A YEAR with YVOR WINTERS

September


Selection and Comments by Ben Kilpela

A YEAR with YVOR WINTERS Introduction

YVOR WINTERS Home Page

Winters quotations used by permission of Swallow Press/Ohio University Press, copyright 1947, 1957, 1967, 1972, 2000

Commentary Copyright Bennett Wade Kilpela, 2002

KP = a passage reflecting a key point in Winters's thought


9/1 - On Milton and Experimentation

from the essay "POETIC CONVENTION" in "PRIMITIVISM AND DECADENCE" (1937) republished in "IN DEFENSE OF REASON"

II. EXPERIMENTAL POETRY endeavors to widen the radical experience, or to alter it, or to get away from it, by establishing abnormal conventions. In one sense or another Spenser, Donne, Milton, Hopkins, Laforgue, and Rimbaud are experimental poets of a very marked kind. The most striking example in English of a convention of heightened intensity (that is, of what the unsympathetic might call poetic strain) is to be found in "Paradise Lost". When the poem does not achieve grandeur, it is grandiloquent; yet the quality of the grandiloquence could have been achieved only by a master of the highest order, and without it the poem could hardly have been accomplished. As an act of invention, of daring experiment, the creation of Miltonic blank verse, both meter and rhetoric, is not equaled in English poetry; in fact one is tempted to wonder if it is equaled in any other. The perils amid which Milton ventured and which he avoided with perfect equanimity are best estimated by a consideration of his disciples. Yet in spite of his mastery, the emphatic and violent rhetoric which he created limits his range, as compared to the range of Shakespeare, a man of comparable genius but working in a series of conventions which are relatively traditional. The same relationship holds between the sonnets of the two men, and is the more readily discernible, perhaps, because of the smaller form. Milton is the more complex rhetoritician, but the simpler moralist and a man of far less subtle perception. Milton is the nobler, but Milton's nobility is in part, and as compared to Shakespeare, the over-emphasis of imperception.

** COMMENT: Did you get a little eager to hear just who Winters thought was the wildest experimenter in English poetry? And how much did it surprise you to read that he named Milton as that poet? Milton is not commonly regarded any longer as an experimenter of any kind. I never heard or read him referred to as such in all my days in college while I was hard at the study of English Renaissance literature, or in any of the books of criticism I read in the field. Winters generally stuck to this opinion of Milton's writing to the end of his days, but his admiration for Milton's experiments certainly dimmed in his later career. Once you understand what Winters means by Milton's being an experimenter, it makes good sense and confirms for you once again how deeply Winters understood literary structure. The suggestion that a comparison between Milton's and Shakespeare's sonnets is apt, and you should make that comparison to understand Winters and the two poets more fully.


9/2 - On Prose

from the essay "PROBLEMS FOR THE MODERN CRITIC OF LITERATURE" (1956) from "THE FUNCTION OF CRITICISM"

Verse is metric or measured language. The measure controls the rhythm, and provides precision of rhythm. The resulting rhythm is more expressive of emotion than is the relatively loose rhythm of prose. That is, verse can express a stronger emotion than prose, and, within the limits proper to it, can express emotion more precisely than prose, even if the emotion is not strong. But it has a different range of emotion than that of prose: the total range of verse is higher, although the two ranges overlap perhaps half of the time. Thus there are subjects which verse can treat with greater power than prose; there are many subjects which verse can treat with greater precision than prose; but there are many subjects which prose can treat with propriety and which verse cannot treat without a somewhat embarrassing exaggeration. The problem with any particular work in hand is to decide which of the two mediums will be more effective the greater part of the time and in general: the decision may be far from an easy one, but one should never forget that the power of truly great prose is far from contemptible -- the fact is, that truly great prose is great, although we have not seen much prose of this kind in the past one hundred years.

** COMMENT: Winters never in his career went on to create the Winters Canon of the great prose works that this passage suggests he considered, at least, possible. We can derive his prose Canon, tentatively, from comments sprinkled throughout his essays, but there can be no firm confidence of his judgments in this matter. It is clear, notwithstanding, that Winters granted prose literature a nearly equal status to poetry among the literary genres, though he did consider poetry the most effective way to present a rational understanding of the most important human experiences and also conveys the proper emotions attendant on that rational understanding. Also clearly, Winters had little regard for much of the prose of fiction written in the last half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th century, as he here says. Though he praised Henry James highly at times, there was no one else he thought worthy of mention for excellence (it is not easy to guess how well read Winters was in fiction from his essays and letters). I believe that in the area of prose literature Wintersians have an excellent opportunity to build on Winters's theories where he left off, create a Winters Canon in fiction, and more fully define excellence in prose in accord with Winters's theories.


