[lit-ideas] On reading Byron

From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Lit-Ideas " <Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 09:58:01 -0800
Harold Bloom on page 242 of The Visionary Company, A Reading of English
Romantic Poetry writes, "The Fire stolen from Heaven both kindles and
blasts, and in Rousseau, human love is one with the stolen flame and in turn
becomes existence itself.  Byron praises Rousseau as inspired, but dismisses
him as 'phrensied by disease or woe,' an anticipation of modern Babbitry
toward Rousseau's genius.  Byron's ambivalence is a necessary consequence of
the extraordinary view of the natural world that Childe Harold's Pilgrimage
develops.  Every element given to man is simultaneously a way to moral
greatness and divine blessing, and also a quicker way to self-deception and
damnation.  Every human act that widens consciousness increases both
exaltation and despair.  No other poet has insisted on maintaining both
views with equal vigor . . . ."

 

Childe Harold in Cantos I and II is a poetic narration of Byron's abandoning
of England for Europe but as Bloom indicates, it rises much above that.
Moving from place to place he engagingly discusses his progress.  The
Promethean fire consists of reaching into oneself and finding that which is
incumbent upon the poet to flesh out and write. Byron is measuring the
places he passes through; one sees his beliefs and prejudices but with
evidence of introspective maturity.  This doesn't mean he's right but it
does mean he strives to be honest; which ought to be capable of being said
about any poet.

 

Perhaps because Byron's most notable poems are long they have been neglected
in this age of the personal short-lyric.  I plowed through Don Juan forty or
fifty years ago but I passed over many of the details because the edition I
was reading wasn't annotated.  The edition in which I'm reading Childe
Harold's Pilgrimage is the "Delphi."  I'm using a Kindle Fire 8.9 which
allows me to click on strange terms or places and see definitions or
descriptions.  

 

I wonder if Byron would have seen the effect of Rousseau on T.S. Eliot, Hart
Crane, and the Robert Lowell clique.  We have had them for most of our lives
and accept them as normal, but Byron wouldn't have.  He would probably have
seen them as likewise "phrensied by disease or woe," and perhaps he would
have considered Ezra Pound to have been the worst of the lot.  Other poets,
Wallace Stevens, Marianne Moore, Elizabeth Bishop, and William Carlos
Williams for aren't "phrensied" perhaps, but perhaps they don't escape
Rousseau's disease.  Stevens used humor and playfulness in his alternatives
to religion, but he was serious at the same time.  It was a great loss to
him to no longer believe the Christianity he was raised with, but he was a
successful businessman and poet.  He was neither phrensied nor diseased -
although he did die of stomach cancer: a metaphor of the internalizing of
the conflict he wrote about in his poetry.   

 

I seem to have burned myself out on the "Moderns" for the present, with
their phrensied disease or woe.  Byron is a move in a more healthful
direction, at least for the present - maybe he won't be if I tackle his
"Cain," which was roundly condemned by many of his contemporaries.   Aside
from the Modernistic phrensy my old eyes paid the price of reading the small
print in too many books of criticism.  I'm better off reading from the
eye-friendly Kindle Fire when possible.  

 



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
[lit-ideas] On reading Byron

Other related posts:
