|
No one expects a man to make a chair without first learning how, but
there is a popular impression that the poet is born, not made, and that
his verses burst from his overflowing heart of themselves. As a matter
of fact, the poet must learn his trade in the same manner, and with the
same painstaking care, as the cabinet-maker. His heart may overflow with
high thoughts and sparkling fancies, but if he cannot convey them to his
reader by means of written word he has no claim to be considered a poet.
A workman may be pardoned, therefore, for spending a few moments to
explain and describe the technique of his trade. A work of beauty which
cannot stand an intimate examination is a poor and jerry-built thing.
In the first place, I wish to state my firm belief that poetry should
not try to teach, that it should exist simply because it is a created
beauty, even if sometimes the beauty of a gothic grotesque. We do not
ask the trees to teach us moral lessons, and only the Salvation Army
feels it necessary to pin texts upon them. We know that these texts are
ridiculous, but many of us do not yet see that to write an obvious moral
all over a work of art, picture, statue, or poem, is not only
ridiculous, but timid and vulgar. We distrust a beauty we only half
understand, and rush in with our impertinent suggestions. How far are we
from "admitting the Universe"! The Universe, which flings down
its continents and seas, and leaves them without comment. Art is as much
a function of the Universe as an Equinoctial gale, or the Law of
Gravitation; and we insist upon considering it merely a little
scroll-work, or no great importance unless it be studded with nails from
which pretty and uplifting sentiments may be hung!
|
|