CHAPTER III GENERAL ASPECTS OF MILTON'S THEORY OF POETRY Milton's obiter dicta on poetry are as scattered, and almost as fragmentary, as his references to the other fine arts, but are more copious, and more obviously part of a complete though unenunciated theory. The relation of this theory to Aristotle one immediately guesses; its reflection of the Italian commentators on Aristotle one ultimately perceives. In a discussion of this theory an important matter must be dealt with at the outset. An effort to formulate the laws and higher mechanics of the fine arts, especially of poetry, will often encounter the ‘enthusiastic' protest that artists, like Paracelsus and the bird, pursue a ‘trackless way,' and like them 'arrive'-in other words, that 'art [is] nothing worth, and genius all in all." As Sir Joshua Reynolds puts it, there is something more 'captivating and liberal' in one who represents painting 'as a kind of inspiration, . . . a gift bestowed upon peculiar favorites at their birth,' than in one who coldly examines into the actual means and methods of artists. So with poetry. Why work out a body of critical doctrine, say the sceptical, when poetry is all a matter of fine frenzy? 1 1 Horace, Ars Poetica 295-296-Howes' translation. We must therefore ask, What was Milton's attitude in the time-honored dispute between art and genius? To what extent was he 'Aristotelian'? To what extent 'Platonic'? Would he have embodied his views on poetry in a treatise or in a myth? What ratio would he assign to art and nature in explaining the creation of beauty? How far did he attribute poetry to original endowment and fitful inspiration, and how far to such an endowment trained to habitual response? Though the dependence, already noted, of Milton upon Aristotle provides a general answer to these questions, yet the wisest writers on poetry, even while assigning the chief importance either to art or to inspiration-that is even while revealing a greater sympathy with Aristotle or with Plato-have come to some middle ground that seemed to allow an adjustment. Our attempt must be to discover Milton's adjustment. But as we have identified his definition of art with Aristotle's, and are searching for his rational artistic principles, we may consider his tributes to inspiration, spontaneity, and inborn aptitude to be the concessive or modifying elements in his theory. As rigorous theorists have admitted the necessity of an innate gift-Aristotle, his disciples in the Renaissance, even Boileau, 'the lawgiver of the French Parnassus'--so also did Milton. He deems it 'a genial power of nature,' essential, though not in itself adequate to creation. He sees its importance, while recognizing the dictates of a rational aesthetic theory; his reasoning is in logical agreement with his whole conception of art. He reverenced workmanship, and insisted upon method; inevitably also he admitted the fact of inspiration. 'Above, p. 29. In a rough classification determined by general attitude, there has been no doubt where our poet would stand. For the plastic quality of Milton's endowment, Addison placed him in the second class of great geniuses in a distinguished fellowship of the law-abiding, with 'those that have formed themselves by rules, and submitted the greatness of their natural talents to the corrections and the restraints of art."2 And a modern editor of Addison, Professor Cook, writes: "That Milton would not have declined to be judged by these rules [the rules of epic poetry] is evident from a passage of his tractate Of Education, in which he speaks of the teaching of "those organic arts, which enable men to discourse and write perspicuously, elegantly, and according to the fittest style of lofty, mean, or lowly."" Finally, Milton him self makes his own attitude clear. In effect he asserts that neither nature alone, nor art alone, can produce a great poet, but that to an original gift there must be joined a capacity for the 'learned pains' which to any gentle apprehension' are easily distinguishable from 'unlearned drudgery," After recording the favorable reception of his poems in Italy by the members of the private academies, he writes: I began thus far to assent both to them and divers of my friends here at home, and not less to an inward prompting which now grew daily upon me, that by labor and intent study (which I take to be my portion in this life), joined with the strong propensity of nature,' I might perhaps 1 Addison explains that the classification was thus numbered 'only for distinction's sake,' and that it bore no relation to degrees of superiority. 2 Spectator. No. 160, Sept. 3, 1711; See Addison on P. L., ed. by Cook, p. 159. 'Addison on P. L., ed. by Cook, Notes, p. 162. 'Church-Gov. (Bk. 2), Works 3.149. 'Another phrase for the 'genial power of nature,' mentioned on p. 60. leave something so written to aftertimes, as they should not willingly let it die . . . I applied myself . to fix all the industry and art I could unite to the adornment of my native tongue.1 Shortly after, he again refers to the two qualities, endowment and diligence, that unite to give him poetical power.2 And a few pages later, he prophesies that the great poem, in which the work of his life is to culminate, will be achieved 'by devout prayer to that Eternal Spirit who can enrich with all utterance and knowledge, and sends out His seraphim with the hallowed fire of His altar to touch and purify the lips of whom He pleases'; to which, he continues, 'must be added industrious and select reading, steady observation, insight into all seemly and generous arts and affairs.' Thus Milton explicitly states his belief in the study and technical training whereby the creative instinct receives its perfect value, and develops into genius. In recognizing that the poetical impulse is natural, and in attributing perfection in the art to care and industry in the gifted, Milton agrees with Aristotle and Horace,' and with the Italian theorists who followed them. But had he been silent on these points, we still should place him where he places himself. We recall his ascription of every 'sociable perfection' in this life to 'discipline," and know he would not cast poetry adrift to chance. 1 Church-Gov. (Bk. 2), Works 3.144-145. 'Ibid., p. 149. See Horace, Ars Poetica 408-418, and passages in the Italian theorists-as Minturno, L'Arte Poetica, Bk. 1, p. 37, where the expectation of perfect workmanship in man taught only by nature is compared to a search for leafy trees and succulent grasses in the Ethiopian desert. 'Cf. Church-Gov. (Bk. 1), Works 3. 97–98. If this conclusion seems to be contradicted by Milton's personal references to easily inspired and 'unpremeditated verse,'1 or to the thoughts, that voluntary move Harmonious numbers," one need only recall his earlier didactic utterances. Or, it may suffice, in dealing with these references, and with the 'prompt eloquence' that 'in prose or numerous verse' flowed 'unmeditated' from the lips of Adam and Eve,' to cite Castelvetro. Poets, he states, do not versify spontaneously; if they do, why mention spontaneity as to their credit in the special instances of Antipater Sidoneus and Licinius Archias? Why indeed? Or if Milton's praise of Shakespeare's 'easy numbers,' is troublesome, let the stu dent reflect that in the preceding line art is characterized as 'slow-endeavoring,' and that in the manner of the sonneteer Milton crowns the dramatist with extravagant honors in which some higher truth overshadows the inaccuracy. Or, finally, our cue may be taken from Milton himself; for, as we shall see, he declares that a surfeit of poetry or passion may for the moment transcend care for literal fact." To resume: Milton admits no essential distinction be-tween the real and the artificial in creative work. He approves the use of artifice when to the ordinary beholder it is least apparent, or least desirable; and he thinks conscious art no menace to sincerity or even to passion. Thus, in his 'P. L. 9.23-24. 'P. L. 3.37-38. 'P. L. 5.144 ff. 'Poetica d'Aristotele, p. 68. 'On Shakespeare 10. 'See below, pp. 75. cashe |