The development of Tennyson’s genius, methods, aims and capacity
of achievement in poetry can be studied with singular precision
and fulness in the history of the poems included in the present
volume. In 1842 he published the two volumes which gave him, by
almost general consent, the first place among the poets of his
time, for, though Wordsworth was alive, Wordsworth’s best work
had long been done. These two volumes contained poems which had
appeared before, some in 1830 and some in 1832, and some which
were then given to the world for the first time, so that they
represent work belonging to three eras in the poet’s life, poems
written before he had completed his twenty-second year and
belonging for the most part to his boyhood, poems written in his
early manhood, and poems written between his thirty-first and
thirty-fourth year.
The poems published in 1830 had the following title-page: “Poems,
Chiefly Lyrical, by Alfred Tennyson. London: Effingham Wilson, Royal
Exchange, 1830”. They are fifty-six in number and the titles are:—
Claribel.
Lilian.
Isabel.
Elegiacs.*
The “How” and the “Why”.
Mariana.
To —— .
Madeline.
The Merman.
The Mermaid.
Supposed Confessions of a second-rate sensitive mind not in unity with itself.*
The Burial of Love.
To — (Sainted Juliet dearest name.)
Song. The Owl.
Second Song. To the same.
Recollections of the Arabian Nights.
Ode to Memory.
Song. (I’ the glooming light.)
Song. (A spirit haunts.)
Adeline.
A Character.
Song. (The lint-white and the throstle cock.)
Song. (Every day hath its night.)
The Poet.
The Poet’s Mind.
Nothing will die.*
All things will die.*
Hero to Leander.
The Mystic.
The Dying Swan.
A Dirge.
The Grasshopper.
Love, Pride and Forgetfulness.
Chorus (in an unpublished drama written very early).
Lost Hope.
The Deserted House.*†
The Tears of Heaven.
Love and Sorrow.
To a Lady Sleeping.
Sonnet. (Could I outwear my present state of woe.)
Sonnet. (Though Night hath climbed her peak of highest noon.)
Sonnet. (Shall the hag Evil die with child of Good.)
Sonnet. (The pallid thunderstricken sigh for gain.)
Love.
Love and Death.
The Kraken.*
The Ballad of Oriana.
Circumstance.
English War Song.
National Song.
The Sleeping Beauty.
Dualisms.
We are Free.
The Sea-Fairies.*†
Sonnet to J.M.K.
οἱ ῥέοντες
Of these the poems in italics appeared in the edition of 1842, and were
not much altered. Those with an asterisk were, in addition to the italicised
poems, afterwards included among the Juvenilia in the collected works
(1871-1872), though excluded from all preceding editions of the poems. Those
with both a dagger and an asterisk were restored in editions previous to the
first collected editions of the works.
In December, 1832, appeared a second volume (it is dated on the title-page,
1833): “Poems by Alfred Tennyson. London: Moxon, MDCCCXXXIII.” This contains
thirty poems:—
Sonnet.†† (Mine be the strength of spirit fierce and free.)
To— .†† (All good things have not kept aloof.)
Buonaparte.††
Sonnet I. (O Beauty passing beauty, sweetest Sweet.)
Sonnet II.†† (But were I loved, as I desire to be.)
The Lady of Shalott.*
Mariana in the South.*
Eleanore.
The Miller’s Daughter.*
φαίνεταί μοι
κῆνος ἴσος
θεοῖσιν Ἔμμεν
ἀνήρ.
Œnone.
The Sisters.
To— . (With the Palace of Art.)*
The Palace of Art*
The May Queen.
New Year’s Eve.
The Hesperides.
The Lotos Eaters.
Rosalind.††
A Dream of Fair Women*
Song. (Who can say.)
Margaret.
Kate.
Sonnet. Written on hearing of the outbreak of the Polish Insurrection.
Sonnet.†† On the result of the late Russian invasion of Poland.
Sonnet.†† (As when with downcast eyes we muse and brood.)
O Darling Room.
To Christopher North.
The Death of the Old Year.
To J. S.
Of these the poems italicised were included in the edition of 1842; those
marked with an asterisk being greatly altered and in some cases almost
rewritten, those marked with a dagger being practically unaltered. To those
reprinted in the collected works a double dagger is prefixed.
In 1842 appeared the two volumes which contained, in addition to
the selections made from the two former volumes, several new
poems:—
“Poems by Alfred Tennyson. In two volumes.
London: Edward Moxon, MDCCCXLII.”
The first volume is divided into two parts: Selections from the poems published
in 1830, Claribel to the Sonnet to J. M. K. inclusive. Selections
from the poems of 1832, The Lady of Shalott to The Goose
inclusive. The second volume contains poems then, with two exceptions, first
published.
The Epic.
Morte d’Arthur.
The Gardener’s Daughter.
Dora.
Audley Court.
Walking to the Mail.
St. Simeon Stylites.
Conclusion to the May Queen.
The Talking Oak.
Lady Clara Vere de Vere.
Love and Duty.
Ulysses.
Locksley Hall.
Godiva.
The Two Voices.
The Day Dream.
Prologue.
The Sleeping Palace.
The Sleeping Beauty.
The Arrival.
The Revival.
The Departure.
Moral.
L’Envoi.
Epilogue.
Amphion.
St. Agnes.
Sir Galahad.
Edward Gray.
Will Waterproofs Lyrical Monologue, made at the Cock.
Lady Clare.
The Lord of Burleigh.
Sir Launcelot and Queen Guinevere.
A Farewell.
The Beggar Maid.
The Vision of Sin.
The Skipping Rope.
“Move Eastward, happy Earth.”
“Break, break, break.”
The Poet’s Song.
Only two of these poems had been published before, namely, St.
Agnes, which was printed in The Keepsake for 1837, and
The Sleeping Beauty in The Day Dream, which was
adopted with some alterations from the 1830 poem, and only one of
these poems was afterwards suppressed, The Skipping Rope,
which was, however, allowed to stand till 1851. In 1843 appeared
the second edition of these poems, which is merely a reprint with
a few unimportant alterations, and which was followed in 1845 and
in 1846 by a third and fourth edition equally unimportant in
their variants, but in the fourth The Golden Year was
added. In the next edition, the fifth, 1848, The Deserted
House was included from the poems of 1830. In the sixth
edition, 1850, was included another poem, To— , after
reading a Life and Letters, reprinted, with some alterations,
from the Examiner of 24th March, 1849.
The seventh edition, 1851, contained important additions. First the Dedication
to the Queen, then Edwin Morris, the fragment of The Eagle, and
the stanzas, “Come not when I am dead,” first printed in The Keepsake
for 1851, under the title of Stanzas. In this edition the absurd trifle
The Skipping Rope was excised and finally cancelled. In the eighth
edition, 1853, The Sea-Fairies, though greatly altered, was included
from the poems of 1830, and the poem To E. L. on his Travels in Greece
was added. This edition, the eighth, may be regarded as the final one. Nothing
afterwards of much importance was added or subtracted, and comparatively few
alterations were made in the text from that date to the last collected edition
in 1898.
