|
Phantom-Wooer: The Thomas Lovell Beddoes Web Site | Critical Response
"A Strayed Singer" by Kate Hillard
Lippincott's Magazine of Popular Literature
and Science 12 (November 1873): 550-557
Most of us know what a pathos is mixed with the sweet surprise of
meeting a beautiful thing in strange and inferior surroundings, in
circumstances that suggest an utter incongruity between the subject
and the situation, and imply an awful weight of loneliness and an
intolerable lack of sympathy. The Alpine harebell on the edge of
the glacier, the caged lion gazing vacantly into a wearisome monotony
of idleness, the shivering little Italian fiddling about our winter
streets, make the same appeal, in various measure, to this
consciousness of incongruity that in another phase would stimulate
our laughter instead of our tears.
As with space, so with time. It is the appreciation of the discord
between the subject and its surroundings that awakens our sympathy for
men "born out of their time," as we express it with an arrogance of
wiser judgment. In every period of history, affronting the great
averages of intellectual development, appear certain minds classified
at once as being either before or behind their age. To the first
class belong the great reformers, discoverers, inventors—men whose
immense genius, concentrated upon one idea, carries them beyond their
fellows, as a straight-going steamer distances a pleasure-yacht.
These men we do not think of pitying, unless they come too near us,
and then we call them fools or fanatics.
But there are lost children of the second class whose fate we all
deplore—children of an earlier age or a summer clime, drifting about
in this laborious world like helpless babes in the wood; bright-eyed,
luxurious young Greeks, rebelling against pain and intolerant of
toil, struggling in vain to hold their own among keen, restless
Yankees; dreamy mystics, strayed from the shadows of some cloister,
their vague eyes dazzled by the sun; artists of early Italy,
worshiping the mediæval Madonna; poets, belonging of right to the
court of Elizabeth, or companions of the wandering and disastrous
fortunes of "the fairest and cruelest of princesses."
It is of an Elizabethan poet strayed into our Victorian age that I
propose to write. Few people except professed students of literature
know more of Thomas Lovell Beddoes than his name. More than a year
ago an article on him appeared in the Fortnightly, half
biographical, half occupied with a sketch of his principal tragedy—an
article doing more justice to the dramatic than to the lyric quality
of his genius. But it is by his songs that his name is kept in the
minds of men to-day—exquisite snatches of melody, full of the
peculiar charm of that Elizabethan age to which they properly belong.
In 1851 an edition of his poems in two volumes, with a memoir and
letters, was published by Pickering. The edition was small and soon
exhausted, but the literary world of England was unanimous in its
praise; and Landor, Browning, Proctor, and many others came out
with generous tributes to the genius of that poet whose circle of
listeners has always been so small. "Nearly two centuries have
elapsed," wrote Walter Savage Landor, with his hearty enthusiasm,
"since a work of the same wealth of of genius as Death's Jest-Book \
has been given to the world." And Browning wrote to Mr. Kelsall,
the author of the memoir: "You might pick out scenes, passages,
lyrics, fine as fine can be: the power of the man is immense and
irresistible."
The two volumes contain, besides the Life and letters, two dramas,
The Brides' Tragedy and Death's Jest-Book, two
unfinished plays, Torrismond and The Second Brother,
and many dramatic and poetic fragments and songs. The Life is an
uneventful history, but the letters, though singularly free from
egotism, bring up before us a most interesting character—a curious
mixture of genius and want of faith in that genius, of energy and
self-distrust, of intense devotion to practical studies and the most
impractical and dreamy fancy, an affectionate nature lonely and
misunderstood, a spirit of the most sturdy and uncompromising
independence, a mind of keen and scientific insight—a character made
up, in short, of all the warring elements of philosopher, physician,
politician and poet.
Thomas Lovell Beddoes was born in Clifton in 1803, and died at Bâle
in Switzerland in 1849. His mother was a sister of Maria Edgeworth,
and his father a distinguished physician and an intimate friend of
Sir Humphry Davy. In the father's character we may trace the
principal traits of the son: a strong scientific bent, a fondness for
poetic dreams, an invincible independence, were predominant in both.
