Coleridge dispute Wordsworth’s
Wordsworth and and Coleridge came came together early in life. life. It was in 1796, 1796, that they were frequently together, and out of their mutual discussion arose the various theories which Wordsworth embodied embodied in his Preface Preface to the Lyrical the Lyrical Ballads, and which he tried to put into practice in the poems. Coleridge claimed credit for these theories and said they were, “half the child of his brain.” brain.” But later on, his views underwent underwent a change, he no longer agreed with Wordsworth’s theories, theories, and so criticized them in Chapter XVII and XVIII of the Biographia the Biographia Literaria. Literaria. Wordsworth’s Views Views In his Preface, Wordsworth made three important statements statements all of which have been objects of Coleridge’s censure. These are: 1. Reasons for His Choice of Rustic Life: Wordsworth writes that he chose low rustic life ,
because in that condition the essential passion of the heart find a better soil in which they can attain their maturity, are less under restraint, and speak a plainer and more emphatic language; because in that condition of life our elementary feelings coexist in a state of greater simplicity and consequently may be more accurately contemplated and more forcibly communicated; because the manners of rural life germinate from those elementary feelings, and from the necessary character of rural occupations are more easily comprehended and are more durable; and lastly, ‘because in that condition the passions of men are incorporated with the beautiful and permanent forms of nature.’ 2. Choice of Rustic Language : Secondly, that, “The language too of these men is adopted
(purified indeed from what appears to be its real defects, from all lasting and rational causes of dislike or disgust) because such men hourly communicate with the best objects from which the best of language is originally derived; and because, from their rank in society and the sameness and narrow circle of their intercourse being less under the action of social vanity, they convey their feelings and notions in simple and unelaborated expressions.”
3. Diction of Poetry: Thirdly, Poetry: Thirdly, he made a number of statements regarding the language and diction of poetry. Of these, Coleridge controverts the following parts : “a selection of the real language of men”; “the language of these men (i. e. men in low and rustic life) I propose to myself to imitate, and as far as possible to adopt the very language of men”; and “between the language of prose and that of metrical composition there neither is, nor can be, any essential difference.” Coleridge’s Criticism
As regards the second second statement statement of Wordsworth, Coleridge Coleridge objects objects to the view that the best of language is derived derived from the objects objects with which the rustics hourly communicate communicate.. First, communication with an object implies reflection on it, and the richness of vocabulary arises arises from such reflection. Now Now the rural conditions conditions of life do not require require any reflection, hence the vocabulary of the rustic is poor. They can express only the barest facts of nature, and not not the ideas and thoughts universal laws which result from reflection on such facts. Secondly, the best part of a man’s language does not result merely from communication with nature, but from education, from the mind’s dwelling on noble thoughts and ideals of the master minds of humanity. Whatever noble and poetic phrases, words and arrangement of words the rustics use, are derived not from nature, but from repeated listening to The Bible and to the sermons of noble and inspired preachers. Coleridge on Poetic Diction Coming then to a detailed consideration of Wordsworth’s theory of poetic diction, he takes up his statements, one by one, and demonstrates that his views are not justified. Wordsworth asserts asserts that the the language of poetry is “a selection selection of the real language language of man or the very language of man; and that there was no essential difference between the language of prose and that of poetry.” Coleridge reports that “every man’s language, varies according according to the extent of his knowledge, the activity activity of his faculties faculties and the depth or quickness of his feelings.” Every man’s language has, first, f irst, its individual peculiarities; secondly, the properties common to the class to which he belongs; and thirdly, words and phrases of universal use. “No two men of the same class or of different classes clas ses speak alike, although both use words and phrases common to them all, because in the one case their natures are different and in the other their classes are different.” This applies much to the language of rustics, as to that of townsmen. In both cases the language varies from person to person, class to class, and place to place. Which of these varieties of language, language, asks Coleridge, Coleridge, is ‘the real language of men.’ Each, he re plies, plies, has to be purged of its uncommon or accidental accidental features (such as those picked up from family, profession, or locality) before it can become the ordinary (i. e. generally spoken) language of men ‘Omit the particularities of each, and the result ofcourse must be common to all. And assuredly the commissions and changes to be made in the language and rustics, before it could be transferred to any species of poem, except the drama or other professed imitation, are at least as numerous and weighty as would be required in adapting to the same purpose the ordinary language of tradesmen and manufacturers.’ manufacturers.’ “Such a language alone has a universal appeal and is, therefore, the language of poetry.” A language so generalised, generalised, so selected, selected, and also so purified purified of what is gross and vulgar will differ in no way way from the language language of any other man man of commonsense.” Coleridge objects to Wordsworth’s use of the words ‘very’ or ‘real’ and suggests that ‘ordinary’ or ‘generally’ aught to have been used. Wordsworth’s addition of the words “in a state of
excitement,” is meaningless, says Coleridge, for emotional emo tional excitement may result in a more concentrated concentrated expression, but it cannot create a noble and richer vocabulary. To Wordsworth’s contention that there is no essential difference between the language of poetry and that of prose, Coleridge replies that there is, and there ought to be, an essential difference difference between the language of prose and that of poetry. The language of poetry differs from that of prose in the same way in which the language of prose differs, and ought to differ, from language of conversion, and as reading differs from talking. Coleridge gives a number of reasons in support of his view. First, language is both a matter of words, and the arrangement arrangement of those words. Now words both in prose and poetry may be the same, but their arrangement is different. This difference arises from the fact that poetry uses metre, and metre requires a different arrangement of words. As Coleridge has already shown, metre is not mere superficial decoration, decoration, but an essential, organic part of a poem. Hence there is is bound to be an ‘essential difference difference between the language, i. e. the arrangement of words, of poetry and of prose. There is the difference even in those poems of Wordsworth which are considered most Words worthian. worthian. In fact, metre medicates the whole atmosphere and so, even the metaphors and similes used by a poet are different in quality and frequency from those of prose. Further, it cannot be demonstrated that the language of prose and poetry are identical, and so convertible. There may be certain lines or even passages which can be used both in prose and poetry, but not all the lines or passages can be used thus. There are passages which will suit the one, and not the other. Coleridge’s devotion of Wordsworth’s theory remains even now one of the finest examples of literary criticism. His essay on Wordsworth has been regarded by Thomas M. Raysor as ‘the finest critical essay in English literature.’ Wordsworth and Coleridge came together early in life and mutually arose various theories which Wordsworth embodied in his “Preface to the Lyrical Ballads” and tried to put into practice in his poems. Coleridge claimed credit for these theories and said they were “half the child of his brain”. But later on, his views underwent the change; he no longer agreed with Wordsworth’s theories and so criticized them.
In his Preface, Wordsworth made three important statements statements all of which h ave been objects of Coleridge's censure. 1. Reasons for His Choice of Rustic Life:
First of all, Wordsworth writes writes that he chose low and rustic life, where the essential passions of the heart find a better soil to attain their maturity. They are less under restraint and speak a plainer and more emphatic language. In rustic life our basic feelings coexist in greater simplicity
and more accurately contemplated and more forcibly communicated. The manners of rural life sprang from those elementary feelings and from the necessary character of rural occupations, are more easily realized and are more durable. Lastly the passions of men are incorporated with the beautiful and permanent forms of nature. 2. Choice of Rustic Language
Secondly, that the language of these men is adopted because they hourly communicate communicate with the best objects from which the best part of language is originally derived. Being less under social vanity, they convey their feelings and ideas in simple and outright expressions because of their rank in society and the equality and narrow circle of their intercourse.
3. Diction of Poetry: Thirdly, he made a number of statements regarding the language and diction of poetry. Of these, Coleridge refutes the following parts: “a selection or the real language of men”; “the language of the men in low and rustic life”: and, “Between the language of prose and that of metrical composition there neither is, nor can be, any essential difference”.
As regards the first statement, i.e. the choice of rustic characters and life, Coleridge points out, first, that not all Wordsworth characters are rustic. Characters in poems like Ruth, Michael, The Brothers, are not low and rustic. Secondly, their language and sentiments do not necessarily arise from their abode or occupation. They are attributable to causes of their similar sentiments and language, even if they have different abode or occupation. These causes are mainly two: Independence which raises a man above bondage, and a frugal and industrious domestic life. A solid, religious education which makes a man well-versed in the Bible and other holy books excluding other books. The admirable qualities in the language and sentiments of Wordsworth’s characters result from
these two causes. Even if they lived in the city away from Nature they would have similar sentiments and language. In the opinion of Coleridge, a man will not be benefited from a life in rural solitudes unless he has natural sensibility and suitable education. In the absence of these advantages, the mind hardens and a man grows, ‘selfish, sensual, gross and hard hearted’.
As regards the second statement of Wordsworth, Coleridge objects to the view that the best part of language is derived from the objects with which the rustic hourly communicates. communicates. First, communication communication with an object implies reflection on it and the richness of vocabulary arises from such reflection. Now the rural conditions of life do not require any reflection, hence the
vocabulary of the rustics is poor. They can express only the barest facts of nature and not the ideas and thoughts which results from their reflection. Secondly, the best part of a man’s
language does not result merely from communication communication with nature, but from education, from the mind of noble thoughts and ideals. Whatever rustics use, are derived not from nature, but from The Bible and from the sermons of noble and inspired preachers.
To Wordsworth’s argument about having no essential difference between the language of
poetry and prose, Coleridge replies that there is and there ought to be, an essential difference between both the languages and gives numerous reasons to support his view. First, language is both a matter and the arrangement of words. Words both in prose and poetry may be the same but their arrangement is different. This difference arises from the fact that the poetry uses metre and metre requires a different arrangement of words. Metre is not a mere superficial decoration, but an essential organic part of a poem. Even the metaphors and similes used by a poet are different in quality and frequency from prose. Hence there is bound to be an ‘essential’ difference between the arrangement of words of poetry and prose. There is this
difference even in those poems of Wordsworth’s which are considered most Wordsworthian. Further, it cannot be confirmed that the language of prose and poetry are identical and so convertible. There may be certain lines or even passages which can be used both in prose and poetry, but not all. There are passages which will suit the one and not the other. Thus does Coleridge refute Wordsworth’s views on the themes and language of poetry.
Coleridge further says that the language praised so much by Wordsworth varies from locality to locality owing to various influences. He then attacks Wordsworth's conception that words would come out of these simple rustics in their moments of natural passion spontaneously. Actually the expression depends on the general truths, conceptions and images and words already stored in mind. Giving illustrations from Wordsworth's own poems, he disproves Wordsworth's assertion that he was using the language of the rustics. He goes to challenge the last important assertion of Wordsworth, "there neither is nor c an be any essential difference between the language of prose and metrical composition". He argues that prose itself differs and ought to differ from the language of conversation just like reading ought to differ fr om talking. There exist a still greater difference between the order of o f words used in a poetic composition and that used in prose, unless Wordsworth had only meant words, and not the style of using them. Coleridge's demolition of Wordsworth's theory of poetic diction remains even now as one of the finest examples of literary polemics.
Of these, Coleridge refutes the following parts: “a selection or the real language of men”; “the language of the men in low and rustic life”: and, “Between the
language of prose and that of metrical composition there neither is, nor can be, any essential difference”.
Wordsworth was a complete innovator who saw things in a new way. Those who approach his poetry for the first time notice two peculiarities – peculiarities – its its austerity and its appearance of triviality. It is so in the case of those who fail to see the quality of really human sympathy. Besides, Wordsworth himself is responsible for inviting this sort of response, as he had no relish for the present. Shelley said about him that “he was hardly a man, but a wandering spirit with spirit with strange adventures and no end to them.” The triviality of manner is the manner through which he could convey the profoundest truths. truths. While reading reading Wordsworth’s Wordsworth’s poems, poems, it is impossible impossible not to be struck by two things: Wordsworth writes the language of these men is adopted because they hourly communicate with the best objects from which the best part of language is originally derived. Being less under social vanity, they convey their feelings and ideas in simple and outright expressions because of their rank in society and the equality and narrow circle of their intercourse. Essentially, Further more, poetry is the pursuit of truth — of of man's knowledge of himself and the world around him. Finally, poetry is a great force for good. In Chapter XIV,Coleridge says that the power of poetry to be two fold: That is, it can arouse reader sympathy by “faithful adherence to the truth of nature” and by “ giving the interest of novelty by the modifying colors of imaginatio.Wordsworth imaginatio.Wordsworth followed the first task by rendering the familiar as marvelous and beautiful, while Coleridge accept the second task of making the unfamiliar credible. Coleridge’s poems “should be directed to persons and characters supernatu supernatural ral or at least romantic” but would be presented with such such “semblance of truth sufficient to procure for these shadows of imagination that willing suspension of disbelief for the moment, which
constitutes poetic faith” (258).(2) Wordsworth would take an opposing approach;his “subjects were to be chosen from ordinary life,” but he would “Give them “the charm of novelty” so that they would “excite a feeling analogous to the supernatural” (258).Tarvin (258).Tarvin 22. In this most memorable of all critical phrases—“to phrases—“to produce . . . the willing suspension willing suspension of disbelief [in the reader] reader] for the moment which constitutes poetic faith”— Coleridge moves into the AFFECTIVE domain. In essence, he contends that a reader picks up every literary work knowing it is fiction(that is, disbelieving that it is reality),but r eality),but the reader willingly suspends this disbelief while reading in order to gain the pleasure which the literary work promises. This suspension of disbelief is the “poetic faith” which every reader must accord an author, until the author through the work violates this faith.3. Coleridge then gives his definition of a poem :(1) This definition first uses the AFFECTIVE THEORY: A poem seeks to produce “immediate” “immediate” “pleasure” “pleasure” in the reader, reader, not to teach teach a “truth” (261). This assertion runs counter to all of the critics we have read since Horace, including Wordsworth.(2) The second part of the definition uses theOBJECTIVE THEORY: A poem has “organic unity,” a conception,the conception,the editors states, which“harken[s] back to Aristotle” (257). Organic unity means that all of the parts of a poemmust fit together as the parts of an organism fit t ogether, where, if you remove one part,the organism dies.4. “A poem is that species of composition, whichis opposed to works of scienceby proposing for its immediate object pleasure, not truth” [AFFECTIVE] (261).Such (261).Such a “legitimate poem . . . must be one, the par ts of which mutuallysupport and explain each other; all in their propor tion harmonizing with, andsupporting the purpose and known influences of metr ical arrangement” [OBJECTIVE](261).5. [OBJECTIVE](261).5. To Coleridge, the es sence of poetry is not fou nd in the Objective or Affectiveapproaches. Affectiveapproaches. Rather it is found in what goes on inthe mind of the poet— poet —theEXPRESSIVE theEXPRESSIVE approach.Thus, Coleridge states, “What is poetry? is so ne arly the same questionwith, what is a poet? that the answer to the one is involved in the solution to the other”(262).To Coleridge the true poet is characterized by “p oetic genius” (262), whathe later calls “poetic IMAGINATION” (262). Colerid ge then describes what goes on inthe poet’s mind when a poem is be ing created.Imagination, created.Imagination, he says, “sustains and modifies the
images, thoughts, andemotions of the poet’s own mind” (262).The “poet, described in ideal perfection, brings the whole soul of man intoactivity. . . . He diffuses a tone and spirit of u nity, that blends, and (as it were) fuses ,each into each, by that synthetic and magical power , to which we have exclusivelyappropriated exclusivelyappropriated the name of imagination” (262).“Imagination (262).“Imagination . . . reveals itself in the balanceor reconciliation of oppositeor discordant qualities: of sameness, with differen ce; of the general, with the concrete;the c oncrete;the idea, with the image; the individual, with therepresentative; the sense of noveltyand of freshness, with old and familiar objects . . . and while it i t blends and harmonizesthe natural and the artificial, still subordinatesart subordinatesart to nature . . .” (262).Tarvin 3Imagination is “the SOUL that is everywhere, andin each; and forms allinto one graceful and intelligent whole” (263)