All the editions up to, and including, that of 1898 have been
carefully collated, so that the student of Tennyson can follow
step by step the process by which he arrived at that perfection
of expression which is perhaps his most striking characteristic
as a poet. And it was indeed a trophy of labour, of the
application “of patient touches of unwearied art”. Whoever will
turn, say to The Palace of Art, to Œnone, to the
Dream of Fair Women, or even to The Sea-Fairies and
to The Lady of Shalott, will see what labour was expended
on their composition. Nothing indeed can be more interesting than
to note the touches, the substitution of which measured the whole
distance between mediocrity and excellence. Take, for example,
the magical alteration in the couplet in the Dream of Fair
Women:—
One drew a sharp knife thro’ my tender throat
Slowly,—and nothing more,
into
The bright death quiver’d at the victim’s throat;
Touch’d; and I knew no more.
Or, in the same poem:—
What nights we had in Egypt! I could hit
His humours while I cross’d him. O the life
I led him, and the dalliance and the wit,
into
We drank the Libyan Sun to sleep, and lit
Lamps which outburn’d Canopus. O my life
In Egypt! O the dalliance and the wit,
The flattery and the strife.
Or, in Mariana in the South:—
She mov’d her lips, she pray’d alone,
She praying, disarray’d and warm
From slumber, deep her wavy form
In the dark lustrous mirror shone,
into
Complaining, “Mother, give me grace
To help me of my weary load”.
And on the liquid mirror glow’d
The clear perfection of her face.
How happy is this slight alteration in the verses To J. S.
which corrects one of the falsest notes ever struck by a poet:—
A tear
Dropt on my tablets as I wrote.
A tear
Dropt on the letters as I wrote.
or where in Locksley Hall a splendidly graphic touch of
description is gained by the alteration of “droops the
trailer from the crag” into “swings the trailer”.
So again in Love and Duty:—
Should my shadow cross thy thoughts
Too sadly for their peace, so put it back.
For calmer hours in memory’s darkest hold,
where by altering “so put it back” into “remand it thou,” a
somewhat ludicrous image is at all events softened.
What great care Tennyson took with his phraseology is curiously
illustrated in The May Queen. In the 1842 edition “Robin”
was the name of the May Queen’s lover. In 1843 it was altered to
“Robert,” and in 1845 and subsequent editions back to
“Robin”.
Compare, again, the old stanza in The Miller’s Daughter:—
How dear to me in youth, my love,
Was everything about the mill;
The black and silent pool above,
The pool beneath it never still,
with what was afterwards substituted:—
I loved the brimming wave that swam
Through quiet meadows round the mill,
The sleepy pool above the dam,
The pool beneath it never still.
Another most felicitous emendation is to be found in The
Poet, where the edition of 1830 reads:—
And in the bordure of her robe was writ
Wisdom, a name to shake
Hoar anarchies, as with a thunderfit.
This in 1842 appears as:—
And in her raiment’s hem was trac’d in flame
Wisdom, a name to shake
All evil dreams of power—a sacred name.
Again, in the Lotos Eaters
Three thunder-cloven thrones of oldest snow
Stood sunset-flushed
is changed into
Three silent pinnacles of aged snow.
So in Will Waterproof the cumbrous
Like Hezekiah’s backward runs
The shadow of my days,
was afterwards simplified into
Against its fountain upward runs
The current of my days.
Not less felicitous have been the additions made from time to
time. Thus in Audley Court the concluding lines ran:—
The harbour buoy,
With one green sparkle ever and anon
Dipt by itself.
But what vividness is there in the subsequent insertion of
“Sole star of phosphorescence in the calm.”
between the first line and the second.
So again in the Morte d’Arthur how greatly are imagery
and rhythm improved by the insertion of
Across the ridge, and paced beside the mere,
between
Then went Sir Bedivere the second time,
and
Counting the dewy pebbles, fix’d in thought.
There is an alteration in Œnone which is very interesting. Till
1884 this was allowed to stand:—
The lizard, with his shadow on the stone,
Rests like a shadow, and the cicala sleeps.
No one could have known better than Tennyson that the cicala is
loudest in the torrid calm of the noonday, as Theocritus, Virgil,
Byron and innumerable other poets have noticed; at last he
altered it, but at the heavy price of a cumbrous pleonasm, into
“and the winds are dead”.
He allowed many years to elapse before he corrected another
error in natural history—but at last the alteration came.
In The Poet’s Song in the line—
The swallow stopt as he hunted the bee,
the “fly” which the swallow does hunt was substituted for what it
does not hunt, and that for very obvious reasons.
But whoever would see what Tennyson’s poetry has owed to elaborate revision and
scrupulous care would do well to compare the first edition of Mariana in the
South, The Sea-Fairies, Œnone, The Lady of Shalott,
The Palace of Art and A Dream of Fair Women with the poems as
they are presented in 1853. Poets do not always improve their verses by
revision, as all students of Wordsworth’s text could abundantly illustrate; but
it may be doubted whether, in these poems at least, Tennyson ever made a single
alteration which was not for the better. Fitzgerald, indeed, contended that in
some cases, particularly in The Miller’s Daughter, Tennyson would have
done well to let the first reading stand, but few critics would agree with him
in the instances he gives. We may perhaps regret the sacrifice of such a stanza
as this—
Each coltsfoot down the grassy bent,
Whose round leaves hold the gathered shower,
Each quaintly folded cuckoo pint,
And silver-paly cuckoo flower.
Tennyson’s genius was slow in maturing. The poems contributed by him to
the volume of 1827, Poems by Two Brothers, are not without some slight
promise, but are very far from indicating extraordinary powers. A great advance
is discernible in Timbuctoo, but that Matthew Arnold should have
discovered in it the germ of Tennyson’s future powers is probably to be
attributed to the youth of the critic. Tennyson was in his twenty-second year
when the Poems Chiefly Lyrical appeared, and what strikes us in these
poems is certainly not what Arthur Hallam saw in them: much rather what
Coleridge and Wilson discerned in them. They are the poems of a fragile and
somewhat morbid young man in whose temper we seem to see a touch of Hamlet, a
touch of Romeo and, more healthily, a touch of Mercutio. Their most promising
characteristic is the versatility displayed. Thus we find Mariana side
by side with the Supposed Confessions, the Ode to Memory with
οἱ ῥέοντες, The Ballad of
Oriana with The Dying Swan, Recollections of The Arabian
Nights with The Poet. Their worst fault is affectation. Perhaps the
utmost that can be said for them is that they display a fine but somewhat thin
vein of original genius, after deducing what they owe to Coleridge, to Keats
and to other poets. This is seen in the magical touches of description, in the
exquisite felicity of expression and rhythm which frequently mark them, in the
pathos and power of such a poem as Oriana, in the pathos and charm of
such poems as Mariana and A Dirge, in the rich and almost
gorgeous fancy displayed in The Recollections.