9/3 - On Modern Famous Poets

from the essay "THE SENTIMENTAL-ROMANTIC DECADENCE OF THE 18TH AND 19TH CENTURIES" (1967) in "FORMS OF DISCOVERY"

Yeats, Pound, Eliot, Stevens, Frost, Miss Moore, Mina Loy, Williams, Hart Crane, Allen Tate were all dominated by the doctrines [of association and Romanticism] which destroyed the poets whom I have been discussing [Wordsworth, Shelley, Keats, etc.]. And in fact these doctrines destroyed or severely damaged the poets whom I have just named: of this list, Stevens alone wrote a few great poems; for the rest, these are the great eccentrics of our time, but eccentric for eccentric I would rather read the Pound of the early "Cantos" than the Spenser of "The Fairie Queene". I have written at length about most of these poets and stated that their faults are serious, and I am not now recanting; but these poets are all better than any of the "great" poets to whom I have objected in this essay.

** COMMENT: It is little wonder that Winters's last book "Forms of Discovery" has been rebuked for being much harsher than his heretical and unquestionably abrasive earlier writings. In this passage, he reserves only for Stevens the judgment of greatness -- even though Williams has a number of poems that made the Winters Canon (a strange choice, I contend); though Tate was once regarded by Winters as having written near-great poems; and though the now obscure Mina Loy has two poems that made the Canon. But Winters is willing to grant them a touch of faint praise by saying that he'd rather read Pound than Spenser, which, to my eyes, is a very curious choice considering all the time he spent railing against the destruction wrought by Pound's associationist doctrines and methods on modern verse. There is a definite note of sadness in this passage, for Winters believed that writers in the modern period have failed to make of the most of their talents because the dominant Romantic culture lacked the intellectual resources to let them take good advantage of those talents. This judgment, my readers, is why Winters took criticism and intellectual debate so seriously. He believed that intellectual errors and critical ignorance caused the waste of far too much genius. He hoped, I believe, to keep it from happening in the future. His hopes have so far been completely dashed.


9/4 - On Judgement in Fiction

from the essay "MAULE'S WELL OR HENRY JAMES AND THE RELATION OF MANNERS TO MORALS" in "MAULE'S CURSE (1938) "IN DEFENSE OF REASON"

The result of this uncertainty [that is brought about in reading James's novel "The Spoils of Poynton"] is that we do not have a tragic moral victory, in which the protagonist judges, makes a sacrifice, and saves her soul; nor do we have a tragic defeat, in which she makes an unjustified choice and is judged by the author -- that is, suffers the consequences. We have rather an intense situation, developed with the utmost care, so far as the succeeding facts and states of mind are concerned, but remaining at nearly all times and certainly at the end uncertain as to significance. Fleda's attitude is never resolved; nor is ours; but the experience has been intense, and as we have not understood it, we cannot but feel it to be essentially neurotic and somewhat beyond the margin of the intelligible.

** COMMENT: Winters here seems to be lending his support to the ancient Aristotelian notion that the outcome of the plot is the means by which the author makes his judgment on the action of the plot. He is never perfectly clear in his writings that he approves of this theory, but he does hint at his approval a number of times in his essays. It is a classical attitude toward fiction and drama, one that has fallen far from favor in our age, this old idea of poetic justice. Following James and others, the fiction plots of our best writers are routinely left unresolved, as James left his concerning Fleda Vetch. Nowadays, of course, it is bad form and manners for an author to make a judgment of his material by almost any means or to try to attach any clear significance whatsoever on his story, a general position clearly antithetical to Winters insistence on the moral judgment found in the finest literary artworks. It is high time we followed Winters's advice in this matter and started writing fiction that resolves the author's attitude toward his action and his characters and gives his readers the means to resolve their judgments toward the author's judgment, which is the first and primary business of criticism.


9/5 - On the Single Electric Shock

from a letter to ALLEN TATE (1927) in "SELECTED LETTERS"

My belief is that it is possible to touch certain obvious physical facts of existence in such a way as to invoke -- or evoke -- or expose -- as by one single electric shock an entire existence or phase of existence. Emily Dickinson does this for me in such a poem as "The last night that she lived," or Hardy in "The Darkling Thrush", Williams in the first poem in "Spring and All", or, in [the book] "Sour Grapes" [the poem] "To Waken an Old Lady". This is what I am endeavoring to do. It is more exciting to me than whole libraries of Pounds, Eliots, or even Rimbauds. Perhaps I am all wrong. If there is any perfection in [my] poems it is, I fear, the product of labor rather than dexterity. It is only recently -- in the stuff I sent [Paul] Rosenfeld ["American Caravan"] -- that I have felt myself to move neatly and freely. Th rest is an infinitely slow and painful accretion -- I cannot begin to tell you how painful -- sheer agony.

** COMMENT: This letter was written during the life-changing transition in Yvor Winters's career, when he was discarding imagist techniques and adopting traditional literary concepts and techniques. At the time, he was still writing imagist poems in free verse, and these poems have almost exactly the quality that he speaks of: the invoking of existence. Only "The Darkling Thrush" among those poems mentioned sank very far in Winters's estimation during his mature career, and that one poem he considered, though not great, very fine. To the end of his days, Winters, in a different way, esteemed and lauded poetry that fanned this shock of insight into flame. Though we have seen that he later defended Reason and traditional structures in literature, he never wandered far from his belief that the finest writing exposes existence as Williams's poems do. It is also most important to note that this exposing was a matter of slow and difficult work, which was how Winters approached all writing, traditional or otherwise. He did not produce much poetry, or criticism, and he was suspicious of those who wrote a lot.


9/6 - On Emily Dickinson and Post-Symbolism

from the essay "THE POST-SYMBOLIST METHODS" (1967) in "FORMS OF DISCOVERY"

The point which I wish to make is this: in the best lines [of Emily Dickinson's poetry] sense-perception and concept are simultaneous; there is neither ornament nor explanation, and neither is needed. This is the new kind of imagery which I am trying to demonstrate in this chapter. In the progress from stanza to stanza there is no trace of associationism, controlled or other, and this is true of most of [Dickinson's] poems. We usually have... a straight narrative order or a simple expository order. The poem ["Twas warm at first"] is crude, but at its best moments very great; in comparison, the poems which I treated in my third chapter are trivial (poems by Wordsworth, Shelley, Keats, etc.], even the best of them. Miss Dickinson often writes badly, but she sometimes writes perfectly.... Most of the poets whom I treated in my third chapter never suspected the nature of good writing.

** COMMENT: Emily Dickinson is a curious case in the career of Yvor Winters, as I have already had occasion to discuss. Winters believed that she, almost miraculously, independent of any influences, developed a "post-symbolist" style in her poetry, this Wintersian uniting of sense and thought, as here mentioned. To restate the matter briefly, Post-Symbolism is the describing of scenes or actions in such a way that a rational argument is being made simultaneously; it is a method similar to allegory or parable in many ways (use ctrl-f to search on the key word "post-symbolism" to find more about the style in this Year with Winters). It is curious that Dickinson has remained popular and even adored throughout the modern period, for her methods, as Winters makes abundantly clear in his writings on her work, are not in any way associated with modern poetic experiments and movements -- nor does anyone write or even try to write like her any longer.


9/7 - On Passion

the complete Winters poem "QUOD TEGIT OMNIA"

Earth darkens and is beaded

with a sweat of bushes and

the bear comes forth;

the mind, stored with

magnificence, proceeds into

the mysterv of time, now

certain of its choice of

passion, but uncertain of the

passion's end.

 

When

Plato temporizes on the nature

of the plumage of the Soul, the

wind hums in the feathers as

across a cord impeccable in

tautness but of no mind:

 

Time,

the sine-pondere, most

imperturbable of elements,

assumes its own proportions

silently, of its own properties -- 

an excellence at which one

sighs.

 

Adventurer in

living fact, the poet

mounts into the spring,

upon his tongue the taste of

air becoming body: is

embedded in this crystalline

precipitate of time.

** COMMENT: This is a transitional poem in Winters's career. It was written at the time Winters was beginning to cross over from free-verse experimental techniques and imagism to traditional structures and rational literary procedures. I will not offer an interpretation of the work, which co-editor Ken Fields chose for inclusion in the special Winters Canon collected at the end of Winters's life in "Quest for Reality". It has never moved me deeply, and I do not consider it great, though perhaps I lack the skill and knowledge to understand it sufficiently. You can see the character of Winters's late free-verse technique in this poem. It is a dense, charged, abstract medium that is intended to bear massive amounts of rational meaning on highly serious subjects: time, passion, experience, emotion. These are subjects that do not particularly interest me, at least in the highly abstract and general sense they are studied in this piece. I remain mostly unmoved by this poem, which has been anthologized on occasion.


9/8 - On the Fragmentariness of Modern Fiction

from the essay "JOHN CROWE RANSOM OR THUNDER WITHOUT GOD" in "THE ANATOMY OF NONSENSE" (1943) republished in "IN DEFENSE OF REASON"

[Quoting John Crowe Ransom:] "Long ago Mr. Richards laid down a canon of relevance: Anything is relevant to the total meaning which belongs to the psychological situation. The canon might as well read: Anything is relevant.... Yet Joyce's book ["Finnegan's Wake"] is on the side of the angels, and I do not like to abuse it. For the poets it is sure to become an inexhaustible source of courage. It shows at most places how to escape from conceptual prose, and into the contingent world; a difficulty that most poets seem unable to surmount."

Ransom apparently has faint doubts about the propriety of the method which he is describing; but they are faint indeed; he would prefer the risk of having no conceptual content to the risk of having too much: and quite rightly from his own point of view. If the method here described, however, represents the infinity toward which true poetry should draw as near as possible without ever quite reaching it, and if his concept of poetry rests, as Ransom frequently assures us, upon a study of traditional English poetry and a deep sympathy for it, one cannot but feel that something has gone wrong in the study.... And one is inclined to wonder at this point what has become of the unique object. The only object left to us now is the universe, and the universe is so chaotic that it can scarcely be called unique with any real sense of security; and the work of art, which in spite of Ransom's having expressed dislike for the theory, is a perfect illustration of the doctrine of expressive form, is merely a shapeless conglomeration of supposedly unique fragments. This, however, is what one would expect of a work of art of which the essential characteristic is described as a tissue of irrelevancies, and of which the function is pure imitation in a nominalistic universe.

** COMMENT: If you are going to stick with and profit from the study of the ideas of Yvor Winters, you are going to have to accept this basic judgment that the fad of dream-like experimental writing in modern literature is mostly a pernicious mistake. Though Ransom himself did not study such experimental writings or lend much approval to them in his criticism, he could not bring himself to reject them as poorly written or morally worthless. Winters had no such qualms, and he attacks Ransom's weak, half-hearted defense of the late Joyce and the influence his work had on the direction literature has taken. Nonetheless, most fiction has continued to be written during the last 100 years much as it was at the end of the golden past that Winters approved of: with a strong emphasis on chronological narrative, though nowadays, under the influence of Joyce and others, writers refuse to offer a final authorial judgment of their stories and provide a deeply interior outlook on their characters. What I am saying is that Joyce was not alone in inaugurating a wide revolution with his experiments and neither have those who have defended the artistic value of his work. Modern fiction does not seem, to me, to be written in meaningless fragments. More often, what is weak about modern fiction is that it is written without the intent to judge rationally the stories and characters that it puts before us (see 9/4 for further insight into this matter).


9/9 - On Incidentals

from the essay "THE POETRY OF GERARD MANLY HOPKINS" (1948) from "THE FUNCTION OF CRITICISM"

"Duns Scotus's Oxford" offers an octet devoted to a description of the Oxford landscape, with especial reference to the mingling of city and country and regrettable domination of the city. The sestet then provides the personal reference:

Yet ah! This air I gather and I release

He lived on; these weeds and waters, these walls are what

He haunted who of all men most sways my spirit to peace;

Of reality the rarest veined unraveler; a not

Rivalled insight, be rival Italy or Greece;

Who fired France for Mary without spot.

This is the climax and the point of the poem, yet it is obviously very weak. We are told that Scotus is the one "who of all men most sways my spirit to peace"; yet we are not told how he does it nor why. We are told that he is "of reality the rarest veined unravaler; a not/ Rivalled insight", yet these are empty epithets, and the subject of the poem, properly speaking, is merely mentioned sentimentally and is not defined or developed. It is as if one should say: "This is a magnificent landscape," or "this is a great man," or "this is the most beautiful woman I have ever seen." What we have is stereotyped assertion, which we are supposed to take seriously, but which we cannot take seriously for lack of definition and perceptual evidence.... Hopkins all but ignores the subject and is at his best in dealing fragmentarily with the incidentals: the "towery city and branchy between towers", and the like. The incidentals are sometimes, as in this line, charming, but they are minor, and they are not incorporated into a well-organized poem, even a minor one, but are parts, rather, of a disorganized poem which pretends to be more than it is.

** COMMENT: This particular poem is a popular one among our leading critics. It is anthologized often and has drawn a good deal of comment from those drawn to Hopkins. Winters chews it up and spits it out, and what seemed a graceful little poem that seemed to suggest some depth of thought beneath the elegant language suddenly appears exposed as the weak, intellectually insipid piece that it is. How quickly Winters accomplishes his purpose, with this and so many other poems that he analyzes and judges in his writings. His discussion of incidentals here might be a good description of most of modern poetry, which revels in the production of endless incidentals hung on thin rational themes and informal structures. Winters denounces this kind of empty writing again and again.


9/10 - On Two Great Literary Periods

from the essay "CONCLUSIONS" (1967) in "FORMS OF DISCOVERY"

Before my retirement I taught both periods [Renaissance and modern poetry] for many years, and, as a result of almost endless reconsideration of the materials in both periods, I have come to the conclusion that the second is certainly the greater. The subjects of the Renaissance are in the main sound and important, but they are few and formulary; the methods employed are sound but simple and formulary; in spite of one's admiration for the best work, one comes to feel a deadly monotony in the period. The moderns to whom I have referred in this volume as eccentrics have their own monotony; each of these concentrates on a personal mannerism, on what the modern politician would call a particular public image; their ideas are few, unoriginal, and unsound; but they are experimenting with their styles and in different directions and they have their interesting moments. And of course a few of them escaped from their mannerisms on a few occasions into fine achievements.

** COMMENT: That Winters considered modern poetry greater than Renaissance poetry comes as a surprise to those few who even know of his views. He has been accused numerous times of wishing that modernity would simply wither to dust and we could all get back to writing Shakespearean sonnets. But as his career progressed, it seems that he became more and more sure that the modern period produced the greater poetry, even though it also produced a mountain of junk. Of course, we must not lose sight of what poetry Winters considered great in modernity. Most of it, as we have seen from many other passages, was little known and undervalued by almost all prominent critics. Lastly, note that in regard to the major modern poets, whom Winters condemned repeatedly in his essays, he is willing to grant that they have "interesting moments". That does not constitute an endorsement of such "eccentrics" as Eliot, Pound, and Frost, but he did believe that they could "write", as he put it himself, meaning, I surmise, that they had facility with words and images.


9/11 - On Imagic Values in Poetry

from the review "HOLIDAY AND DAY OF WRATH, ON 'OBSERVATIONS' BY MARIANNE MOORE" (1925) from "UNCOLLECTED ESSAYS AND REVIEWS"

If we confine ourselves to those poets who are masters of the minutiae of style, rhythm, and outline, that poem will be most intense which most fully exhausts the possibilities of the medium -- that is, which contains the greatest possible imagic and symbolic intensity. It is possible, of course, that a poem of very great symbolic intensity may outweigh a poem of slighter symbolic intensity and slight imagic intensity, but it is certain that the first poem would be greater with imagic values. It is worth observing in this connection that the metaphysical can attain imagic existence and hence the greatest possible intensity only when expressed in terms of the physical, and this transference of the metaphysical into physical terms is one of Miss Moore's most noteworthy achievements.

** COMMENT: This passage comes from an article that appeared some years before Yvor Winters began using traditional poetic forms and structures and while he was still committed to free-verse imagism. Winters never left some of the central concepts of imagism entirely behind and remained committed throughout his career to the imagic and symbolic intensity of poetry. Some time after this was written, he came to believe that the greatest literature presents rational content in concentrated form and offers the use of the devices of rhetoric and language to convey the emotion proper to a rational comprehension of a human experience. Even later in his career, he began to systematize his early ideas about post-symbolist poetry, which is a style that uses natural description and images to express rational thought, an idea which is expressed in early form in those last comments on Marianne Moore's poetry. In general, though it might seem so on the surface, there was not as great a disconnection between Winters's two phases of literary development as has been supposed. Note also how Winters is thinking about ways to evaluate intensity, critical tools that he employs throughout his career, as we have seen clearly during this Year with Winters. Nonetheless, Winters entirely rejected the ideas expressed in that final sentence and came to expound his belief that abstract language is as artistic as concrete language.


9/12 - On Melville's Portrait of Evil

from the essay "HERMAN MELVILLE OR THE PROBLEMS OF MORAL NAVIGATION" in "MAULE'S CURSE" (1938) republished in "IN DEFENSE OF REASON"

The subject matter of the first two of the later masterpieces may be briefly defined: In "Benito Cereno", the Spanish sea-captain of that name takes insufficient precautions in the transporting of a ship-load of negro slaves belonging to a friend; the slaves mutiny, kill most of the crew, and enslave the remainder, including the captain. When Cereno is finally rescued by Captain Delano, he is broken in spirit, and says that he can return home but to die. When Captain Delano inquires what has cast such a shadow upon him, he answers, "The negro." His reply in Spanish would have signified not only the negro, or the black man, but by metaphorical extension the basic evil in human nature. The morality of slavery is not an issue in this story; the issue is this, that through a series of acts of performance and of negligence, the fundamental evil of a group of men, evil which normally should have been kept in abeyance, was freed to act. The story is a portrait of evil in action, as shown in the negroes, and of the effect of the action, as shown in Cereno. It is appalling in its completeness, in its subtle horror, and in its silky quiet.

** COMMENT: Winters considered Melville's novella one of the finest works of prose literature of all time. His interpretation of the work is incisive and compelling, and this passage is typical of his approach to analyzing specific works of both poetry and prose throughout his essays. Only for the very finest or highly illustrative works does he take the time to do more than this -- a quick overview of his interpretation followed by a summary evaluation. My view is that the novella is probably a touch over-rated. There are much better works, even though it is unquestionably a fine and profound literary artwork. Whether it is one of our greatest prose works remains an open question in my mind for a variety of reasons.


9/13 - On Robinson's Intellect

from the chapter "THE NEW ENGLAND BACKGROUND" from "EDWIN ARLINGTON ROBINSON" (1946)

Emerson gave to American romanticism, in spite of its irresponsible doctrine, a religious tone which it has not yet lost and which has often proved disastrous. He gave, also, a kind of moral and religious sanction to mere eccentricity, to self-satisfaction and to critical laziness. The type of mind which follows its first guesses in matters of opinion and perception, with irritated contempt for opposing arguments, and which finds any kind of careful thinking beneath the dignity of a gentleman, is his legitimate heir and can find explicit justification in his writings. This kind of mind is common in modern New England (and no doubt elsewhere); and commingled with the New England moral sense and moral curiosity, there is a good deal of this intellectual laziness in Robinson; and as a result of this laziness, there is a certain admixture of Emersonian doctrine, which runs counter to the principles governing most of his work and the best of it. This tendency does not result in stylistic eccentricity in Robinson, as it does, for example, in much of Emerson and Frost; but it results in loose thinking and in a good many failures of structure. It is the moralistic tradition which predominates in Robinson, however; in the choice of matter, this shows itself in the moral curiosity with regard to the particular case; in the realm of style, in honesty of statement and clarity of form; in the conduct of life, in immutable adherence to a purpose.

** COMMENT: This is our first selection from Winters's only book-length study of a single poet. I do not believe that we should draw any conclusion about Winters's view of Robinson from his decision to pay Robinson the honor of being the subject of such a book, for I believe Winters wrote the book simply at the request of an editor for money. He did believe that Robinson was a great poet and had written a number of great poems (several of which made the Winters Canon), but he certainly did not consider Robinson the only poet worthy of a book. I personally consider it a great loss that Winters did not write more such books, but, alas, he considered himself a poet and teacher first, and turned to criticism only to secure his academic post and to help rescue literature from modernist Romanticism. One would hardly know the high regard Winters had for Robinson from this passage, or from most of the book for that matter. Once again, Winters lays Robinson's weaknesses mostly at the feet of Emerson, his continual whipping boy for the damage Romanticism has done, in Winters's opinion, to modern literature. Note how Winters ties life and literature together in his final description of the work of Robinson. That bond is central to his critical theory and practice.


9/14 - On Donne's Struggles

from the "INTRODUCTION" (1967) to "FORMS OF DISCOVERY"

The previous stanzas [of John Donne's poem "A Valediction of My Name, in the Window"], in the course of the poet's intense efforts to hold the lady in his warnings, have identified the poet with his name, the identification culminating in images drawn from the doctrine of the resurrection of the body and from astrology. We are thus prepared to watch the suffering of the "trembling name"; this stanza is the climax of the poem. In the three final stanzas the poem is brought to a quiet but embittered close.

This poem exhibits more fully than any other Donne's desire for a stable love, his fear of betrayal, and a kind of sublimation of his excessive sexuality. He gives us the feeling that he is endeavoring to master his problem through an enormous act of the will operating through an equally enormous act of the intellect. The engraved name, the possession of the lady in his absence, become real, in part, because of the effort made before our eyes to make them real, though we, like the poet, are aware that the effort is toward something transcending human power and cannot wholly succeed. The immensity of the effort, the illusion that it can exert real power, the awareness that it cannot exert enough power or cannot exert power which is quite real, these in combination result in moving poetry.

** COMMENT: What has commonly come to be called "metaphysical" poetry Winters considered, mostly, a manifestation of decay in the literature of the English Renaissance. This brand of poetry, of course, usually forms the core of teaching on this period, and it seems clear that most critics and professors consider it to be the finest poetry written in the period. Winters rejected that implicit judgment (contrary to most critics, he made his judgments concerning the Canon explicit and, most importantly, endeavored to defend them with sound reasoning). But one metaphysical poem did manage to make the special Winters Canon of the greatest poems ever written, and this is the poem under discussion here. It is a difficult poem, and in many ways it is out of step with most of the work Winters chose to include in his Canon. It seems that in this one poem Donne's technique of using extravagant metaphors and images and rhetorical devices fit the theme so well that Winters granted that he had achieved greatness. The important thing to note is how, I believe, Winters's discussion of the poem makes one thirst to read it and know it well. This is one of the great pleasures of reading Winters's criticism. Moreover, Winters believed that all of life was an immense struggle of will and intellect to gain control in one's life, fashion one's moral decisions, and shape one's actions. This is why he pays such close attention to the poem, for it embodies Donne's understanding of a key concept of morality.


9/15 - On the Art of Show Dogs

from a letter to HARRY DUNCAN (1950) in "SELECTED LETTERS"

You seem to resent my Airedales especially. Why, in God's name, should you resent my enjoying the company of five of God's most charming little creatures? Breeding and showing Airedales is a minor art; quite as much so as making fine furniture or making fine books. You may not realize this, but that is doubtless because of your ignorance of animals. I have two dogs on the place who are beautiful to watch in every movement and position and I have two others who are almost as fascinating; and the fifth is not bad. I would rather have these dogs than, say, masterpieces of furniture or silver -- as works of art they are quite as admirable and quite as serious and much more to my taste.

** COMMENT: This letter was occasioned by Winters's mild dispute with a book-maker, and this piece is one of several exchanged with Duncan on the matter of the cost of making a book. It seems that Duncan had taken to chiding Winters for his lifestyle and especially his hobby of showing dogs (though the passage makes clear that calling such a "hobby" would have been an insult to Winters). It is very interesting to see how Winters spoke of his dogs as he spoke of poetry. Just in his literary career, Winters saw ignorance all around him. One might wonder why Winters could not simply appreciate fine writing or great writing in the poets whose method he despised, for one might judge their work to be charming little creations in the same way the dogs are God's charming creations -- which, roughly, could be described as the position of those in favor of an art-for-art's-sake theory of criticism. I have no answer, but it is a matter for further reflection.


9/16 - On the Dangers of Our Philosophies

from the essay "WALLACE STEVENS OR THE HEDONIST'S PROGRESS" from "THE ANATOMY OF NONSENSE" (1943) republished in "IN DEFENSE OF REASON"

There appears to be in the best of [Wallace Stevens's] early poems, as I have said, a traditional seriousness of attitude and a traditional rhetoric cognate with that attitude and precisely expressive of it. This traditional element in the early work enables Stevens' talent to function at its highest power; but it is not only unjustified and unsupported by Stevens' explicit philosophy, it is at odds with that philosophy. And the conflict between the traditional element and the element encouraged by the philosophy results little by little in the destruction of the traditional element and the degradation of the poet's style. It is extremely important that we understand Stevens for more reasons than one; he has written great poems, and we should know them and know why they are great; and we should know what is bad, and why it is bad, so that we may separate the bad from the good and the more surely preserve the good. But beyond this, he gives us, I believe, the most perfect laboratory of hedonism to be found in literature. He is not like those occasional poets of the Renaissance who appear in some measure to be influenced by a pagan philosophy, but who in reality take it up as a literary diversion at the same time that they are beneath the surface immovably Christian. Stevens is released from all the restraints of Christianity, and is encouraged by the modern orthodoxy of Romanticism: his hedonism is so fused with Romanticism as to be merely an elegant variation on that somewhat inelegant System of Thoughtlessness.

** COMMENT: The passage reveals two central propositions of Yvor Winters's critical system. First, he reiterates that the purpose of setting canons is to be able to decipher good works from weak and bad one (I believe, as some have not realized, that Winters knew there was a large gray area in between these two extremes, between the excellent and the worthless) and to preserve the good ones and use them as our models. As we have seen, Winters's entire critical career was dedicated first to this great task of uncovering and preserving the very finest of our heritage. It is a gross misconception of his theory that no poem that failed to make his Winters Canon was worthless. That special Canon and his critical writings are intended to show what is near perfect, more or less, to explain why it is near perfect, to offer those artworks as models, and to encourage readers to pay more attention to the most nearly perfect poems written in English than any other literary artworks. Second, the passage speaks about why Winters took this endeavor so seriously: because the stakes in life are very high. Stevens work (and, in Winters's judgment, perhaps his life) was ruined by the Romantic "System of Thoughtlessness" he adopted -- perhaps naively, perhaps ignorantly, perhaps willfully -- as his understanding of life and art. As a consequence, his considerable talent was, in Winters's view, wasted on almost all his later and very weak poetry. Stevens is a cautionary tale, and Winters had a number of such exempla that he turned to more than once. Hart Crane's career, for example, was another cautionary tale, as we have had numerous occasions to discuss. The choosing of a bad philosophical system, is, therefore, highly dangerous to one's art and life. I agree with Winters for the most part on this matter as it applies to Stevens, though I do have reservations about how badly his philosophy damaged his later work.


9/17 - On Imperfect Understanding

from the essay "PROBLEMS FOR THE MODERN CRITIC OF LITERATURE" (1956) from "THE FUNCTION OF CRITICISM"

A novelist would be able to write about Macbeth and his state of mind [in the famous dagger scene, Act II Scene I], and would thus have an advantage over the dramatist, who must exhibit Macbeth's state of mind in words in some sense appropriate to Macbeth in that state of mind. The novelist could employ the best prose of which he might be capable; the poet cannot employ the best poetry of which he is capable, for such poetry would be out of character -- such poetry has to wait until later, when Macbeth has been educated up to the point at which he can speak it plausibly. Yet this is not a minor and quiet situation [the scene with the dagger], such as a novelist, or perhaps Chaucer, might exhibit in a quiet and unobtrusive style as a necessary step toward reaching more important matters. It is a major crisis in the life of Macbeth, and his feelings and terribly aroused, in spite of the fact that his understanding is imperfect. The situation calls for powerful statement; but the statement must be made by an imperfect intelligence.

** COMMENT: Though Winters's ideas about discerning the best genre of literature, which are laid out in this long essay, have found very few convinced adherents, there is something, to my mind, amazingly insightful about this analysis of one famous speech of one great play. The author of the play had to write at lower than the finest level out of necessity, constrained by the form of the dramatic genre itself. I find this insightful and compelling. After many years of thought on the matter, I am not sure what the next step should be in the development of drama, but I believe someone along the line is going to take that next step, because Winters has revealed -- and he is the only critic ever to do -- a wide gap in our understanding of one of the most fundamental issues of literary art. Note that Winters's point is that the dramatic form FORCES a writer to write without all the resources of his intelligence and knowledge and moral wisdom. Clearly, this is a flaw Winters discovered that must, and perhaps can, be addressed. It is time critics went back to this essay to deal with the problems Winters uncovered.


9/18 - On Modern Poetry and Sensory Detail

from the essay "THE TURN OF THE CENTURY" (1961, 1967) in "FORMS OF DISCOVERY"

Yeats's poem ["Byzantium"] is almost wholly decoration, and the ornaments are from his private myths. The generality of the meaning of the ornament drawn from such myths is essentially of the same kind as the generality of the cliche: it has nothing in common with the precise generalization of abstract terms. Yeats had, in fact, only a vague idea of what he was talking about. He did his talking in terms of sensory details, which everyone believes (in our time) to be essential to poetry. The fact that his sensory details do not embody definite thought (as the sensory details of Stevens and Valery often do) and the fact that his details are often poorly realized at the sensory level do not disturb his admirers, for his language is violent. We are in search of easy emotion, and we find it in Yeats.