The character of Lovell Beddoes' poetry was the natural outgrowth of
his early studies. His schoolfellows at the Charterhouse speak of
him at the age of fourteen as already thoroughly versed in the best
English literature and a close student of the dramatists, from the
Elizabethan to those of his own day. He was always ready to invent
and carry out any acts of insubordination, which he informed with so
much wit and spirit that the very authorities were often subdued by
their own irresistible laughter. It was one phase of his dramatic
genius, that seemed to be constantly impelling him to get up some
striking situation wherein he might pose as a youthful Ajax defying
the lightnings. At Oxford his restless independence was continually
prompting him to affront his tutors. He was always in opposition to
the spirit of the occasion, whatever it might be.
This spirit of rebellion inspired him with an intense interest in
German literature and German politics, as representing the
ultra-liberal tendencies of the day. Shelley, too, the rejected of
Oxford, whose name was scarcely to be mentioned to the British
Philistine of the moment, was one of Beddoes' idols, and he joined
with two other gentlemen in the expense of printing the first edition
of the poet's posthumous works in 1824, afterward withdrawn by Mrs.
Shelley. Byron was the popular poet then, and universal Young England
was turning down its shirt-collars in a mockery of woe. But this boy
of twenty, with his sturdy independence, would judge for himself, and
wrote to a friend: "I saw —— (the greatest fool within the walls of
my acquaintance) the other night at Oxford, repeating the whole of
the Deformed in raptures. God forgive him!"
In 1821, while yet a freshman, he published a little volume of poems
called The Improvisatore, of which he was soon ashamed. Long
before he left Oxford he used to hunt the unfortunate volume through
the libraries of his acquaintance, and cutting out all the pages
leave the binding intact, a hollow mockery, upon their shelves. The
next year, however, he published The Brides' Tragedy, a drama
of very great originality and power, and a most extraordinary
production for a boy of nineteen. The Edinburgh Review and
the London Magazine, then at the height of their power, came
out with critical and highly laudatory notices by Proctor (Barry
Cornwall) and George Darley, and the former was ever after one of
Beddoes' warmest personal friends. In July, 1825, he went to
Göttingen, where his brilliant achievements as a student of medicine
won him numerous honors. The rest of his life was spent in Germany
and Switzerland, with occasional brief visits to England, but his
heart was with the German radicals, and he found the united
attractions of science, liberalism and Swiss scenery far more
powerful than love of his native land. He threw himself with
enthusiasm into the discussion of the scientific and political
questions of the day, soon became a master of the language, wrote a
great deal for the German newspapers, both in prose and verse, and
used jestingly to call himself "a popular German poet."
About this time he began his finest tragedy, Death's Jest-Book,
still undergoing correction and revision at the time of his death in
his forty-sixth year. He was never weary of making alterations:
never satisfied with the result of his labors, he tore up scene after
scene, or struck out remorselessly the finest passage in a drama if
he thought it inharmonious with the context. He had a theory that no
man should devote himself entirely to poetry unless possessed of most
extraordinary powers of imagination, or unfitted, by mental or bodily
weakness, for severer scientific pursuits. The studies of the
physician and the dramatist were to his mind allied by Nature, and he
looked upon tragedy as the fitting and inevitable result of combined
physiological and psychological researches. And he afterward
declared himself determined "never to listen to any metaphysician who
is not both anatomist and physiologist of the first rank." This was
in 1825, when German and French scientists were just beginning to
explore the hidden mysteries of matter, and to trace its intimate and
subtle connections with the mind, and when protoplasm was still an
unknown quantity toward whose discovery science was slowly feeling
its way.
As he penetrated deeper and deeper into the arcana of anatomy and
physiology his judgment of his own poetry grew more and more severe.
The more he knew of Truth, the nearer absolute perfection must that
Beauty be which would compete with her for his heart. Busy with a
pursuit in which his progress was marked by absolute tests that even
his modesty could not disown, he shrank from trying to reach vague
eminences in poetry that he judged himself unable to attain. There
is something in his style that recalls Heine when he writes, "Me you
may safely regard as one banished from a service to which he was not
adapted, but who has still a lingering affection for the land of
dreams—as yet, at least, not far enough in the journey of science to
have lost sight of the old two-topped hill." And again: "I am
essentially unpoetical in character, habits and ways of thinking; and
nothing but the desperate hanker for distinction so common to the
young gentlemen at the university ever set me upon rhyming. If I had
possessed the conviction that I could by any means become an
important or great dramatic writer, I would have never swerved from
the path to reputation; but seeing that others who had devoted their
lives to literature, such as Coleridge and Wordsworth—men beyond a
question of far higher originality and incomparably superior poetical
feeling and genius—had done so little, you must give me leave to
persevere in my preference of Apollo's pill-box to his lyre, and
should congratulate me on having chosen Göttingen instead of Grub
street for my abode...It is good to be tolerable or intolerable in
any other line, but Apollo defend us from brewing all our lives at a
quintessential pot of the smallest ale Parnassian!"