The poems of 1833 are much more ambitious and strike deeper notes. Here comes
in for the first time that
σπουδαιότης, that high
seriousness which is one of Tennyson’s chief characteristics—we
see it in The Palace of Art, in Œnone and in the verses To J.
S. But in intrinsic merit the poems were no advance on their predecessors,
for the execution was not equal to the design. The best, such as Œnone,
A Dream of Fair Women, The Palace of Art, The Lady of
Shalott—I am speaking of course of these poems in their first
form—were full of extraordinary blemishes. The volume was degraded by
pieces which were very unworthy of him, such as O Darling Room and the
verses To Christopher North, and affectations of the worst kind deformed
many, nay, perhaps the majority of the poems. But the capital defect lay in the
workmanship. The diction is often languid and slipshod, sometimes quaintly
affected, and we can never go far without encountering lines, stanzas, whole
poems which cry aloud for the file. The power and charm of Tennyson’s
poetry, even at its ripest, depend very largely, often mainly, on expression,
and the couplet which he envied Browning,
The little more, and how much it is,
The little less, and what worlds away,
is strangely applicable to his own art. On a single word, on a subtle
collocation, on a slight touch depend often his finest effects: “the little
less” reduces him to mediocrity, “the little more” and he is with the masters.
To no poetry would the application of Goethe’s test be, as a rule, more
fatal—that the real poetic quality in poetry is that which remains when
it has been translated literally into prose.
Whoever will compare the poems of 1832 with the same poems as they appeared in
1842 will see that the difference is not so much a difference in degree, but
almost a difference in kind. In the collection of 1832 there were three gems,
The Sisters, the lines To J. S. and The May Queen. Almost
all the others which are of any value were, in the edition of 1842, carefully
revised, and in some cases practically rewritten. If Tennyson’s career had
closed in 1833 he would hardly have won a prominent place among the minor poets
of the present century. The nine years which intervened between the publication
of his second volume and the volumes of 1842 were the making of him, and
transformed a mere dilettante into a master. Much has been said about the
brutality of Lockhart’s review in the Quarterly. In some respects it was
stupid, in some respects it was unjust, but of one thing there can be no
doubt—it had a most salutary effect. It held up the mirror to weaknesses
and deficiencies which, if Tennyson did not care to acknowledge to others, he
must certainly have acknowledged to himself. It roused him and put him on his
mettle. It was a wholesome antidote to the enervating flattery of coteries and
“apostles” who were certainly talking a great deal of nonsense about him, as
Arthur Hallam’s essay in the Englishman shows. During the next nine
years he published nothing, with the exception of two unimportant contributions
to certain minor periodicals.[1] But he was educating himself, saturating
himself with all that is best in the poetry of Ancient Greece and Rome, of
modern Italy, of Germany and of his own country, studying theology,
metaphysics, natural history, geology, astronomy and travels, observing nature
with the eye of a poet, a painter and a naturalist. Nor was he a recluse. He
threw himself heartily into the life of his time, following with the keenest
interest all the great political and social movements, the progress and effects
of the Reform Bill, the troubles in Ireland, the troubles with the Colonies,
the struggles between the Protectionists and the Free Traders, Municipal
Reform, the advance of the democracy, Chartism, the popular education question.
He travelled on the Continent, he travelled in Wales and Scotland, he visited
most parts of England, not as an idle tourist, but as a student with note-book
in hand. And he had been submitted also to the discipline which is of all
disciplines the most necessary to the poet, and without which, as Goethe says,
“he knows not the heavenly powers”: he had “ate his bread in sorrow”. The death
of his father in 1831 had already brought him face to face, as he has himself
expressed it, with the most solemn of all mysteries. In 1833 he had an awful
shock in the sudden death of his friend Arthur Hallam, “an overwhelming sorrow
which blotted out all joy from his life and made him long for death”. He had
other minor troubles which contributed greatly to depress him,—the
breaking up of the old home at Somersby, his own poverty and uncertain
prospects, his being compelled in consequence to break off all intercourse with
Miss Emily Selwood. It is possible that Love and Duty may have reference
to this sorrow; it is certain that The Two Voices is autobiographical.
Such was his education between 1832 and 1842, and such the influences which
were moulding him, while he was slowly evolving In Memoriam and the
poems first published in the latter year. To the revision of the old poems he
brought tastes and instincts cultivated by the critical study of all that was
best in the poetry of the world, and more particularly by a familiarity
singularly intimate and affectionate with the masterpieces of the ancient
classics; he brought also the skill of a practised workman, for his diligence
in production was literally that of Sir Joshua Reynolds in the sister
art—nulla dies sine line’. Into the composition of the new
poems all this entered. He was no longer a trifler and a Hedonist. As Spedding
has said, his former poems betrayed “an over-indulgence in the luxuries
of the senses, a profusion of splendours, harmonies, perfumes, gorgeous
apparel, luscious meals and drinks, and creature comforts which rather pall
upon the sense, and make the glories of the outward world to obscure a little
the world within”. Like his own Lady of Shalott, he had communed
too much with shadows. But the serious poet now speaks. He appeals less to the
ear and the eye, and more to the heart. The sensuous is subordinated to the
spiritual and the moral. He deals immediately with the dearest concerns of man
and of society. He has ceased to trifle. The
σπουδαιότης, the high
seriousness of the true poet, occasional before, now pervades and enters
essentially into his work. It is interesting to note how many of these poems
have direct didactic purpose. How solemn is the message delivered in such poems
as The Palace of Art and The Vision of Sin, how noble the
teaching in Love and Duty, in Œnone, in Godiva, in
Ulysses; to how many must such a poem as The Two Voices have
brought solace and light; how full of salutary lessons are the political poems
You ask me, why, though ill at ease and Love thou thy Land, and
how noble is their expression! And, even where the poems are less directly
didactic, it is such refreshment as busy life needs to converse with them, so
pure, so wholesome, so graciously human is their tone, so tranquilly beautiful
is their world. Who could lay down The Miller’s Daughter, Dora, The
Golden Year, The Gardener’s Daughter, The Talking Oak, Audley Court, The
Day Dream without something of the feeling which Goethe felt when he first
laid down The Vicar of Wakefield? In the best lyrics in these volumes,
such as Break, Break, and Move Eastward, Happy Earth, the
most fastidious of critics must recognise flawless gems. In the two volumes of
1842 Tennyson carried to perfection all that was best in his earlier poems, and
displayed powers of which he may have given some indication in his cruder
efforts, but which must certainly have exceeded the expectation of the most
sanguine of his rational admirers. These volumes justly gave him the first
place among the poets of his time, and that supremacy he maintained—in
the opinion of most—till the day of his death. It would be absurd to
contend that Tennyson’s subsequent publications added nothing to the fame
which will be secured to him by these poems. But this at least is certain,
that, taken with In Memorium, they represent the crown and flower of his
achievement. What is best in them he never excelled and perhaps never equalled.
