irving’s works between the History and The Sketch Book. He reports that between 1609 and 1819, Irving fell in love with a young lady whom he was to have married. She sickened and died on the eve of her wedding to

Irving, and he is reported to have kept as a constant reminder of her, and as a companion, the Bible whioH~she owned~and which contained a lock of her hair.^

^Washington Irving, The Sketch Book, ed. Mary Litchfield (boston, 1901), xix. 2 Knight, op. cit., p. 113. 5Prose. II, 344. 4Ibid., p. 348. Ibid. With respect to the changed tone in Irving's works, Parring- ton calls him: The most distinguished of our early romanticists/whq/in the end was immolated on the altar of romanticism. The pursuit of the pic¬ turesque lured him away into sterile wastes.... a born humorist...he was lacking in a brooding intellectuality. Parrington, op.cit., p. 212. 54

The Sketch Book, which we may assume from the foregoing to have repre¬ sented a changed tone, Bryant finds grave in vein, yet with a subtle humor underlying it: "Gur deeper sympathies are addressed primarily as in "'The Broken Heart," "Rural Funerals," and in "The Widow and her Son."'’

These pieces, Bryant notes, abound in agreeable pictures of English life.

When the satiric element appears it is amiable; and the irony playful, not bitter.® Its publication is said to have improved Anglo-American relations because of its sympathetic treatment of English life.

With respect to its influence on American literature, Bryant credits the Sketch Book with precipitating the publication of works by many new writers; indeed, Bryant continues, "all phases of our national life and literature developed during this period, and produced an abundance of different types of writers—theologians, essayists, novelists, dramatists, and poets included."-

Bracebridge Hall represents Irving’s attempt to fuse German manners with American native scenery, especially the Hudson River. This narra¬ tive which Bryant praises for its descriptions of rural life, is inter¬ spersed with short narratives, the scenes of which are laid in many countries.

Another work which shows Irving's understanding and power of portray¬ al of European life and manners is Tales of a Traveller. This narrative depicts literary life as the author found it in London and in other foreign cities. Bryant finds that the author's. pen sketches of indi¬ viduals are "clear," "diverting," and "individual," yet kindly with

Prose,II, 347, 2Ibid., p. 346. ®Ibid., p. 349. 55

"Irving's good nature pervading all."^

As a tribute to Irving's great versatility, Bryant comments on his biographical works such as his Lives of Columbus, Yifashington, and Gold¬ smith. Two of Irving's works in this connection—those of Washington and Goldsmith--Bryant finds characterized by simplicity and faithful adherence to facts; the defects of the Columbus are that the work lacks uniformity of style and is further marred by ornamentation where sim¬ plicity would have been better.2 In this work, however, Bryant notes that the narrator keeps himself detached from the personalities he is portraying, and that he keeps good proportion in presenting the charac¬ ters and events.3

Respecting the events which the Washington portrays, Bryant remarks upon its clarity in presenting the events of the Revolutionary- War be¬ fore the reader. The impartial spirit of Irving in skillfully and just¬ ly depicting the men around Washington, Bryant sees as a tribute to the writer's fair-mindedness and faithfulness to detail.

Irving's Goldsmith is so well written that Bryant places it superior to Foster's Life of Goldsmith in exactness of particulars, beauty of style, and entertainment of aneodotes. Its crowning feature, Bryant says, is

1 Ibid. 2 p- 354. Dana, in his review of Irving's works in the North American Review, says of them: He appears to have lost a little of that naturalness of style, for which his lighter works were so remarkable. He has given up something of his direct, simple manner and plain phraseology, for a more studied, periphrastical mode of expression. He seems to have exchanged words and phrases, which were strong, distinct, and definite, for a general sort of language. Quoted in Pattee, op. cit., p. 244. 3 Prose, II, 362. 56 its ability to "carry the reader forward without tediousness."■*■

Bordering on the factual, too, is Irving’s Chronicles of the Conquest of Granada. This work Bryant calls "authentic, and factual, yet so fill¬

ed with personal incidents as to read like a romance."2

Not only was Irving interested in glorifying the history of Spain and of Germany, but he also recorded the growth and expansion of his own coun¬ try in his works. Bryant interprets his Tour on the Prairies as a graphic

7 representation of the growth, character, and background of the West.

A narrative of equal importance for its depiction of the commercial

growth of American financial might,is Astoria. Bryant sees this work as

a representation of America's growing power and might.

Summarizing Irving, Bryant finds that he has no regular habits of

compositions that he writes prolifically when the spirit moves him; but that otherwise he hardly touches pen to paper. As to Irving's style,

Bryant attributes its quality to the reading of good authorsj in addi¬ tion, he finds the style "transparent, modulated, unaffected, and trans¬

fused with a peculiar humor.

Ibid., p. 363. In his "introduction" to A New Library of Poetry and Song, Bryant remarks favorably on the removal of devices which might lead to tediousness : It is curious to observe that a certain set of hackneyed phrases ...which were once used for the convenience of rounding out a line or supplying a rhyme, have.disappeared from our poetry. William Cullen Bryant (ed.), A New Library of Poetry and Song (New York, 1876), p. 49. 2 Prose, II, 356. 3 Ibid. Many poets have celebrated the West in their poetry. Chief among these is Edward Rowland Sill, who interpreted the cadences of the Pacific Ooean and the grandeur of the California scenery. Kreymborg sees Sill's work as akin "to the Bryant who sought escape from civiliza¬ tion." See Sill’s "The Redwoods," "California Winter , " and "Tropical Morning." Kreymborg, op. oit., p. 189. ^Prcse, II, 336. 57

We have given Bryant's estimate of some of the individual writers whom he ohose to include in his essays and whose reviews are pertinent

to our discussion. In "the miscellaneous essays which remain in our

block relating to American literature, we find that in his "American

Society as a Field for Fiction,” Bryant sees in the varied population

of America and her constantly shifting movement, far more material for

literary production than European cities centuries old could offer:

"Each little hamlet in a few seasons has more events and change to tell

of than a European village can furnish in a course of ages."l Further,

against the statement that American habits are too practical and too ac¬

tive to foster literary effort, Bryant says:

It is said...we need...a class of men whose condition in life places them above the necessity of active exertion. This is not so, the materials for the novelist are not the most corrupt seg¬ ment of society....A narrative the scene of which...is in the drawing rooms...we soon grow weary of...and ask for objects of sympathy and regard.^

Finally, "Wherever there are human nature and society, there are sub¬

jects for writers. The passions and affections, virtues and vices are

of no country."3

Modern critics give ample testimony of Bryant's ability as a critic

of the American scene:

He draws his figures and his illustrations from the life about him....And it was no narrowly localized America that he sang, but of the wide, growing, and prosperous America wherever it was.4

McDowell is also articulate on this point:

Ibid., p. 356. 2Ibid., p. 357. 3Ibid. '

Fred Lewis Pattee, "The Centenary of 3ryant s Poetry", Sidelights on American Literature (hew York, 1922), pp. 293-326. ' 58

His treatment of the history and legends of his own country, however, was commonly both nationalistic and emotional... .To the Pilgrims he paid high tribute... and likewise to the heroes of the

-1» American Revolution. 1

Our discussion of Bryant's critical principles as he applies them to

English verse and English authors will follow the same pattern as our discussion for American verse and American authors. First, we shall present Bryant's scattered comments on the state of English poetry be¬ tween Chaucer and Spenser, and follow these with critical estimates of individual English authors and certain of their works. The entire sect¬

ion of critical material is taken from Bryant's "introduction" to The

Mew Library of Poetry and Song.

Evincing an interest in a very important period in English litera¬ ture, Bryant finds that the state of English poetry between Chaucer and 2 Spenser is,for the most part,dormant. He finds little worthy of attention during this period because the poets who were writing during the period were too intent upon following their French and Italian models to the neg¬ lect of Chaucer, who wisely used these models as a frame for his master¬ pieces. Among the few poets worthy of mention during this period, Bryant says that Skelton merits a place of distinction,

3 Respecting the length of poetry, Bryant believes in part with Poe, that while it is true thait most masterpieces are of considerable length,

• T .» * f poems of moderate length or else "parts of the greater works produce a 4 more beneficial effect.

jt, y

■'"McDowell, Bryant, xlix, 2 Prose, II, 359. See also J. M. Berdan, Early Tudor Poetry (Mew York, 1934), p. 46. 2 Edgar Allen Poe, op. cit., pp. 1-3-7. Svilliam Cullen Bryant (ed.), A New Library of Poetry and Song (rev. 59

It is with respect to length that Bryant indicts Chaucer's Troylus and his Romaunt of the Rose. The latter, Bryant finds particularly marred by length. In the Troylus, Bryant see's little action and incident,and

states that its "length equals that of Homer's epics."''' Here Bryant

interposes the thought that Chaucer would have done well to have aban¬

doned his French and Italian models in the matter of length; for Bryant

says the French and Italians wrote for a "leisure class which had ample 2 time to pursue long works."

Similarly, Bryant finds length a major defect of The Canterbury

Tales. However, he finds that "over-minuteness of character portrayl

and the habit which its characters have of talking too much, though well,"® are its main defects. Bryant's final estimate of Chaucer is

that he has "no majesty, no stately march of numbers in his poetry, still

less is there of fire, rapidity, and conciseness."^

In length of treatment and in degree of commendation, Bryant places

Shakespeare chief among all poets in all phases of genius. For his uni¬ versality and timeliness plus his greatness, Bryant shows an awareness.

in the remark that "Shakespeare is not an American...yet a poet of the 5 Americans." Or again in showing Shakespeare's prescience and profun-

ed.,(Hew York, 192$,' p. 40. Subsequent quotations from Bryant's intro- duetion to bis anthology will be taken from this source and will be designated Library, followed by page and number. •''Ibid., p. 44. 2Ibid. 3Ibid. ^Ibid., p. 42. Bryant's estimate of Chaucer is meager and is lack¬ ing in a full appreciation of the poet. Even Arnold, who also tends to minimizes Chaucer's importance, says of him: He is a genuine source of joy and strength....He will be read, as time goes on far more generally than he is read now. Arnold, op. cit., p. 90. 5Prose, II, 43. 60 dity, Bryant says:

Passages /in his dramasy show Shakespeare anticipated Harvey in his knowledge of blood circulation; his understanding of the workings of the human mind show an instructive grasp of psychol¬ ogy; Wolsey's speech shows Shakespeare capable of ministering to souls..•, ^

Further concerning Shakespeare's genius and greatness, Bryant in¬ terestingly enough, intimates a belief that an indivivual is a composite of many varying degrees of greatness or meanness according to the quality of thoughts he thinks s

Shakespeare partook of the greatness he puts into each char¬ acter, He would have been great in any number of fields in which he depicted his character...for the dramatic poet who puts into the mouths of personages he would represent.. .words and sentiments corresponding to their exalted character, must ...possess an intellectual character somewhat like theirs, and must...partake of theirs

In his attempt to give an estimate of the colossal intellect of

Shakespeare, Bryant makes the following comparisons /he is likey”...a forest of trees which have been untouched by mankind, how they tower above

<2 all others in strength....” Shakespeare also possesses ”an imagination so creative, a reason so vigorous, a wisdom so clear and comprehensive, taking view of like and character and duty so broad and just and true...such acute¬ ness of observation and such power of

^Ibid., p. 302. o &Ibid. In his essay on poets and poetry, Poe, discussing whether or not a writer who is not himself a poet is capable of good critical judg¬ ment, calls Shakespeare "the greatest of poets.” Philip Van Doren Stern op. cit., p. 577. In this same connection Coleridge saysî In this investigation/of qualities of poems promising poetic powerj I would not, I thought, do better than keep before me the earliest works of the greatest genius that perhaps human nature has yet produced, our myriad-minded Shakespeare. Coleridge, op. cit., p. 166. 3Prose, II, 45. SI presenting to other minds what is observed, that he is preeminent among poets."'*'

With respect to Shakespeare's dramas , Bryant states that they "keep alive the connection between the present and the remote past, and stay the hurrying process of change in certain respects in which change is 2 undesirable."

But Shakespeare also has faults, Bryant finds. Chief among these is his leaning toward length which is apparent in both his dramatic and non dramatic works.

From the foregoing discussion, it is clear that Bryant considers

Shakespeare the peer of all poets with respect to knowledge, imagination, and perfection of the poetic art; with other early English poets, Bryant is not so complimentary. Yet everywhere he attempts to be fair, never vitriolic and completely damnatory.

With regard to Thomson, Bryant confines his comments to the state¬ ment that Thomson is great for his showing the various materials na¬ ture offers for poetic treatment to those who observe her instead of 3 reading about her. Bryant finds Thomson's chief defect to be "a blank verse which appears swollen and propped instead of flowing smoothly along."4

In his appraisal of Dryden and Pope, Bryant censures the two for ad-

~*Tbid., p. 304. 2Ibid., p. 151. 3 Ibid., p. 163. In this relation, Joseph Warton in his "Essay on the Genius and Writings of Pope" says of him: "Thomson was blessed with a strong and copious fancy; he hath enriched poetry with a variety of new and original images which he paints from nature itself." Woods, 0£. cit., p. 1348. 4Prose, II, 164. 62 hering to the couplet style which in the end make for much weariness and monotony. With reference to the relative merits and defects of Dryden,

Bryant says that these are chief among his defects as a poet: an infer¬ tile imagination and the use of imagery not drawn from an observation of external nature. His chief merit lies in his raising the heroic couplet to perfection, the numbers of which "are pleasing at first, but in the end fatiguing."^

Pope, on the other hand, is credited with contracting the "range of the heroic couplet, reducing it to more regular'pause, and making it at first more musical, but ending, finally, in monotony from overuse."2

In his discussion of the poet whom Pope followed, Bryant's estimate of Oldham's character is very enlightening; for Bryant says that Oldham would not dedicate his works to rich patrons as was the custom during the seventeenth and eighteenth century, nor would he ask favors and pa¬ tronage of anyone.

Instances in which Pope's work parallels that of Oldham are pointed out as they serve Bryant's purpose. For example, Pope's pastoral,

"Winter,." compares. clo sely with Oldham's "Bion. ? Similarly, the follow¬ ing lines of Pope's "Windsor Forest" compare in thought with Oldham's

"First Satire Against, the Jesuits." 'Compare Pope's

...whom even the Saxon spared, and bloody Dane The wanton victims of his sport remain...^

1Ibid., p. 165. 2Ibid. 3 Ibid. In the matter of indebtedness, it is interesting to relate Hudson's findings regarding Bryant's indebtedness to Archibald Alison, whom Hudson says, furnished the basis for Bryant's principles upon which his theories rested. Alison's "Essay on the Nature and Principles of Taste" embodies the thought that esthetic pleasure arises from the 63 with Oldham’s:

...what neither Saxon rage could here inflict Nor Danes more savage, nor barbarous Piet...4

Bryant recognizes Oldham as a writer of eulogistic poetry. However.

Bryant credits Oldham with ’’possessing a genuine enthusiasm and majestic imagery and Vigor.w2 At the same time he observes Oldham's bad rhymes and "a certain coarseness.”3

Another poet to whom Bryant says Pope is indebted is Abraham Cowley.

Bryant contends that Pope borrowed without acknowledgement the scheme for his Essay on Criticism from Cowley’s Davideis. In support of his accusation. Bryant offers the following for comparison:

Round the whole earth his dreaded name shall sound. And reach to worlds that must not yet be found...4 and from Pope's essay:

Nations unborn your mighty name shall sound And worlds applaud that must not yet be found...5

Relative to Cowley's accomplishments, Bryant calls him remarkable for his scholarly attainments and for his "Discoveries By Yfay of Essays in Prose and Verse," written at an early age, which shows a love of re¬ tirement and of study. His'prose, too, Bryant finds, shows the volumin- ous reading and vast extent of Cowley's knowledge. In the field of trans¬ lations, Bryant finds CowPey so competent a translator of Anacreon that combination of a simple emotion with the exercise of the imagination. Here too, may be found, Hudson says, the concept of nature as a healer. W. P. Hudson, "Archibald Alison and Bryant", American Literature, XII (March, 1940),pp. 59-68. ^Quoted in Prose, II, 127. 2Ibid. 5Ibid. 4Ibid. 5lbid. 64

in many instances, his translation surpasses the Greek originals and is

"sprightly and joyous in tone."*

Summarizing Cowley's faults, Bryant finds too great a predilection for using remote allusions, an over abundance of ingenious expressions

and conceits which are more appropriate in connection with odes, to be

among his chief defects.

Next to his treatment of Shakespeare, Bryant devotes his most lengthy

and searching critical gaze to the works of Burns, Of Burns, Bryant says»

He had a creative and fertile imagination, and his poems have a mastery over the mind of men, God breathed the spirit of love for fellow men into Burns,,,a great sympathetic spirit even with animals, no affectation, no exaggeration, nothing childishly silly, •«•but all that is manly, truthful, and noble.

Further, Bryant ascribes to Burns true originality» "Burns attains to the title of genius by his ability to take a dialect and make it classi-

cal and universal." Again he states» "Some of Burns's productions have no pattern in our literature. "Tam O'Shanter," for instance, is a gem of wit written in a superb manner.Of the "Cotter's Saturday Night,"

Bryant says»

What poem descriptive of rural manners and virtues, rural life in its simplicity and dignity—yet without a single false outline or touch of false coloring—clings to our memories and lives in our bosoms like his "Cotter's Saturday Night?"5

1Ibid. 2 Library, p. 49. 3 Ibid. In regard to his facility in the use of native dialect, Burns makes this illuminating admission» These English songs gravel me to death. I have not the facility and command of the language that I have of my native tongue. In fact, I think that my ideas are more barren in English than in Scotch. Quoted in Arnold, op. cit., p. 100. 4 Prose, II, 321. 5Ibid., p. 218. 65

In his final estimate of-B.urns, Bryant concludes*

...he could transfigure the commonest into objects of gold, pervading all his writings is a profound sympathy with all liv¬ ing things.. .1

It is a strange but a noteworthy fact that being somewhat of a roman¬ ticists himself, Bryant devotes no detailed essays or full estimates of the English romanticists who inspired him most—Wordsworth, Thomson,

Keats, and Coleridge, but contents himself to give scattered and brief estimates of them throughout his essays. For instance, he merely says of Wordsworth:

Wordsworth brought back simplicity of expression over the fantastic forms preceding him. ..^

In his "introduction" to the Mew Library of Poetry and Song, Bryant lists as Wordsworth's chief defects a lack of compression, and thought which suffers through expansion.3

Exhibiting a keen and penetrating insight into the character and work of Scott, Bryant pays Scott a high tribute:

...no other metrical narratives in our language seem to possess an equal power of enchaining the attention of readers and carrying them forward from incident to incident with such entire freedom from weariness.^

Incident to this discussion, Bryant states that Scott's Waverly Novels show mastery of materials and workmanship; humor, pathos, vivid character

1Ibid., p. 218. 2 Library, p. 45. 3Ibid. 4 Prose, II, 312. The charm and value of the Waverly Hovels claim the attention of many critics, among whom are H. B. Mabie, who says in My Study Fire, Second Series (1896): The perennial charm of the Waverly Novels resides very largely in their healthfulness. They take us entirely out of ourselves, and absorb us in the world of incident and action. Quoted in George B. Woods, op. cit«, p. 1319. 66 portrayal which is life-like and scintillating.'*' Scott's chief character¬ istics, then, are his ability to carry the reader forward without weari¬ ness and to evoke sustained interest.

A second nineteenth century romanticist whom Bryant treats in pass¬ ing is Byron, whose vigor and passion if used in moderation, Bryant says should have accorded him a place above that of Keats in the character of

English poetry; but because of his gloom and misanthropic tendencies, animosities and repellent tone, he antagonizes and freezes his readers.2

Southey shares honors with Scott of "writing the first long narra¬ tive poem in our language which can be read without weariness."® His

Roderic is the example in this connection.

Finally, Keats, in a brief estimate, is found to be a poet rich in imagery and sense words as shown in his "Ode to a Grecian Urn," and

"Ode to a Nightingale." Briefly his chief defeot is a "childish flat¬ ness" as seen in "Endymion."^

lUrning his attention to an estimate of German literature and Ger¬ man poets, Bryant is broad and objective in his criticisms in that he does not regard England and his America as having a monopoly on power¬ ful minds or brilliant intellects; for Bryant cites the Germans as being among the most profound historians.the most learned philologists, the most original writers and thinkers. He is quick to point out the debt owed the Germans by Coleridge, Wordsworth, Southey, DeQuincey, and Scott among others, who, he says, "drank deeply at German fountains."®

Prose, II, 313. 2Ibid., p. 156. 5Ibid., p. 158. 4Ibid., p. 159. 5Ibid.,- . 67

■ Of the malignant influence of German literature, Bryant speaks of the calumny under which German literature fell when it was dominated. By

French influence. This calumny was earned, too, Bryant continues, as a. result of German philosophers and metaphysicians daring to question points long held in reverence by the r-est of the world. Yet he calls

German literature rich in all phases and powerful in its influence on the literature of other countries.

As to Germany's greatest poets, Bryant calls Goethe and Schiller

"great poets...and citizens of the world.... Their works speak to the human heart everywhere; their voice is heard from age to age; their fame is the common property of mankind; and their writings are among- the ties that bind the tribes of men in common brotherhood."^

Goethe is not only great in knowledge, Bryant continues, but he is also great in his ability to stand comparison with other writers. Like

Milton, Goethe, too, shows how knowledge may become the handmaid of poetry, how poetic invention is aided rather than hindered by a large abundance 2 of knowledge. Called a reformer in literature by Bryant, Goethe is also credited with mastery of expression and superb power in the delineation of 3 character.

With Schiller, Bryant shares a kindred feeling; for Schiller was a lover of freedom and of justice, and earnestly labored for redress from

~*Tbid., p. 289. Adverse criticism of Schiller may be found in Coleridge, who says; "Schiller's blank verse is bad. He moves in it as a fly in a glue-pot." Coleridge, op. cit., p. 160. 2 Prose, II, 289.

'"Ibid. , p. 340. 68 wrongs which he felt society imposed on the common man. Schiller's The

Robbers not only shows impatience with society because of the abuse it permits, but argues for reform. Similarly, in his Don Carlos Schiller exhorts rulers to build their empires both on the happiness and affection Z of their subjects and upon the respect of the rights for others.

It is necessary here to state that Bryant, however, does not -view

Schiller as a revolutionist, for his William Tell with its emphasis on love of order, love of country, and reverence for the rights of others dis¬ proves this, Bryant says; but rather he views Schiller in the light of an 3 advocate of gradualism. In his view, it is apparent that Schiller was for keeping the old that is usable...for constant revision and changes are 4 necessary to political health."

Bryant's final estimate of Schiller is that he is "an earnest seeker after truth; a man whose moral nature revolted at every form of deceit... 5 working always for brotherhood and for justice.

From his observation of the English and German writers, Bryant turns his attention to an appraisal of other foreign literary artists. Of in¬ terest among these is his comment on Spanish or Mori scan romancers.

These romancers relate the loves and chivalric deeds of the knights of

Granada, and celebrate Moslem heroism and beauty. These romances are

4Ibid., p. 217. In contrasting Schiller and Shakespeare, Coleridge says Schiller has the material sublime; to produce an effects.he sets you a whole town on fire, and then throws infants with their mothers into the flame, or locks up a father in an old tower. But Shake¬ speare drops a handkerchief, and the same or greater effects follow. Coleridge, op. cit., p. 160. ^Prose, II, 341. ^Ibid., p. 218. 4Ibid., p. 219. ®Ibid., p. 168. 69 characterized by simplicity of spirit, tenderness, and a natural sweet¬ ness.

With reference to the characteristics of Moriscan style, Bryant re¬ fers to the use of conceits by these poets. He finds that the Spanish poets use a "perpetual tissue of affectations and extravagances similar to the euphuistic writing of the sixteenth century poets."-'- This ten¬ dency, Bryant believes, makes for a deformed poetry.2

In impressing the beauty of the Moriscan romance upon his readers,

Bryant reproduces the essence of the "Complaint of Fatima to Raduan" for the reader’s study.

The first stanza sings the fickleness of the lover; yet the refrain admits between each stanza that a woman forgives a lover before he goess

False diamond set in flint', hard heart in.. .breast'. By a softer, warmer bosom the tiger's couch prest. Thou art fickle as the sea, thou art wandering as the wind, Ohl I could chide thee sharply—but every maiden knows That she who chides her lover, forgives him ere he goes.

In stanza II the lover has told Fatima that she is the fairest of all; nevertheless, she alone knows his fickle heart, and forgives him "ere he goes”:

Thou hast called me oft the flower of all maids, Thou hast said they by the side of me...the fairest fades;

Alas', if they but knew thee, as mine it is to know, They well might see another mark to which thine arrows go; for I speak to one who knows

XProse, I, 168. 2 Ibid. Characteristics of sixteenth century writing are found in the works of Sir Philip Sidney, John Lyly, and in the works of Thomas Lodge. For illustrations of this type of prose see lyly's "Euphues" and Lodge's "Rosalynde". The Golden Hind, ed. Roy Lamson and Hallett Smith (New York, 1942), pp. 463-69. ~ 70

That she who chides her lover, forgives him ere he goes.^-

Cur final discussion in this chapter concerns the use of scriptural

characters in dramatic presentations. In his review of Hillhouse's

Hadad, Bryant makes an interesting observation. This work of Hillhouse's

is based on Absalom’s rebellion, and Bryant attempts to give the answer

to the question regarding to what extent subjects drawn from the sacred

scripture are proper for dramatic use. Bryant believes that humans men¬

tioned in the Bible must be looked upon as humans with the strength, weaknesses, and passions of other humans, and that literary interpreta¬

tion and presentation of Bible characters and incidents do not necessari¬

ly induce irreverence, but rather, such representations, if artistically

executed, may confirm one's faith.^ He oites in support of this belief

the fact that ministers are permitted to use their imaginations to paint

pictures of love and devotion, good and evil, and that poets should be

allowed the same privilege. He further mentions that Milton, Dante, and

Byron are among the many successful users of suoh religious materials.

Here, however, Bryant adds a yardstick which may be used for measuring

the successful and unsuccessful attempts in this direction:

...whenever great powers of mind have been brought to work, their exertion has been attended with success; and that those who have written bad poems owe their failure quite as much to the want of talent as to the unfortunate choice of a subject... so the history of literature proves these materials/religious/ may be converted to the purposes of poetry and...although not the most attractive in their nature nor the best adapted to the favorable execution of ordinary talents, they are capable of being turned to good account in the hands of a master...3

It has been pointed out that Bryant's wide knowledge as evidenced

1 Prose, I, 97-98. ^Ibid., p. 363. 71

by the range of materials under his observation plus his universality

of feeling with mankind; his love of liberty and social justice as well

as his knowledge of both foreign and native poets and poetry; his balanced

and critical judgment and, finally his competency as a versifier familiar with the mechanics of verse writing— all qualify him for the role of

critic. We have noted also that Bryant held, with other critics, certain

common practices of critical thinking of the period, yet departed in

some respects, from a few of these rigid tenets, such as his favoring the

use of the subjective in writing poetry. Bryant feels that the infusion

of the more melancholy aspects of life into writing, strengthens the

character. While never denying that the future of .American literature

and of American writers is great, Bryant finds early eighteenth century

American literature, in the hands of the "Connecticut Wits," imitative

for the most part, but somewhat promising.

In the area of prose, Bryant sees Cooper's competency as a narrator

and depictor of character as contributing to the future greatness of

literary America. Nor does America's future greatness in literature

stand void of the elements of humor.

Turning a critical gaze upon English authors, Bryant finds that

Chaucer, though significant, is faulty in brevity and succinctness,

Shakespeare is pre-eminent among poets, and to his genius Bryant pays

the highest tribute. Scott is praised for his ability to dramatize and

to keep the reader in suspense; Pope, Dryden, Oldham and Cowley are / praised for their clarity and neatness of diction but found fault with

in their over use of the couplet. To Wordsworth, Bryant devotes no

1 Ibid., p. 364. 72 extended treatment, but allows Southey to share honors with Scott as a writer who does not weary his readers. Byron, Coleridge, and Keats,

Bryant commends for strength, mysticism and delightful imagery respec¬ tively. Burns is treated as a humanitarian and as an original artist.

Germany and Germany's poets, Schiller and Goethe, especially, are praised for their depth, humanity, influence and scholarship.

Finally, Bryant looks with favor upon the use of scriptural subjects for literary presentation, and finds that such material may confirm and strengthen faith rather than weaken it.

In this chapter, then, we have been concerned with Bryant as an in¬ terpreter, an appraiser of literature. In this study we may observe.two significant facts: First, that Bryant in his practice of criticism is both relatively consistent with his theory and in comparative harmony with nineteenth century substantial critics, American and English, in his appreciation and appraisal of certain authors; second,- that he has an intelligent grasp of and a lively interest in comparative literature, including ancient and modern authors, American and European literary productions. It shall be the purpose of the third chapter of this thesis to point up the significance of Bryant's place in american criticism, and to suggest that Bryant's position as a critic is a fertile field for further investigation. CHAPTER III

BRYANT THE CRITIC: AN EVALUATION

In this evaluation of Bryant the literary critic, it is our intention to arrive at a few general truths concerning his significance in the field of American literary criticism rather than to make a catalog of his literary opinions. We have seen in Chapter I, how Bryant set out to define poetry, to evaluate its uses to human welfare and happiness, to assign its rela¬ tionship to the other arts—especially to painting, sculpture, and to ora- tory--as well as to assert the most propitious time and emotional state necessary to its effective and artistic execution. Therefore, his literary stand, as set forth in Chapter I, may be summarized as follows:

(1) He believes that "only poems of moderate length or else parts of great works" give the highest imaginative and intellectual pleasure—anticipating Poe.

(2) He stresses the prosodic debt of one age to another.

(3) He prefers freedom of manner (apparently including technique).

(4) He is glad to see that hackneyed phrases and rime tags are no longer much used by contemporary poets.

(5) He dislikes affectations of all kinds, especially of style and "novelties of expression."

(6) He is especially pleased that blank verse is dropping Latin- isms and awarkward distortions.

These beliefs and predilections held by Bryant are not new, and may be easily discovered in the basic tenets of the Scottish rhetoricans and of the critics of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century in England

Charvat, op. cit., pp. 27-58. American criticism during Bryant's period was characterized by a judicious and moral tone; for the major critics of the period, with but two exceptions, were lawyers: Bryant,

73 74 and. America. In the main, these theories were subscribed to by all of the American critics including Channing, Gilman, Prescott, Dana, Sr., and

Bancroft. Yet, traditional as. Bryant's position in the field may be, he did offer contributions in a distinct way which may be regarded as entirely

"Bryantian." It is, indeed, in his application of 'these traditional literary theories that Bryant's apostasy is more clearly, discernible. This application of his theories formed the subject of the second chapter of this thesis, and in the main reveals two outstanding facts: (1) Eis ap¬ preciation of the writings of his own countrymen (whether of early writers or of those contemporaneous with him), and of the writings of Europeans whom he chose to estimate, shows both a strict adherence to his critical tenets and a relatively impartial and just estimate of their works. (2)

In his estimates of writers, Bryant shows ability to catch intelligently and incisively the spirit of their works and to render judgment in the light of his own study and not of that of anyone else.

Bryant has been dwelt upon so exclusively in the field of verse to the neglect of his importance in the field of American literary criticism, that a study of his significance in this field is necessary. Therefore it is our purpose in this third chapter to point to an evaluation of Bryant in the critical field, and to suggest some problems connected with such an evaluation.

Dannie, Prescott, Walsh, Sands, E. T. Channing—all were lawyers, except W. E. Channing and Prescott. The major tenets held by these critics have been discussed in Chapter II, and were formed upon the criticial views of the Scottish critics as disseminated through the Edinburgh and the Quarterly reviews principally. Headed by men of Scotch descent—Blair, Karnes, Alison, Campbell and Dougal Stewart—criticism was dogmatic, vitriolic, and in¬ fected by partisanship. Appreciation gradually crept into these standards with the advance of romanticism. Previous to its advent, enthusiasm was held to be out of place. Ibid., p. 97. 75

A search through the periodical files in any library will reveal the scarcity of periodical material on Bryant as a critic. So, too, do the critical histories and current bibliographies yield a modicum of mention of Bryant in the critical field. To show the truth of this, the writer of this thesis has, in her research, compiled a group of three lists of articles, one from the periodical files, one from the various literary histories and texts used most frequently in this study, and one from two recent bibliographies which list articles on American Literature.

One of these bibliographies, edited by Lewis Leary, is Articles on Ameri¬ can Literature Appearing in Current Periodicals—1920-1945; the other,

Volume III of the Literary History of the United States edited by Robert

E. Spiller, et. al. Let us list the findings from these references.

Our first list from the periodical files shows the types of articles carried by a representative number of our leading periodicals. The Dial carries four articles concerning Bryant and the new poetry* and some little p known facts relating to his birth* which have recently come to light. The

American Literature magazine is equally lacking in material on Bryant as a critic} for from the three articles carried his contributions to the field of journalism^ and allusions to his poetic fame are mentioned.^ Likewise, 5 the New England Quarterly concerns itself with Bryant and Mellarme, the

French writer. The National Republic records Bryant’s fathering

"Bryant and the New Poetry," LXIX (August 15, 1915), 92-93; "Few Facts About Bryant," XXXVIII (April 1, 1905), 223-226. ^"Some Further Remarks About Bryant," LXIX (October, 1928), 361-363; "Our Pioneer American Poet," LXIX (December, 1915), 231. ^"Bryant and the North American Review," I (March, 1929), 14-16. ^"Rhetoric and Poetry in Bryant," VII (May, 1935), 168-94. ^"Bryant and Mellarme," LXII (June, 1947), 442. 76

American Literaturethe South Atlantic Quarterly shows interest in his nature views. ^ This first list—as are the other two—is far from com¬ plete; however, it does offer a representative sampling of the lack of material on Bryant as a critic in leading periodicals. Similarly, our list compiled from recent bibliographies is equally as meager in its yield, of the fifty-two magazines on Bryant listed in Articles on American

Literature, 1920-1945, only two articles make mention of Bryant as a con¬ tributor to the field of criticism. These are (1) C. I. Glicksberg's article, "William Cullen Bryant, A Reinterpretation," Revue Anglo Américaine,

XI (August, 1934), 495-503; and (2) McDowell's "Bryant's Practice in Com¬ position and Revision," PMLA, LII (June, 1937), 474-502. Therefore, during this twenty-five-year-period apparently only two articles which took cogni¬ zance of Bryant as a critic appeared in recognized periodicals.

Our third list, compiled from the literary histories and texts used most frequently in this thesis offers no greater yield in this connection.

From McDowell's Bryant, one of the most authoritative sources on our sub¬ ject, we find that in the contemporary criticisms carried in pages 359 through 388, there is no mention of Bryant's critical ability. A fair cross section or sampling of these criticisms and the materials treated are the

"Father of American Poetry," XVIII (November, 1930), 22. ^"Nature in Bryant's Poetry," XVII (January, 1918), 10-17. 3 The following are among the fifty-two magazines. These are listed merely to show the types of periodicals which carry articles: Colophon, I (Spring, 1936); NEQ, VI (September, 1933); State Historical Society, XXXIII (June, 1940); Negro 'Historical Bulletin, VI (November, 1942); Ameri¬ cana, XXXIX (July, 1935): Fantasy, V (1Ô35); American Literature, VII (May, 1935), Georgia Historical Quarterly, XXXIII (June, 1940); North American Review, CCIV (November, 1§£7); Éducation, XLVIII (June, 192Ô); Philological Quarterly, XVI (January, 1937) ;~Modern Language Journal (January, 1933). These periodical volume listings are just as they appear in the source. 77 following: A H. Everett, "Review of The Embargo," Monthly Anthology, V

(June, 1808), 339-40; John Neal, "American Writers," 31ackwood1s Magazine,

•XVI (September, 1824), 304-11; George Lamson, "Review of Miscellaneous

Poems," North American Review, XII (April, 1826), 432; William McHenry,

"American Lake Poetry," American Quarterly Review, XI (March, 1832), 421;

Edgar Allen Poe, "Preface to Poems," Southern Literary Messenger, III (Jan¬ uary, 1837), 41.

From the most important critical histories used in the preparation of this thesis, only three mention Bryant as a critic. Farrington says:

"The keenness of his humanitarian criticism set the editor apart from 1 shriller contemporaries." Allen says that Bryant "was the first American 2 to publish important criticism on subjects pertaining to prosody," Charvat pays tribute to Bryant's judgment in connection with the use of Biblical

•Z material in dramatic presentation and to his essays on the troubadours.

The following histories make no mention of Bryant's critical ability:

Shafer's Paul Elmer More and American Criticism (New Haven, 1925); Zabel

Literary Opinion in America (New York, 1937); Augustus Strong, American

Poets and Their Theology (Philadelphia, 1906); Kreymborg, History of Ameri¬ can Poetry (Few York, 1934); Pattee, First Century of American Literature

(New York, 1935); nor does Kreymborg's American Criticism (New York, 1928) make mention of Bryant the critic. A final word on the paucity of material is offered by Spiller, et_. al_., who say:

No biography of Bryant has been published in forty years, and critical estimates are not numerous. The standard life still remains

10p. cit., pp. 239-421. 2 Op. cit., p. 53. 2 Op. cit., p. 65. 78

Parke Godwin, A Biography of William Cullen Bryant with Extracts from His Private Correspondence (New York, 1883), 2 volumes. It is uncritical end adulatory.... The best brief narrative bi¬ ography is that of Allan Nevins, Dictionary of American Biography (1929); a good critical summary is Tremaine McDowell's introduction to William Cullen Bryants Representative Selections (1935), xii- lxvii...1

How is one to interpret the dearth of material concerning Bryant's critical ability? Has no one attempted to rate him as a critic or has he no stature in this field? In approaching this problem one faces broad questions which, when answered, should present Bryant the critic in a new and significant lights Was he widely read? Was his judgment sound? Was his style clear and effective?

For answer to the first question, the extent of coverage of Bryant's critical works and allusions themselves will partially answer the question and should yield sufficient proof of his synoptic knowledge and interests.

That knowledge is essential to the good critic cannot be denied.^ Such knowledge should include familiarity with the author's psychological and biographical background as well as the socio-historical background of his work. This knowledge Bryant had, as has been shown in his essays on Irving,

Cooper, and Halleck.

Any thorough investigation of Bryant’s learning will readily reveal that such critics as Lowell, Milton, Macaulay, and Arnold surpassed him in depth and breadth of scholarship, but such an investigation, unearth¬ ing the literary America of Bryant's day—its provincialism, its relative

Robert E. Spiller, et al., op. cit., p. 424.

2 ' : Most critics agree on this point. Nitchie is of this belief; so are Arnold, Coleridge, More, and Pope, among others, oee respectively Eliza¬ beth Nitchie, The Criticism of Literature (New York, 1929), p. 25; Matthew Arnold, "The Function of Criticism at the Present Time," Essays in Criticism (London, 1921), p. 1; Paul Elmer More, "How to Read Lycidas,** ed. Zabel, op. cit., p. 7; Alexander Pope, "An Essay on Criticism," ed. Bredvold and Me- Killop, op. cit., p. 347. 79 neglect of things artistic, its infantile efforts in belles lettres— show Bryant as a fertile oasis in a veritable desert of philistinism. A search through the prose editions of his •works as edited by Godwin, reveals

Bryant's interest in people and how they lived. Many essays reveal an accurate knowledge of Mexican and Cuban problems, a lively and interpreta¬ tive view of sectionalism as found in the Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, and Illinois of his day. Not only do his essays reveal his knowledge gained from direct observations resulting from his travels, but his occasional ad¬ dresses include his attention to the literature of England, Germany, Spain,

Scotland, Italy, and America. Further evidence of his interest in and knowledge of his milieu, is his interest in the scientific and technological

advances of his day. Civic enterprises, too, as well as attention to muni¬ cipal reforms, libraries, the arts, abolition, usury laws—all come under his observation. Character studies, also, such as those of Sheridan, Bona¬ parte, Lord Brougham, Webster, Morse, and Winthrop, among others, disclose his interest in and knowledge of a gallery of people in different fields of endeavor. Such biographical, social, and literary matter has been mentioned in Chapters I and II of this thesis. Also his boyhood mastery of the classics, his expert knowledge of nature, his essays in poetry re¬ vealing a clear understanding of the technical aspects of the subject, his commemorative addresses on Cooper, Irving, and Halleck, his estimate of the works of such masters as Shakespeare, Milton, Pope, Dryden, Cowley, Burns,

Keats, Wordsworth, and Southey—all this points to a grasp and an under¬ standing requisite of a substantial critic.

Our second question—was his judgment sound?—is an important one; for judgment is an essential possession of the critic. Its soundness is dependent 80 upon the keenness of the critic’s imagination, together with his thorough understanding of literature and human nature, his balanced perception, and his firm grasp on values. It depends, as Matthew Arnold ^rould say, upon

"seeing things steadily and seeing them whole." With regard to sound

judgment, Arnold says that "a true critic should be disinterested so as to

allow free play of the thoughts of the mind on all subjects."'*' By disinter¬

ested Arnold means that the critic should bear a certain detachment from whatever will prevent his taking sides. This Bryant does to a great degree,

and in no particular is this trait more amply demonstrated than, in his effort

to refine public taste and to make balanced judgment prevail; he taught men 2 to "weigh reasons and not be led by passion and prejudice." This imparti¬

ality is again seen in his stand in regard to British criticism of and biased

observations on America.

That Bryant's soundness of observation on major critical points may be more adequately shown, let us compare his critical views on major critical

points with those of other critics. Coleridge, for instance, on how to write, exhorts you to "examine nature accurately, but to write from recol-

lection and to trust more to your imagination than to your memory." This

is notât variance with Bryant's

Seek'st thou in living lays, To limn the beauty of the earth and sky? Before thine inner gaze ^ Let all that beauty in clear vision lie...

Here the implication is that the imagination plays an important part in

- ■ _____ Matthew Arnold, op. cit., p. 42. 2 Kevins, Evening Post, p. 208. 3 Coleridge, op. cit., p. 3. 4 "The Poet," p. 130. 81 reproducing sense impressions. Further, Lewis Gates and Bryant are one on the point of the power of suggestion. Compare Gates's statement: "A play by Shakespeare...speaks a language that varies in its power and sug¬ gestion according to the personality of the hearer,with that of Bryant:

"The creations of poetry depend greatly for their vividness and clearness of impression upon the mind to which they are presented.

So, too, in connection with the labor and workmanship necessary in creative writing, Bryant is in accord with some of our ablest critics.

Compare, for example, Arnold's: "But for all kinds of poetry...the careful construction of the poem is a primary consideration"® with Bryant's

"Deem not the framing of a deathless lay, the pastime of a drowsy summer day..."4 Springarn's idea is the same; he says: "Tradition ensues from great labor; it cannot be inherited.T. S. Eliot, too, is in accord with

Bryant and Arnold in the belief that hard work must accompany artistic ef¬ fort: "There is a great deal in poetry that must be conscious and deliberate,"® states Eliot.

On the point of figurative language, Bryant and Whitman share the same thought; for on the subject of figurative language note what Whitman says :

Lewis E. Gates, "Impressions and Appreciation," American Critical Essays of the XIX Century (London, 1930), p. 190. Subsequent quotations from American Critical Essays will be designated Essays, and will be entered by author and title of essay, followed by the page number, 2 Prose, L, 6. ■z*- Arnold, op. cit., p. 10. 4"The Poet," p. 129. ^T. S. Eliot, "Tradition and the Individual Talent," Literary Opinion in America, ed. Martin Zabel (New York, 1937), p. 3. 6Ibid. 82

"Who troubles himself about his ornaments or his fluency is lost...."

Compare this expression with Bryant,who states: "Figurative language should be used only to heighten the intensity of expression; they are never in- ,,2 troduced for their own sake.

With respect to originality and imitation in art, Bryant again shares experiences and opinions with other critics. Bryant and Eliot agree on this point when Eliot says: "The tendency to praise a poet in the light of his differences from his predecessors is a fallacy. The most individual parts of his work may be those in which the dead poets, his ancestors, as- sert their originality most vigorously." Bryant himself says: "The art of poetry is not perfected in a day...and not created by one poet in any language, in any country....Genius, therefore, is but a dependent quality, 4 and cannot...claim all its honors without an amount of labor from others."

Relative to originality and imitation, another foremost American critic utters the same sentiment as Bryant, Eliot, and Whitman. William Dean Howells says; "This is, I believe, the reason why artists in general and poets principally, have been confined to so narrow a circle: they have been rather 5 imitators of one another than nature-.

In the light of high critical authority in both America and in Europe,

Bryant's critical judgment seems to be sound and trustworthy; for his posi¬ tion on many points coincides with that of many ancient and modern critics.

■Sïalt Whitman, "Preface," Leaves of Grass, Essays, p. 136. Prose, I, 10. 3 Zabel, op.cit., p. 8. 4 Prose, I, 37. 5 William Dean Howells, "Realism and the American Novel," Essays, p. 136. 83

Coleridge and Bryant, for instance, agree on the most auspicious time for the writing of poetry; further, both favor a careful study of nature tempered by a reflective period in which the imagination is allowed full play; Gates and Bryant agree on the power of suggestion and the enjoyment it evokes according to the preparation of the reader; with Arnold and

Spingarn, Bryant agrees that intense labor must go into the writing of good poetry. With Whitman he legislates against unnecessary ornamentation.

Finally, in agreement with Howells and Eliot, Bryant concludes that there is no such thing as pure originality; yet the creative urge in an artist transmutes his borrowings into something far different from mere imitation..

In answering our third question—Is Bryant's style clear and effective? we shall choose from among his prose estimates one which is iypical of

Bryant's style. For this purpose we shall choose the essay on Washington

Irving. The first characteristic of Bryant's style may be noticed in the introductory material. This introduction is characterized by simplicity of expression and by a careful choice of words. The following excerpt is chosen to illustrate this simplicity and careful diction;

We have come together, my friends, on the birthday of an illustrious citizen of our republic, but so recent in his departure from among us....His admirable writings....remain to be the enjoy¬ ment of the present and future generations. We keep the recol¬ lection of his amiable and blameless life and his kindly manners, and for these we give thanks... .He owed little to the schools, though he began to attend them early....He was a favorite with the master, but preferred reading to regular study...^

The reader is asked especially to notice the simplicity and clarity of

Bryant's expression. Observe, too, the constant recurrence of the words

"amiable," "genial," and "kindly" which are in keeping with the personality

Prose, I, 332. 84 of the subject. One should notice, further, Bryant’s appreciation of

Irving's living of the "good or blameless life" which is a sentiment in keeping with Bryant the moralist. There is warmth and a subtle moral

overtone in his dwelling upon the personality of the subject. He uses

figurative language, but it is well selected and employed to give an ex¬ tension to the thought he is conveying; for instance: "It is as if some

genial year had just closed and left us in frost and gloom.It is sig¬ nificant to notice the employment of the word, "genial" in the construction

of the figure when one recalls that "geniality" is a descriptive adjective

used constantly in connection with Irving's personality. Sincerity is also

apparent in his style and tone, or as Grant C. Knight says: "There is a

presentation of matter in an impressive and convincing style which is clear

and effective; and it needs to be. Such a style is an invaluable aid to

sound, critical judgment. Though critics comment variously on Bryant's

style, Strong, for instance, says that his writings are characterized by a

simplicity and judicial quality which makes his style impressive and con- *3 vincing. Kreymborg cites austerity and lack of ardor among the chief

characteristics of Bryant's style.^ If we should multiply critical estimate

of Bryant's style many times over, the significant estimate of it and the

results from them would be this final estimate: Bryant's style is character

ized by a simplicity of expression and an extreme care in the choice of words, both of which are essential possessions of a good critic.

1Ibid., p. 334. 2 Grant C. Knight, op. cit., p. 156. 3 ~ Augustus Hopkins Strong, op. cit., p. 72. 4 Kreymborg, op. cit., p. 29. 85

What, therefore, has this brief study of Bryant the critic disclosed?

First, the critical theories of Bryant have been found to be sound and not too diverse from our present day acceptance of poetic theories and pro¬

sodic al tenets. From his estimate of the works of others, we have found that Bryant’s application of his theories is in the main sound and worth¬ while, and that while Bryant may not occupy the first place in the first

rank of critics and poets, he does occupy an important place in the field

of American criticism. His reputation in criticism and journalism seems

to rest primarily upon the followingi

(1) He was the first American to publish important criticism and theories on purely prosodic subjects.

(2) His alertness to new developments toward general prosodic independence started American prosodic history on the way toward a revolution in its methods.

(3) He did more than any other man to elevate the tone of Ameri¬ can journalism.

(4) He set the true standards for good journalism and is responsible for our dislike of yellow journalism today.

(5) He did much toward provoking right views in politics, art, and conduct.

It seems unquestionable that Bryant’s critical purpose and services should

assure him a definite place among the contributors to American literary

criticism and should merit further scholarly investigation and study. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Text

Godwin, Parke (ed.). Prose of William Cullen Bryant. Vol. I, New York: The Macmillan" Company, 1926.

. Prose of William Cullen Bryant. Vol. II, New York: The Macmilüàn Company, 1926.

McDowell, Tremaine (ed.). William Cullen Bryant. New York: The American Book Company, 1935.

Criticism and History

Allen, Gay Wilson. American Prosody. New York: The American Book Company, 1935.

Arnold, Matthew. Essay in Criticism. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1930.

______• Prose and Poetry. Ed. Archibald D. Bouton. Charles Scribner's Sons, 1927.

Bradley, William Aspenwall. William Cullen Bryant. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1926.

Bennett, H. S. England from Chaucer to Caxton. London: Methuen and Company, Ltd., 1928.

Butcher, S. H. (ed.). Aristotle's The Poetics— A Critical Text and and Translation. London: The Macmillan Company, Ltd., 1932.

Charvat, William. The Origins of American Critical Thought from 1810- 1835. Philadelphia: The University of Pennsylvania Press, 1936.

Clark, Harry Hayden (ed.)» Major American Poets. New York: American Book Company, 1936.

Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. Lectures and Notes on Shakespeare and Other English Poets. London: G. Bell and Sons, Ltd., 1914.

. Literary Criticism. London: Henry Frowde, 1908.

Dunn, Esther Cloudman. Shakespeare in America. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1939.

86 87

Foerster, Norman (ed.). American Poetry and Prose. New York: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1934.

Halleek, Robert P. The History of American Literature. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1902.

Irving, Vfashington. The Sketch Book . Ed. Mary Litchfield. Boston: Ginn and Company, 1901

Knight, Grant C. American Literature and Culture. New York: Ray Long and Richard Smith, Inc., 1932.

Kreymborg, Alfred. History of American Poetry. New York: Tudor Publishing Company, 1934.

Leary, Lewis (ed.). Articles on AmericanLiterature Appearing in Current Periodicals, 1920-1945. Durham: The Duke University Press, 1947.

Lewisohn, Ludwig. The Story of American Literature. New York: The Random House, Inc., 1939.

More, Paul Elmer. Shellburne Essays. Seventh Series. NOT York: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1905.

. Shellburne Essays, Third Series. New York: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1905.

Nevins, Allen. American Press Opinion from Washington to Coolidge. New York: D. C. Heath and Company, 1928.

. The Evening Post. New York: Boni and Livoright, Inc., 1922.

Nitchie, Elizabeth. The Criticism of Literature. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1929.

Parrington, Vernon Louis. Main Currents in American Thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1930.

Pater, Walter. Appreciations. London: Macmillan Company, Ltd., 1927.

Pattee, Fred Lewis. The First Century of American Literature, 1770-1870 New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1935.

. Sidelights on American Literature. New York: The Century Company, 1928.

Pelham, Edgar. The Art of the Novel from 1700 to the Present. NOT York: The Macmillan Company, 1934.

Saintsbury, George. A History of Criticism and Literary Taste in Europe. London : William felackwood and Sons , 1912. 88

Shafer, Robert. Paul Elmer More and American Criticism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1935.

Sidney, Sir Philip. The Defense of Posey, ed. by Albert S. Cook. Ginn and Company, 1890.

Spiller, Robert E. (ed.). The Roots of National Culture. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1933.

. est al., (ed.). Literary History of the United States. Vol. Ill, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1948.

Strong, Augustus Hopkins. American Poets and Their Theology. The Griffith and Rowland Press, 1916.

Westfall, Alfred Van Rensselear. American Shakespeare Criticism. New York: H. W. Wilson Company, 1939.

Woods, George B. (ed.). English Prose and Poetry of the Romantic Move¬ ment. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1934.

Zabel, Morton (ed.). Literary Opinion in America. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1937'/

Articles

Braxton, I. "Father of American Poetry," National Republic, XVIII (November, 1930), 22-83.

Bryant, William Cullen. "Letters to His Mother," Good Housekeeping, CXXVIII (January, 1949), 18.

Eaton, William. "Recollections of American Poets," Century, LXIX, (March, 1940), 49.

Foerster, Norman. "Nature in Bryant's Poetry," South Atlantic Quarterly, XVIII (January, 1918), 10-17.

Herrick, M. T. "Rhetoric and Poetry in Bryant," American Literature, VII (May, 1935), 188-94.

Hervey, L. "Bryant and the New Poetry," Dial, LXIX (October 28, 1915), 92-3.

. "Few Facts About Bryant," Dial, LXIX (August 15, 1915), 361-3.

. "Some Further Remarks About Bryant," Dial, LXIX (December 9, 1915), 555-7. ” "

Huson, W. P. "Archibald Alison and William Cullen Bryant," American Litei-ature, XII (March, 1929), 85. 89

McDowell, Tremaine. "Bryant and the North American Review," American Literature, I (March, 1929), 59.

. "Bryant's Practice in Composition," FMLA, LXII “(June," 1937), 474-502.

. "Edgar Allen Poe and Bryant," Philological Quarterly, XVI (January, 1937), 83-4.