There are so many racy bits of anecdote and opinion scattered through
this correspondence, so many things worth keeping for their own sakes
or as throwing new light upon the character of their writer, that it
is hard to choose a single specimen, but with one more extract we
must strive to be content. Beddoes' friend and editor had been
trying to get from him some personal details about his daily life,
pursuits and fancies, which, with his usual horror of the
egotistical, he flatly declined to give. "I will not venture on a
psychological self-portraiture," he writes, "fearing—and I believe
with sufficient reason—to be betrayed into affectation, dissimulation
or some other alluring shape of lying. I believe that all
autobiographical sketches are the result of mere vanity—not
excepting those of St. Augustine and Rousseau—falsehood in the mask
and mantle of truth. Half ashamed and half conscious of his own
mendacious self-flattery, the historian of his own deeds or
geographer of his own mind breaks out now and then indignantly, and
revenges himself on his own weakness by telling some very
disagreeable truth of some other person; and then, re-established in
his own good opinion, marches on cheerfully in the smooth path
toward the temple of his own immortality. Yet even here, you see, I
am indirectly lauding my own worship for not being persuaded to laud
my own worship. How sleek, smooth-tongued, paradisaical a deluder
art thou, sweet Self-conceit! Let great men give their own thoughts
on their own thoughts: from such we can learn much; but let the small
deer hold jaw, and remember what the philosopher says, 'Fleas are not
lobsters: d——n their souls!'"
Caring nothing even for professional honors, Beddoes refused various
professorships in Germany, and traveled about to Zurich, to Bâle, and
to the other German centres of learning as his desires prompted him.
Always the same independent and rebellious spirit that he had shown
himself as a boy, he sympathized warmly with the democratic movements
then agitating Switzerland and the Rhine provinces, and devoted both
his purse and his pen to aid the anti-oligarchic and anti-clerical
party. In 1848 he had intended to go back to England, but in the
spring of that year a slight wound received while dissecting infused
a poison into his system that undermined his health. In May, while
seeking restoration in the purer air of Bâle, his horse fell with
him, and his left leg was so badly broken that amputation became
necessary. Until the autumn he seemed to be doing well, but then the
poison imbibed at Frankfort declared itself once more, and a slow
fever set in which terminated in death on the 26th of January, 1849.
Beddoes' great fault as a dramatist he was quite aware of himself,
and had pointed out to the friend who was continually urging him to
write: "The power of drawing character and humor—two things
absolutely indispensable for a good dramatist—are the first two
articles in my deficiencies; and even the imaginative poetry I think
you will find in all my verse always harping on the same two or
three principles; for which plain and satisfactory reasons I have no
business to expect any great distinction as a writer." He could draw
types of character, but not individuals: the power of making the
creations of the mind seem as real as "our dear intimates and
chamber-fellows" was denied him. But he was not wholly destitute of
humor, though he was possessed of but one kind—that grim, sardonic
quality which we find so often among the Elizabethans—that mocking
irony most like the grin upon a skull. His fools are his best
characters, so far as strength and originality go. Here is a snatch
from the wise conversation of two of these worthies in Death's
Jest-Book:
"Isbrand. Good-morrow, Brother Vanity! How? soul of a
pickle-herring, body of a spagirical tosspot, doublet of motley, and
mantle of pilgrim, how art thou transmuted! Wilt thou desert our
brotherhood, fool sublimate? Shall the motley chapter no longer
boast thee? Wilt thou forswear the order of the bell, and break thy
vows to Momus? Have mercy on Wisdom and relent.
"Mandrake. Respect the grave and sober, I pray thee.
To-morrow I know thee not. In truth, I mark that our noble faculty
is in its last leaf. The dry rot of prudence hath eaten the ship of
fools to dust: she is no more seaworthy. The world will see its ears
in a glass no longer. So we are laid aside and shall soon be
forgotten; for why should the feast of asses come but once a year,
when all the days are foaled of one mother? O world! world ! The
gods and fairies left thee, for thou wert too wise; and now, thou
Socratic star, thy demon, the great Pan, Folly, is parting from thee.
The oracles still talked in their sleep, shall our grandchildren say,
till Master Merriman's kingdom was broken up: now is every man his
own fool, and the world's sign is taken down.
"Isbrand. Farewell, thou great-eared mind! I mark, by thy
talk, that thou commencest philosopher, and then thou art only a
fellow-servant out of livery."
Isbrand is the brother of the slain knight Wolfram: his foolery is
but the disguise of his revenge, and thus he rails over the body
of his brother: "Dead and gone! a scurvy burden to this ballad of
life. There lies he, Siegfried—my brother, mark you—and I weep not,
nor gnash the teeth, nor curse: and why not, Siegfried? Do you see
this? So should every honest man be—cold, dead, and leaden-coffined.
This was one who would be constant in friendship, and the pole
wanders; one who would be immortal, and the light that shines upon
his pale forehead now, through yonder gewgaw window, undulated from
its star hundreds of years ago. That is constancy, that is life.
O moral Nature!"
It is unnecessary to try to describe the plot of this strange drama,
if plot it may be called. The poem rather resembles the old bridge
at Lucerne with the gloomy figures of the Dance of Death painted
along its wormeaten sides, while over its old timbers rolls the
current of busy life, and the laughter of children echoes from its
roof. With the exception of Isbrand, the characters of the play are
pale and shadowy enough, but the poetry that they speak is wonderful.
The gloom and tender beauty of the verse are inextricably united, as
in the plays of Webster, whose "intellectual twin" Beddoes might have
been. Here is a lovely sketch of "a melancholy lady:"
Duke. Thorwald, I fear hers is a broken heart.
When first I met her in the Egyptian Prison,
She was the rosy morning of a woman:
Beauty was rising, but the starry grace
Of a calm childhood might be seen in her.
But since the death of Wolfram, who fell there,
Heaven and one single soul only know how,
I have not dared to look upon her sorrow.
Thorwald. Methinks she's too unearthly beautiful.
Old as I am, I cannot look at her,
And hear her voice, that touches the heart's core,
without a dread that she will fade o' th' instant.
There's too much heaven in her; oft it rises,
And, pouring out about the lovely earth,
Almost dissolves it. She is tender too;
And melancholy is the sweet pale smile
With which she gently does reproach her fortune.
But the greatest beauty of this singular poem, with its wild medley
of jesters and spirits, knights and fiends, Deaths and tender
women, "like flowers on a grave," is the wonderful perfection of its
songs. There are no less than thirteen in this play, some of them
the wild mockery of the jesters, but many of them very beautiful;
and there are three more in The Brides' Tragedy. Since the
days of Elizabeth we have had nothing to compare with them. They
have that delicate poise of beauty, like the lighting of a butterfly
on a bending flower, that adds to our delight the keen sense of its
transitoriness. Here is one—"a voice from the waters:"
The swallow leaves her nest,
The soul my weary breast;
But therefore let the rain
On my grave
Fall pure; for why complain?
Since both will come again
O'er the wave.
The wind dead leaves and snow
Doth hurry to and fro;
And once a day shall break
O'er the wave,
When a storm of ghosts shall shake
The dead, until they wake
In the grave.
This is the least Elizabethan of them all, perhaps, in sentiment,
but it has an exquisite sombre tenderness and music of its own. Then
follows one of the finest of all Beddoes' songs, a dirge,
beginning—
If thou wilt ease thine heart
Of love and all its smart,
Then sleep, dear, sleep;
which it is useless to quote entire, because it may be found in
Dana's Household Poetry, and in the best collection of songs
we have, R.H. Stoddard's Melodies and Madrigals, wherein are
enshrined three of Beddoes' dirges, all from this one drama of
Death's Jest-Book.
The second volume of Beddoes' poems also contains The Brides'
Tragedy, written when he was but nineteen. More simple and
coherent in plot and construction than the other drama, it has more
sweetness and less strength. It is full of the innocence of love,
and rich with that prodigality of beauty with which youthful genius
loves to make itself splendid. It begins with a scene in a garden,
and "while that wingèd song, the restless nightingale, turns her sad
heart to music," two lovers talk of flowers and love and dreams—dreams
of the Queen of Smiles, and her attendant mob of Loves, busy with
their various tasks:
Here stood one alone,
Blowing a pyre of blazing lovers' hearts
With bellows full of absence-causèd sighs;
Near him his work-mate mended broken vows
With dangerous gold, or strung soft rhymes together
Upon a lady's tress...And one there was alone,
Who with wet downcast eyelids threw aside
The remnants of a broken heart, and looked
Into my face and bid me 'ware of love,
Of fickleness, and woe, and mad despair.
There are beautiful scenes and passages all through the play, the
passion and the terror smacking somewhat of youth, perhaps, that
loves to pile up agonies, but the poetry still so fine that one
continually forgets to say, This is the work of a boy of nineteen.
There is no need to say it, in fact: it is a work of genius, and
demands no extenuation. There is a scene between Olivia and her
attendants, as they prepare her for her bridal, that has a sustained
and tender sweetness and calm about it hard to be matched in all our
modern drama. For the same Olivia is sung this lovely
SONG, BY TWO VOICES
First Voice.
Who is the baby that doth lie
Beneath the silken canopy
Of thy blue eye?
Second Voice.
It is young Sorrow laid asleep
In the crystal deep.
Both.
Let us sing his lullaby,
Heigho! a sob and a sigh.
First Voice.
What sound is that, so soft, so clear,
Harmonious as a bubbled tear
Bursting, we hear?
Second Voice.
It is young Sorrow, slumber breaking,
Suddenly waking.
Both.
Let us sing his lullaby,
Heigho! a sob and a sigh.
They are not all dirges, these beautiful scraps of melody.
Sometimes we come upon one as blithe as sunshine, like this serenade
from the fine fragment called The Second Brother:
Strike, you myrtle-crowned boys,
Ivied maidens, strike together:
Magic lutes are these whose noise
Our fingers gather,
Threaded thrice with golden strings
From Cupid's bow;
And the sounds of its sweet voice
Not air, but little busy things,
Pinioned with the lightest feather
Of his wings,
Rising up at every blow
Round the chords, like flies from roses
Zephyr-touched; so these light minions
Hover round, then shut their pinions,
And drop into the air, that closes
Where music's sweetest sweet reposes.
There is a song worthy of Ariel, whose delicate involutions well
repay study, and whose perfect melody carries along the unfolding of
the thought as easily and lightly as a swift stream sweeps along
scattered rose-leaves. And here is another of the same dainty
complexion, but simpler:
How many times do I love thee, dear?
Tell me how many thoughts there be
In the atmosphere
Of a new-fall'n year,
Whose white and sable hours appear
The latest flake of Eternity:
So many times do I love thee, dear.
How many times do I love again?
Tell me how many beads there are
In a silver chain
Of evening rain,
Unraveled from the tumbling main,
And threading the eye of a yellow star:
So many times do I love again.
Nor is it only the songs of Beddoes that ought to keep his memory
alive among us, if his dramas are too long to enchain our fickle
attention. We turn over the small collection of fragments that his
stern judgment has spared from the material of his two finished
plays, to come across thoughts like these, that would have made the
best part of some less severe critic's pages:
I know not whether
I see your meaning: if I do, it lies
Upon the wordy wavelets of your voice
Dim as the evening shadow in a brook,
When the least moon has silver on't no larger
Than the pure white of Hebe's pinkish nail.
And many voices marshaled in one hymn
Wound through the night, whose still, translucent moments
Lay on each side their breath; and the hymn passed
Its long harmonious populace of words
Between the silvery silences.
Luckless man
Avoids the miserable bodkin's point,
And flinching from the insect's little sting,
In pitiful security keeps watch,
While 'twixt him and that hypocrite the sun,
To which he prays, comes windless Pestilence,
Transparent as a glass of poisoned water
Through which the drinker sees his murderer smiling:
She stirs no dust, and makes no grass to nod,
Yet every footstep is a thousand graves,
And every breath of hers as full of ghosts
As a sunbeam with motes.
There is an old saying that the workman may be known by his chips:
surely from these chips we may gather a high opinion of that
artificer who left such fragments to testify for him. For
imaginative power of a very high order, for the true tragic spirit,
for exquisitely melodious versification, for that faculty of song
which is the flower of the lyric genius, Beddoes was pre-eminently
distinguished. Nor for these alone. His style is based upon the
rich vocabulary of the old dramatists, and is terse, pregnant and
quaint, without any trace of affectation. There was a sturdy
genuineness about the man that forbade him to assume, and his
phraseology was the natural outgrowth of his mind and his early
education. He has not gone to work, like so many of our modern
pre-Raphaelite painters, to imitate crudeness of form in the vain
hope of acquiring thereby earnestness and innocence of spirit; but he
has studied the best tragic models in a reverent spirit, and allowed
his muse to work out her own salvation. That grim ironical humor
which infuses such bitter strength into the speeches of Isbrand was
always scoffing at his own verses, and nipping the blossoms of his
genius in the bud. "I believe I might have met with some success as
a retailer of small coal," he writes to Mr. Kelsall, "or a writer of
long-bottomed tracts, but doubt of my aptitude for any higher
literary or commercial occupation."
His greatest weakness as a writer of tragedy has already been
mentioned as one of which he was himself but too well aware—his
inability to create characters that should have any more individual
existence than as the mouthpieces of various sentiments. While
holding that the proper aim of the dramatic writer should be to write
for the stage, his dramas are nevertheless fitted only for the
closet. "If it were possible," said George Darley (in the London
Magazine, December, 1823), "speaking of a work of this kind (The
Brides' Tragedy), to make a distinction between the
vis tragica and the vis dramatica, I should say that he
possessed much of the former, but little of the latter." As the
beauties of his style—and they are many—recall to us the Shakespearian
writers and the matchless riches of their verse, so do its faults—which
are few—remind us of their faults. A turgid inflation in the tragic
passages, a tendency to bombast, even more apparent in the man of
forty-six than in the boy of nineteen, mar the calm strength of many
of his scenes. The cloying sweetness that overloaded the verses of
his juvenile work he left behind him as he grew older, but the
Marlowe-like extravagance that rioted in the soliloquies of
Hesperus still comes to the surface occasionally in the pages
of Death's Jest-Book. It is the extravagance of strength,
however, not of weakness.
It is not often that we see a poet giving up the glorious race from
sheer distrust of his power to win, but such was the case of Beddoes.
A want of faith in his own genius was for ever paralyzing his hand.
To succeed, as he himself knew but too well, and as he wrote to his
editor, "a man must have an exclusive passion for his art, and all
the obstinacy and self-denial which is combined with such a
temperament—an unconquerable and always enduring will, always working
forward to the only goal he knows." This singleness of purpose
Beddoes never possessed. Inheriting from his father the qualities of
both poet and physician, the faculties of the scientific man, trained
and cultivated through a long life by Dr. Thomas Beddoes (with whom
poetry was but an occasional pastime), seem to have overbalanced and
diverted the poetic genius of his son. The hereditary instinct
overcame the individual bent. And in spite of Lovell Beddoes'
opinion that "the studies of the dramatist and physician are closely,
almost inseparably, allied," is it not true that the analytical
faculty so essential to the latter is rarely found in connection with
great creative ability? Sainte-Beuve never forgave Balzac for saying
that critics were unsuccessful authors, but he should have consoled
himself with the reflection that the author was unsuccessful because
the critic was great. All critics, however, do not aspire to create,
but all poets sooner or later attempt to criticise. Baudelaire, "the
illustrious poet, the faultless critic," as Swinburne calls him,
went still further. He said: "Tous les grands poëtes deviennent
naturellement, fatalement, critiques. Je plains les poëtes que
guide le seul instinct; je les crois incomplets. Il serait
prodigieux qu'un critique devînt poëte, et il est impossible qu'un
poëte ne contienne pas un critique." Yet a man cannot serve two
masters, and Art is a jealous mistress who will not brook a rival.
Even Beddoes found that his ideal of the physiologist-poet was fast
slipping through his fingers, and confessed at last that were he
"soberly and mathematically convinced" of his own inspiration, he
would give himself up to the cultivation of literature. But he died
at the early age of forty-six, from the effects of a wound received
in the cause of Science. A singular retribution befell him, a truly
poetic justice: all his scientific writings have disappeared—were
either stolen before his executors had time to examine his papers, or
had been destroyed by his own ruthless hand—and all that was left to
keep his memory alive were the two tragedies and the few scattered
fragments of verse of which he had made so little account during his
lifetime. Their circle of readers has necessarily been small, but
choice. There are few left, besides Browning and Proctor and John
Forster, of his original admirers, and his name seems to be another
on the long list of those who have failed, as the world counts
failure. But the poets know better, and among their undying
brotherhood space will always be kept for this strayed singer.
Back
Home
|