We should be the poorer, and much the poorer, for the loss of anything which he
produced subsequently, it is true; but would we exchange half a dozen of the
best of these poems or a score of the best sections of In Memoriam for
all that he produced between 1850 and his death?
The poems of 1842 naturally divide themselves into seven groups:—
(i.) Studies in Fancy.
Claribel.
Lilian.
Isabel.
Madeline.
A Spirit Haunts.
Recollections of the Arabian Nights.
Adeline.
The Dying Swan.
A Dream of Fair Women.
The Sea-Fairies.
The Deserted House.
Love and Death.
The Merman.
The Mermaid.
The Lady of Shalott.
Eleanore.
Margaret.
The Death of the Old Year.
St. Agnes.
Sir Galahad.
The Day Dream.
Will Waterproof’s Monologue.
Sir Launcelot and Queen Guinevere.
The Talking Oak.
The Poet’s Song.
(ii.) Studies of Passion.
Mariana.
Mariana in the South.
Oriana.
Fatima.
The Sisters.
Locksley Hall.
Edward Gray.
(iii.) Psychological Studies.
A Character.
The Poet.
The Poet’s Mind.
The Two Voices.
The Palace of Art.
The Vision of Sin.
St. Simeon Stylites.
(iv.) Idylls.
(a.) Classical.
Œnone.
The Lotos Eaters.
Ulysses.
(b.) English.
The Miller’s Daughter.
The May Queen.
Morte d’Arthur.
The Gardener’s Daughter.
Dora.
Audley Court.
Walking to the Mail.
Edwin Morris.
The Golden Year.
(v.) Ballads.
Oriana.
Lady Clara Vere de Vere.
Edward Gray.
Lady Clare.
The Lord of Burleigh.
The Beggar Maid.
(vi.) Autobiographical.
Ode to Memory.
Sonnet to J. M. K.
To—— with the Palace of Art.
To J.S.
Amphion.
To E. L. on his Travels in Greece.
To—— after reading a Life and Letters.
“Come not when I am Dead.”
A Farewell.
“Move Eastward, Happy Earth.”
“Break, Break, Break.”
(vii.) Political Group.
“You ask me.”
“Of old sat Freedom.”
“Love thou thy Land.”
The Goose.
In surveying these poems two things must strike every one—
their very wide range and their very fragmentary character. There
is scarcely any side of life on which they do not touch, scarcely
any phase of passion and emotion to which they do not give
exquisite expression. Take the love poems: compare Fatima
with Isabel, The Miller’s Daughter with Locksley
Hall, The Gardener’s Daughter with Madeline, or
Mariana with Cleopatra in the Dream of Fair Women.
When did love find purer and nobler expression than in Love
and Duty? When has sorrow found utterance more perfect than
in the verses To J.S., or the passion for the past than in
Break, Break, Break, or revenge and jealousy than in
The Sisters? In The Two Voices, The Palace of
Art and The Vision of Sin we are in another sphere.
They are appeals to the soul of man on subjects of momentous
concern to him. And each is a masterpiece. What is proper to
philosophy and what is proper to poetry have never perhaps been
so happily blended. They have all the sensuous charm of Keats,
but the prose of Hume could not have presented the truths which
they are designed to convey with more lucidity and precision. In
that superb fragment the Morte d’Arthur we have many of
the noblest attributes of Epic poetry. ënone is the
perfection of the classical idyll, The Gardener’s Daughter
and the idylls that follow it of the romantic. Sir Galahad
and St. Agnes are in the vein of Keats and Coleridge, but
Keats and Coleridge have produced nothing more exquisite and
nothing so ethereal. The Lotos Eaters is perhaps the most
purely delicious poem ever written, the ne plus ultra of
sensuous loveliness, and yet the poet who gave us that has given
us also the political poems, poems as trenchant and austerely
dignified in style as they are pregnant with practical wisdom.
There is the same versatility displayed in the trifles.
But all is fragmentary. No thread strings these jewels. They form
a collection of gems unset and unarranged. Without any system or
any definite scope they have nothing of that unity in diversity
which is so perceptible in the lyrics and minor poems of Goethe
and Wordsworth. Capricious as the gyrations of a sea-gull seem
the poet’s moods and movements. We have now the reveries of a
love-sick maiden, now the picture of a soul wrestling with
despair and death; here a study from rural life, or a study in
character, there a sermon on politics, or a descent into the
depths of psychological truth, or a sketch from nature. But
nothing could be more concentrated than the power employed to
shape each fragment into form. What Pope says of the
Æneid may be applied with very literal truth to these
poems:—
Finish’d the whole, and laboured every part
With patient touches of unwearied art.
In the poems of 1842 we have the secret of Tennyson’s eminence as a poet
as well as the secret of his limitations. He appears to have been
constitutionally deficient in what the Greeks called architektoniké,
combination and disposition on a large scale. The measure of his power as a
constructive artist is given us in the poem in which the English idylls may be
said to culminate, namely, Enoch Arden. In Memoriam and the
Idylls of the King have a sort of spiritual unity, but they are a series
of fragments tacked rather than fused together. It is the same with
Maud, and it is the same with The Princess. His poems have always
a tendency to resolve themselves into a series of cameos: it is only the short
poems which have organic unity. A gift of felicitous and musical expression
which is absolutely marvellous; an instinctive sympathy with what is best and
most elevated in the sphere of ordinary life, of ordinary thought and
sentiment, of ordinary activity with consummate representative power; a most
rare faculty of seizing and fixing in very perfect form what is commonly so
inexpressible because so impalpable and evanescent in emotion and expression; a
power of catching and rendering the charm of nature with a fidelity and
vividness which resemble magic; and lastly, unrivalled skill in choosing,
repolishing and remounting the gems which are our common inheritance from the
past: these are the gifts which will secure permanence for his work as long as
the English language lasts.
In his power of crystallising commonplaces he stands next to Pope, in subtle
felicity of expression beside Virgil. And, when he says of Virgil that we find
in his diction “all the grace of all the muses often flowering in one lonely
word,” he says what is literally true of his own work. As a master of style his
place is in the first rank among English classical poets. But his style is the
perfection of art. His diction, like the diction of Milton and Gray, resembles
mosaic work. With a touch here and a touch there, now from memory, now from
unconscious assimilation, inlaying here an epithet and there a phrase, adding,
subtracting, heightening, modifying, substituting one metaphor for another,
developing what is latent in the suggestive imagery of a predecessor, laying
under contribution the most intimate familiarity with what is best in the
literature of the ancient and modern world, the unwearied artist toils
patiently on till his precious mosaic work is without a flaw. All the resources
of rhetoric are employed to give distinction to his style and every figure in
rhetoric finds expression in his diction: Hypallage as in
The pillard dusk
Of sounding sycamores.