** COMMENT: The comments Winters makes here speak to all modern poetry as much as to the specific poem of Yeats's under discussion. The reliance on sensory detail has become an overmastering convention, as strong as any that have controlled literature in past ages. Consider the once inviolable convention that the action of a dramatic tragedy shall take place in one day. Talking in terms of sensory detail has become a convention just as strong as this once was. In Winters's opinion, however, Yeats's sensory details embody very little rational understanding beyond their literal meanings. The poem he is discussing here is a very famous and highly praised artwork of the modern age. It is generally considered one of the finest poems by our finest modern English poet. Winters is right that it is almost pure ornament, but it seems that most critics praise it all the more for exactly this reason. The language is, indeed, violent, by which Winters means wholly out of proportion to the rational ideas being conveyed in the total poem. It is a strong condemnation that the poem is one of easy emotions, for it is clear that "Byzantium" has drawn the attention of many critics who have searched and found great depths to it. I suppose it is for you to decide who is right, the thousands who approve of Yeats's approach, or the one, Winters, who challenged it. If you can perceive and appreciate the weakness of Yeats's poem, then you will go on to profit a great deal from more extensive reading in Winters's essays.


9/19 - On Cleverness

from a letter to DONALD DAVIE (1958) in "SELECTED LETTERS"

Maybe [Philip Larkin in his poem "The Less Deceived"] is ignorant. Maybe he is just trying to be ugly, But he ended up ugly. And the poem should have been beautiful. "Lines on a Young Lady's Photograph Album" is the next best [poem]. It reminds me of some of Ransom. You have some of the same faults, and these faults seem common in your generation of Englishmen. "The Wind at Penistone", for example, is deliberately diffused in much the same way. The subject is more interesting, but you were playing with the subject. Reread Hardy's "In Time of 'The Breaking of Nations'". More is there in 12 short lines. All of you people strike me as afraid not to be clever. It is easy to be clever. I was clever as hell when I was about 25, but I gave it up.

** COMMENT: Of course, to be clever and to find cleverness, clearly, is one of the reasons people write and read. It is not so easy to be clever ENOUGH, as Winters seems to think. We all delight in the beauties of phrasing and rhetoric, and Winters did, too. But he was always focused on the unity of each work of literary art. Sparkling and arresting images, creative metaphors, elegant turns of phrase, these all must serve a rational understanding of human experience and an exact evocation of the emotion that OUGHT to be evoked by that rational understanding. This kind of literature demands much greater effort and care, much higher goals than the mere cleverness that can be found in almost every poem of Larkin and Davie, two British formalists whom Winters did not judge as having written great poems. The comparison is to a Hardy poem (I quote it below) that Winters discussed and mentioned a dozen times in his essays and made the Winters Canon. Nonetheless, I am not certain that the Hardy piece, as greatly as Winters praised it, is in any way measurably better than many a poem by Larkin, as judged by Winters's own standards. The Hardy poem seems a minor affair, all in all. I say this after many years of study on the matter.

Thomas Hardy's "IN TIME OF 'THE BREAKING OF NATIONS'" (not quoted in the letter):

 

Only a man harrowing clods

In a slow silent walk

With an old horse that stumbles and nods

Half asleep as they stalk.

 

Only thin smoke without flame

From these heaps of couch grass

Yet these will onward the same

Though dynasties pass.

 

Yonder a maid and her wight

Come whispering by

Wars annals will cloud into night

Ere their story die.


9/20 - On Diffuse Poetry

from the section "THE HEROIC COUPLET AND ITS RECENT RIVALS" from the essay "POETIC CONVENTION" from "PRIMITIVISM AND DECADENCE" (1937) republished in "IN DEFENSE OF REASON"

Unlike the Webtserians (such as T.S. Eliot), Mr. [Ezra] Pound in his best "Cantos" does not muddy his verse with secondary and uncontrolled didacticism: he is usually dialectic, if at all, by implication only, but implication is inadequate, in the long run, as a didactic instrument. In the best "Cantos", at least, Mr. Pound is successful, whether in fragments or on the whole, but he presents merely a psychological progression or flux, the convention being sometimes that of wandering revery, sometimes that of wandering conversation. The range of such a convention is narrowly limited, not only as regards formulable content, but as regards feeling. The feelings attendant upon revery and amiable conversation tend to great similarity notwithstanding the subject matter, and they simply are not the most vigorous or important feelings of which the human being is capable. The method, when employed in satirical portraiture, lacks the incisiveness of the eighteenth century masters:

So we left him at last in Chiasso

Along with the old woman from Kansas,

Solid Kansas, her daughter had married that Swiss

Who kept the buffet in Chiasso.

Did it shake her? It did not shake her.

She sat there in the waiting room, solid Kansas,

Stiff as a cigar store Indian from the Bowery

Such as one saw in the nineties,

First sod of bleeding Kansas

That had produced the ligneous solidness

If thou wilt go to Chiasso wilt find that indestructible female

As if waiting for the train to Topeka.

The passage is amusing in a way, but is soft and diffuse. Even "The Rosciad" offers more successful portraits.

** COMMENT: You might say that most of modern poetry is as diffuse and soft as this passage from one of Pound's "Cantos". Winters opined that the convention of revery and free-verse imagism were, despite contrary claims from its myriad adherents, a severely limiting convention. This seems painfully obvious to those of us who have awakened from our modern thrall and come to understand modern poetry in terms of Winters's critical theory. Much of the poetry of our age has a tedious sameness, as though the poets were determined to be merely as clever as possible as they work over the same thin and private ideas and the same vague emotions. