So many communications have been received on the subject of
Miss Sitwell's poem and our Literary Editor's commentary that we have been forced, in this instance, to forgo our usual custom of publishing correspondence at length. The following selection from letters gives as fair a representation of readers' opinions as is consistent with the method of quotation :—
"My own attitude towards poetry is probably that of very many others. I read a poem. In it, perhaps, I tome across a passage that is stimulating. It stirs me ; it sets me thinking ; it clings to the memory. For example, in ' Terminology ' Spectator, December 30th, 1922) occurs the striking pro- nouncement
Speech is most precious when the words we use Leap to an end the speaker did not choose.'
To me, therefore, ` Terminology ' is a fine poem. The pro- phetic poems of William Blake arc -absolutely valueless to anyone who does not approach them in this spirit. They are crowded with stimulating passages, therefore they are price- less, although as a whole they are unintelligible ; and I could prove, if I had space, that in places Blake himself had no idea what he was talking about. Yet in his prophetic books we are face to face with great poetry."—TuomAs WRIGHT.
"An indefinable moral quality, true feeling, clear per- ception, accurate application of ideas to life is surely the hall- mark of a poet. Art has fallen on evil days. Ugliness and disease proclaim their right to be made immortal. Is not the poet's function to create what is beautiful and noble, exquisite, elevated and serene ? Did not Lord Justice Bowen maintain that the end of poetry is not truth so much as the truthful presentation of beauty ; and that authors are not bound to surprise truth in all her hiding-places ; for it is not the absence of costume but the presence of innocence which makes the Garden of Eden. Sir, I am not angry ; I am only grieved. For it is not with these lines, but with your heading ' Poetry ' that my quarrel lies."—ARTHUR R. DOLPIIIN.
"Do not the critics seem to forget that it is Professor Goose-cap speaking and not Miss Sitwell ? True, lambs do not chew their cuds, but is it not just the sort of remark that would be made by a dry-as-dust old eccentric, so wrapped up in his own profession that he is almost daft as regards practical matters ? Again, this same doddering old gentleman, impelled by the sharp spring air to a flickering sentimentality, might well babble incoherent phrases such as the much quoted " buds" and" cuds," "husk " and" musk', lines, out of the sheer desire for nonsensical gaiety, expressed in his queer, mad way. Miss Sitwell is no more to be criticized for the professor's statements than is Shakespeare for what he puts into the mouth of Ophelia."—MAay E. JOIINSON.
Previous page