—Audley Court.
Paronomasia as in
The seawind sang
Shrill, chill with flakes of foam.
—Morte d’Arthur.
Oxymoron as
Behold them unbeheld, unheard
Hear all.
—Œnone.
Hyperbaton as in
The dew-impearled winds of dawn.
—Ode to Memory.
Metonymy as in
The bright death quiver’d at the victim’s
throat.
—Dream of Fair Women.
or in
For some three careless moans
The summer pilot of an empty heart.
—Gardener’s Daughter.
No poet since Milton has employed what is known as Onomatopoeia
with so much effect. Not to go farther than the poems of 1842, we
have in the Morte d’Arthur:—
So all day long the noise of battle rolled
Among the mountains by the winter sea;
or
Dry clashed his harness in the icy caves
And barren chasms, and all to left and right
The bare black cliff clang’d round him, as he bas’d
His feet on juts of slippery crag that rang
Sharp-smitten with the dint of armed heels—
or the exquisite
I heard the water lapping on the crag,
And the long ripple washing in the reeds.
So in The Dying Swan,
And the wavy swell of the soughing reeds.
See too the whole of Oriana and the description of the
dance at the beginning of The Vision of Sin.
Assonance, alliteration, the revival or adoption of obsolete and provincial
words, the transplantation of phrases and idioms from the Greek and Latin
languages, the employment of common words in uncommon senses, all are pressed
into the service of adding distinction to his diction. His diction blends the
two extremes of simplicity and artificiality, but with such fine tact that this
strange combination has seldom the effect of incongruity. Longinus has remarked that “as the fainter lustre of the stars
is put out of sight by the all-encompassing rays of the sun, so when sublimity
sheds its light round the sophistries of rhetoric they become invisible”.[2]
What Longinus says of “sublimity” is equally true of sincerity and truthfulness
in combination with exquisitely harmonious expression. We have an illustration
in Gray’s Elegy. Nothing could be more artificial than the style, but
what poem in the world appeals more directly to the heart and to the eye? It is
one thing to call art to the assistance of art, it is quite another thing to
call art to the assistance of nature. And this is what both Gray and Tennyson
do, and this is why their artificiality, so far from shocking us, “passes in
music out of sight”. But this cannot be said of Tennyson without reserve. At
times his strained endeavours to give distinction to his style by putting
common things in an uncommon way led him into intolerable affectation. Thus we
have “the knightly growth that fringed his lips” for a moustache, “azure
pillars of the hearth” for ascending smoke, “ambrosial orbs” for apples,
“frayed magnificence” for a shabby dress, “the secular abyss to come” for
future ages, “the sinless years that breathed beneath the Syrian blue” for the
life of Christ, “up went the hush’d amaze of hand and eye” for a gesture of
surprise, and the like. One of the worst instances is in In Memoriam,
where what is appropriate to the simple sentiment finds, as it should do,
corresponding simplicity of expression in the first couplet, to collapse into
the falsetto of strained artificiality in the second:—
To rest beneath the clover sod
That takes the sunshine and the rains,
Or where the kneeling hamlet drains
The chalice of the grapes of God.
An illustration of the same thing, almost as offensive, is in
Enoch Arden, where, in an otherwise studiously simple
diction, Enoch’s wares as a fisherman become
Enoch’s ocean spoil
In ocean-smelling osier.
But these peculiarities are less common in the earlier poems
than in the later: it was a vicious habit which grew on him.
But, if exception may sometimes be taken to his diction, no
exception can be taken to his rhythm. No English poet since
Milton, Tennyson’s only superior in this respect, had a finer ear
or a more consummate mastery over all the resources of rhythmical
expression. What colours are to a painter rhythm is, in
description, to the poet, and few have rivalled, none have
excelled Tennyson in this. Take the following:—
And ghastly thro’ the drizzling rain
On the bald street strikes the blank day.
—In Memoriam.
See particularly In Memoriam, cvii., the lines beginning
“Fiercely flies,” to “darken on the rolling brine”: the
description of the island in Enoch Arden; but
specification is needless, it applies to all his descriptive
poetry. It is marvellous that he can produce such effects by such
simple means: a mere enumeration of particulars will often do it,
as here:—
No gray old grange or lonely fold,
Or low morass and whispering reed,
Or simple style from mead to mead,
Or sheep walk up the windy wold.
—In Memoriam, c.
Or here:—
The meal sacks on the whitened floor,
The dark round of the dripping wheel,
The very air about the door
Made misty with the floating meal.
—The Miller’s Daughter.
His blank verse is best described by negatives. It has not the endless variety,
the elasticity and freedom of Shakespeare’s, it has not the massiveness and
majesty of Milton’s, it has not the austere grandeur of Wordsworth’s at its
best, it has not the wavy swell, “the linked sweetness long drawn out” of
Shelley’s, but its distinguishing feature is, if we may use the expression, its
importunate beauty. What Coleridge said of Claudian’s style may be applied to
it: “Every line, nay every word stops, looks full in your face and asks and
begs for praise”. is earlier blank verse is less elaborate and seemingly more
spontaneous and easy than his later.[3] But it is in his lyric verse that his
rhythm is seen in its greatest perfection. No English lyrics have more magic or
more haunting beauty, more of that which charms at once and charms for ever.
In his description of nature he is incomparable. Take the
following from The Dying Swan:—
Some blue peaks in the distance rose,
And white against the cold-white sky,
Shone out their crowning snows.
One willow over the river wept,
And shook the wave as the wind did sigh;
Above in the wind was the swallow,
Chasing itself at its own wild will,
or the opening scene in Œnone and in The Lotos
Eaters, or the meadow scene in The Gardener’s
Daughter, or the conclusion of Audley Court, or the
forest scene in the Dream of Fair Women, or this stanza in
Mariana in the South:—
There all in spaces rosy-bright
Large Hesper glitter’d on her tears,
And deepening through the silent spheres,
Heaven over Heaven rose the night.
A single line, nay, a single word, and a scene is by magic
before us, as here where the sea is looked down upon from an
immense height:—
The wrinkled sea beneath him
crawls.
—The Eagle.
Or here of a ship at sea, in the distance:—
And on through zones of light and shadow
Glimmer away to the lonely deep.
—To the Rev. F. D. Maurice.
Or here of waters falling high up on mountains:—
Their thousand wreaths of dangling water-smoke.
—The Princess.
Or of a water-fall seen at a distance:—
And like a downward smoke the slender stream
Along the cliff to fall and pause and fall did seem.
Or here again:—
We left the dying ebb that faintly lipp’d
The flat red granite.
Or here of a wave:—
Like a wave in the wild North Sea
Green glimmering toward the summit bears with all
Its stormy crests that smoke against the skies
Down on a bark.
—Elaine.
That beech will gather brown,
This maple burn itself away.
—In Memoriam.
The wide-wing’d sunset of the misty marsh.
—Last Tournament.
But illustrations would be endless. Nothing seems to escape him
in Nature. Take the following:—
Like a purple beech among the greens
Looks out of place.
—Edwin Morris.
Or
Delays as the tender ash delays To clothe herself,
when all the woods are green.
—The Princess.
As black as ash-buds in the front of March.
—The Gardener’s Daughter.
A gusty April morn
That puff’d the swaying branches into smoke.
—Holy Grail.
So with flowers, trees, birds and insects:—
The fox-glove clusters dappled bells.
—The Two Voices.
The sunflower:—
Rays round with flame its disk of seed.
—In Memoriam.
The dog-rose:—
Tufts of rosy-tinted snow.
—Two Voices.
A million emeralds break from the ruby-budded lime.
—Maud.
In gloss and hue the chestnut, when the shell
Divides threefold to show the fruit within.
—The Brook.
Or of a chrysalis:—
And flash’d as those
Dull-coated things, that making slide apart
Their dusk wing cases, all beneath there burns
A Jewell’d harness, ere they pass and fly.
—Gareth and Lynette.
So again:—
Wan-sallow, as the plant that feeds itself,
Root-bitten by white lichen.
—Id.
And again:—
All the silvery gossamers
That twinkle into green and gold.
—In Memoriam.
His epithets are in themselves a study: “the
dewy-tassell’d wood,” “the tender-pencill’d
shadow,” “crimson-circl’d star,” the “hoary
clematis,” “creamy spray,” “dry-tongued laurels”.
But whatever he describes is described with the same felicitous
vividness. How magical is this in the verses to Edward Lear:—
Naiads oar’d
A glimmering shoulder under gloom
Of cavern pillars.
Or this:—
She lock’d her lips: she left me where I stood:
“Glory to God,” she sang, and past afar,
Thridding the sombre boskage of the wood,
Toward the morning-star.
—A Dream of Fair Women.
But if in the world of Nature nothing escaped his sensitive and
sympathetic observation,—and indeed it might be said of him
as truly as of Shelley’s Alastor
Every sight
And sound from the vast earth and ambient air
Sent to his heart its choicest impulses,
—he had studied the world of books with not less sympathy and attention.
In the sense of a profound and extensive acquaintance with all that is best in
ancient and modern poetry, and in an extraordinarily wide knowledge of general
literature, of philosophy and theology, of geography and travel, and of various
branches of natural science, he is one of the most erudite of English poets.
With the poetry of the Greek and Latin classics he was, like Milton and Gray,
thoroughly saturated. Its influence penetrates his work, now in indirect
reminiscence, now in direct imitation, now inspiring, now modifying, now
moulding. He tells us in The Daisy how when at Como “the rich Virgilian
rustic measure of Lari Maxume” haunted him all day, and in a later
fragment how, as he rowed from Desenzano to Sirmio, Catullus was with him. And
they and their brethren, from Homer to Theocritus, from Lucretius to Claudian,
always were with him. I have illustrated so fully in the notes and elsewhere[4]
the influence of the Greek and Roman classics on the poems of 1842 that it is
not necessary to go into detail here. But a few examples of the various ways in
which they affected Tennyson’s work generally may be given. Sometimes he
transfers a happy epithet or expression in literal translation, as in:—
On either shining shoulder laid a hand,
which is Homer’s epithet for the shoulder—
ἀνὰ φαιδίμῳ
ὤμῳ
—Od., xi., 128.
It was the red cock shouting to the light,
exactly the
ἕος ἐβόησεν
ἀλέκτωρ
(Until the cock shouted).
—Batrachomyomachia, 192.
And all in passion utter’d a dry shriek,
which is the sicca vox of the Roman poets. So in The
Lotos Eaters:—
His voice was thin as voices from the grave,
which is Theocritus’ voice of Hylas from his watery grave:—
ἀραιὰ δ’ Ἱκετο
φωνά
So in The Princess, sect. i.:—
And cook’d his spleen,
which is a phrase from the Greek, as in Homer, Il., iv.,
513:—
ἐπι νηυσὶ
χόλον
θυμαλγέα
πέσσει
(At the ships he cooks his heart-grieving spleen).
Again in The Princess, sect. iv.:—
Laugh’d with alien lips,
which is Homer’s (Od., 69-70)—
διδ’ ἤδη
γναθμοῖσι
γελῴων
ἀλλοτρίοισι
So in Edwin Morris—
All perfect, finished to the finger nail,
which is a phrase transferred from Latin through the Greek;
cf., Horace, Sat., i., v., 32:—
Ad unguem
Factus homo
(A man fashioned to the finger nail).
“The brute earth,” In Memoriam, cxxvii., which is
Horace’s
Bruta tellus.
—Odes, i., xxxiv., 9.
So again:—
A bevy of roses apple-cheek’d
in The Island, which is Theocritus’
μαλοπάρῃος. The line in the
Morte d’Arthur,
This way and that, dividing the swift mind,
is an almost literal translation of Virgil’s Æn., iv.,
285:—
Atque animum nunc huc celerem nunc dividit illuc
(And this way and that he divides his swift mind).
Another way in which they affect him is where, without direct
imitation, they colour passages and poems as in Œnone,
The Lotos Eaters, Tithonus, Tiresias, The
Death of Œnone, Demeter and Persephone, the passage
beginning “From the woods” in The Gardener’s Daughter,
which is a parody of Theocritus, Id., vii., 139
seq., while the Cyclops’ invocation to Galatea in
Theocritus, Id., xi., 29-79, was plainly the model for the
idyll, “Come down, O Maid,” in the seventh section of The
Princess, just as the tournament in the same poem recalls
closely the epic of Homer and Virgil. Tennyson had a wonderful
way of transfusing, as it were, the essence of some beautiful
passage in a Greek or Roman poet into English. A striking
illustration of this would be the influence of reminiscences of
Virgil’s fourth Æneid on the idyll of Elaine and
Guinevere. Compare, for instance, the following: he is
describing the love-wasted Elaine, as she sits brooding in the
lonely evening, with the shadow of the wished-for death falling
on her:—
But when they left her to herself again,
Death, like a friend’s voice from a distant field,
Approaching through the darkness, call’d; the owls
Wailing had power upon her, and she mix’d
Her fancies with the sallow-rifted glooms
Of evening and the moanings of the wind.
How exactly does this recall, in a manner to be felt rather than
exactly defined, a passage equally exquisite and equally pathetic
in Virgil’s picture of Dido, where, with the shadow of her death
also falling upon her, she seems to hear the phantom voice of her
dead husband, and “mixes her fancies” with the glooms of night
and the owl’s funereal wail:—
Hinc exaudiri voces et verba vocantis
Visa viri, nox quum terras obscura teneret;
Solaque culminibus ferali carmine bubo
Sæpe queri, et longas in fletum ducere voces.
—Æn., iv., 460.)
(From it she thought she clearly heard a voice, even the accents
of her husband calling her when night was wrapping the earth with
darkness; and on the roof the lonely owl in funereal strains kept
oft complaining, drawing out into a wail its protracted
notes.)
Similar passages, though not so striking, would be the picture
of Pindar’s Elysium in Tiresias, the sentiment pervading
The Lotos Eaters transferred so faithfully from the Greek
poets, the scenery in Œnone so crowded with details from
Homer, Theocritus and Callimachus. Sometimes we find similes
suggested by the classical poets, but enriched by touches from
original observation, as here in The Princess:—
As one that climbs a peak to gaze
O’er land and main, and sees a great black cloud
Drag inward from the deeps, a wall of night
Blot out the slope of sea from verge to shore.
...
And quenching lake by lake and tarn by tarn
Expunge the world,
which was plainly suggested by Homer, iv., 275:—
ὡς δ’ ὅτ’ ἀπὸ
σκοπιῆς εἴδε
νέφος αἰπολος
ἀνήρ
ἐρχόμενον κατὰ
πόντον ὑπὸ
Ζεφύροιο ἰωῆς
τῷ δε τ’ ἄνευθεν
ἐόντι, μελάντερον
ἠΰτε πίσσα,
φαίνετ’ ἰὸν
κατὰ πόντον,
ἄγει δέ τε
λαῖλαπα πολλὴν.
(As when a goat-herd from some hill-peak sees a cloud coming
across the deep with the blast of the west wind behind it; and to
him, being as he is afar, it seems blacker, even as pitch, as it
goes along the deep, bringing with it a great
whirlwind.)
So again the fine simile in Elaine, beginning
Bare as a wild wave in the wide North Sea,
is at least modelled on the simile in Iliad, xv., 381-4,
with reminiscences of the same similes in Iliad, xv., 624,
and Iliad, iv., 42-56. The simile in the first section of
the Princess,
As when a field of corn
Bows all its ears before the roaring East,
reminds us of Homer’s
ὡς δ’ ὅτε κινήση
Ζέφυρος βαθυλήϊον,
ἐλθὼν
λάβρος, ἐπαιγίζων,
ἐπὶ τ’ ἠμύει
ἀσταχύεσσιν.
(As when the west wind tosses a deep cornfield rushing down with furious blast,
and it bows with all its ears.)
Nothing could be more happy than such an adaptation as the
following—
Ever fail’d to draw
The quiet night into her blood,
from Virgil, Æn., iv., 530:—
Neque unquam Solvitur in somnos oculisve aut pectore noctem
Accipit.
(And she never relaxes into sleep, or receives the night in eyes
or bosom),
or than the following (in Enid) from Theocritus:—
Arms on which the standing muscle sloped,
As slopes a wild brook o’er a little stone,
Running too vehemently to break upon it.
ἐν δὲ μύες
στερεοῖσι
βραχίοσιν ἄκρον
ὑπ’ ὦμον
ἔστασαν, ἠύτε
πέτροι ὀλοίτροχοι
οὕς τε κυλίνδον
χειμάῤῥους
ποταμὸς μεγάλαις
περιέξεσε δίναις.
—Idyll, xxii., 48 seq.
(And the muscles on his brawny arms close under the shoulder stood out like
boulders which the wintry torrent has rolled and worn smooth with the mighty
eddies.)
But there was another use to which Tennyson applied his accurate
and intimate acquaintance with the classics. It lay in developing
what was suggested by them, in unfolding, so to speak, what was
furled in their imagery. Nothing is more striking in ancient
classical poetry than its pregnant condensation. It often
expresses in an epithet what might be expanded into a detailed
picture, or calls up in a single phrase a whole scene or a whole
position. Where in Merlin and Vivian Tennyson
described
The blind wave feeling round his long sea hall
In silence,
he was merely unfolding to its full Homer’s κῦμα
κωφόν—“dumb wave”; just as the best
of all comments on Horace’s expression, “Vultus nimium lubricus
aspici,” Odes, I., xix., 8, is given us in Tennyson’s
picture of the Oread in Lucretius:—
How the sun delights
To glance and shift about her slippery sides.
Or take again this passage in the Agamemnon, 404-5,
describing Menelaus pining in his desolate palace for the lost
Helen:—
πόθῳ δ’
ὑπερποντίας
φάσμα δόξει
δόμων ἀνάσσειν
(And in his yearning love for her who is over the sea a phantom
will seem to reign over his palace.)
What are the lines in Guinevere but an expansion of what
is latent but unfolded in the pregnant suggestiveness of the
Greek poet:—
And in thy bowers of Camelot or of Usk
Thy shadow still would glide from room to room,
And I should evermore be vex’d with thee
In hanging robe or vacant ornament,
Or ghostly foot-fall echoing on the stair—
with a reminiscence also perhaps of Constance’s speech in
King John, III., iv.
It need hardly be said that these particular passages, and
possibly some of the others, may be mere coincidences, but they
illustrate what numberless other passages which could be cited
prove that Tennyson’s careful and meditative study of the Greek
and Roman poets enabled him to enrich his work by these
felicitous adaptations.
He used those poets as his master Virgil used his Greek predecessors, and what
the elder Seneca said of Ovid, who had appropriated a line from Virgil, might
exactly be applied to Tennyson: “Fecisse quod in multis aliis versibus
Virgilius fecerat, non surripiendi caus, sed palam imitandi, hoc animo ut
vellet agnosci”.[5]
He had plainly studied with equal attention the chief Italian poets, especially
Dante, Petrarch, Ariosto and Tasso. On a passage in Dante he founded his
Ulysses, and imitations of that master are frequent throughout his
poems. In Memoriam, both in its general scheme as well as in numberless
particular passages, closely recalls Petrarch; and Ariosto and Tasso have each
influenced his work. In the poetry of his own country nothing seems to have
escaped him, either in the masters or the minor poets.[6] To apply the term
plagiarism to Tennyson’s use of his predecessors would be as absurd as to
resolve some noble fabric into its stones and bricks, and confounding the one
with the other to taunt the architect with appropriating an honour which
belongs to the quarry and the potter. Tennyson’s method was exactly the method
of two of the greatest poets in the world, Virgil and Milton, of the poet who
stands second to Virgil in Roman poetry, Horace, of one of the most illustrious
of our own minor poets, Gray.
An artist more fastidious than Tennyson never existed. As scrupulous a purist
in language as Cicero, Chesterfield and Macaulay in prose, as Virgil, Milton,
and Leopardi in verse, his care extended to the nicest minutiæ of word-forms.
Thus “ancle” is always spelt with a “c” when it stands
alone, with a “k” when used in compounds; thus he spelt
“Idylls” with one “l” in the short poems, with two
“l’s” in the epic poems; thus the employment of
“through” or “thro’,” of “bad” or
“bade,” and the retention or suppression of “e” in past
participles are always carefully studied. He took immense pains to avoid the
clash of “s” with “s,” and to secure the predominance
of open vowels when rhythm rendered them appropriate. Like the Greek painter
with his partridge, he thought nothing of sacrificing good things if, in any
way, they interfered with unity and symmetry, and thus, his son tells us, many
stanzas, in themselves of exquisite beauty, have been lost to us.
Tennyson’s place is not among the “lords of the visionary eye,” among
seers, among prophets, but not the least part of the debt which his countrymen
owe to him is his dedication of his art to the noblest purposes. At a time when
poetry was beginning to degenerate into what it has now almost universally
become—a mere sense-pampering siren, and when critics were telling us,
as they are still telling us, that we are to understand by it “all literary
production which attains the power of giving pleasure by its form as distinct
from its matter,” he remained true to the creed of his great predecessors.
“L’art pour art,” he would say, quoting Georges Sand, “est un vain mot:
l’art pour le vrai, l’art pour le beau et le bon, voila la religion
que je cherche.” When he succeeded to the laureateship he was proud to remember
that the wreath which had descended to him was
greener from the brows
Of him that utter’d nothing base,
and he was a loyal disciple of that poet whose aim had been, in his own words,
“to console the afflicted, to add sunshine to daylight by making the happy
happier, to teach the young and the gracious of every age to see, to think, to
feel, and therefore to become more actively and securely virtuous”.[7]
Wordsworth had said that he wished to be regarded as a teacher or as nothing,
but unhappily he did not always distinguish between the way in which a poet and
a philosopher should teach. He forgot that the didactic element in a poem
should be, to employ a homely illustration, what garlic should be in a salad,
“scarce suspected, animate the whole,” that the poet teaches not as the
moralist and the preacher teach, but as nature and life teach us. He taught us
when he wrote The Fountain and The Highland Reaper, The
Leach-gatherer and Michael, he merely wearied us when he sermonised
in The Excursion and in The Prelude. Tennyson never makes this
mistake. He is seldom directly didactic. Would he inculcate subjugation to the
law of duty—he gives us the funeral ode on Wellington, The Charge of
the Light Brigade, and Love and Duty. Would he inculcate
resignationto the will of God, and the moral efficacy of conventional
Christianity—he gives us Enoch Arden. Would he picture the
endless struggle between the sensual and the spiritual, and the relation of
ideals to life—he gives us the Idylls of the King. Would he point
to what atheism may lead—he gives us Lucretius. Poems which are
masterpieces of sensuous art, such as mere æsthetes, like Rosetti and his
school, must contemplate with admiring despair, he makes vehicles of the most
serious moral and spiritual teaching. The Vision of Sin is worth a
hundred sermons on the disastrous effects of unbridled profligacy. In The
Palace of Art we have the quintessence of The Book of Ecclesiastes
and much more besides. Even in The Lotos Eaters we have the mirror held
up to Hedonism. On the education of the affections and on the purity of
domestic life must depend very largely, not merely the happiness of
individuals, but the well-being of society, and how wide a space is filled by
poems in Tennyson’s works bearing influentially on these subjects is obvious.
And they admit us into a pleasaunce with which it is good to be familiar, so
pure and wholesome is their atmosphere, so tranquilly beautiful the world in
which the characters move and the little dramas unfold themselves. They preach
nothing, but deep into every heart must sink their silent lessons. “Upon the
sacredness of home life,” writes his son, “he would maintain that the stability
and greatness of a nation largely depend; and one of the secrets of his power
over mankind was his true joy in the family duties and affections.” What
sermons have we in The Miller’s Daughter, in Dora, in The
Gardener’s Daughter and in Love and Duty. The Princess was a
direct contribution to a social question of momentous importance to our time.
Maud had an immediate political purpose, while in In Memoriam he
became the interpreter and teacher of his generation in a still higher sense.
Since Shakespeare no English poet has been so essentially
patriotic, or appealed so directly to the political conscience of
the nation. In his noble eulogies of the English constitution and
of the virtue and wisdom of its architects, in his
spirit-stirring pictures of the heroic actions of our forefathers
and contemporaries both by land and sea, in his passionate
denunciations of all that he believed would detract from
England’s greatness and be prejudicial to her real interests, in
his hearty sympathy with every movement and with every measure
which he believed would contribute to her honour and her power,
in all this he stands alone among modern poets. But if he loved
England as Shakespeare loved her, he had other lessons than
Shakespeare’s to teach her. The responsibilities imposed on the
England of our time—and no poet knew this better—are
very different from those imposed on the England of Elizabeth. An
empire vaster and more populous than that of the Cæsars has
since then been added to our dominion. Millions, indeed, who are
of the same blood as ourselves and who speak our language have,
by the folly of common ancestors, become aliens. But how immense
are the realms peopled by the colonies which are still loyal to
us, and by the three hundred millions who in India own us as
their rulers: of this vast empire England is now the capital and
centre. That she should fulfil completely and honourably the
duties to which destiny has called her will be the prayer of
every patriot, that he should by his own efforts contribute all
in his power to further such fulfilment must be his earnest
desire. It would be no exaggeration to say that Tennyson
contributed more than any man who has ever lived to what may be
called the higher political education of the English-speaking
races. Of imperial federation he was at once the apostle and the
pioneer. In poetry which appealed as probably no other poetry has
appealed to every class, wherever our language is spoken, he
dwelt fondly on all that constitutes the greatness and glory of
England, on her grandeur in the past, on the magnificent promise
of the part she will play in the future, if her sons are true to
her. There should be no distinction, for she recognises no
distinction between her children at home and her children in her
colonies. She is the common mother of a common race: one flag,
one sceptre, the same proud ancestry, the same splendid
inheritance. “How strange England cannot see,” he once wrote,
“that her true policy lies in a close union with her
colonies.”
Sharers of our glorious past,
Shall we not thro’ good and ill
Cleave to one another still?
Britain’s myriad voices call,
Sons be welded all and all
Into one imperial whole,
One with Britain, heart and soul!
One life, one flag, one fleet, one Throne!
Thus did the poetry of Tennyson draw closer, and thus will it
continue to draw closer those sentimental ties—ties, in
Burke’s phrase, “light as air, but strong as links of iron,”
which bind the colonies to the mother country; and in so doing,
if he did not actually initiate, he furthered, as no other single
man has furthered, the most important movement of our time. Nor
has any man of genius in the present century—not Dickens,
not Ruskin—been moved by a purer spirit of philanthropy, or
done more to show how little the qualities and actions which
dignify humanity depend, or need depend, on the accidents of
fortune. He brought poetry into touch with the discoveries of
science, and with the speculations of theology and metaphysics,
and though, in treating such subjects, his power is not, perhaps,
equal to his charm, the debt which his countrymen owe him, even
intellectually, is incalculable.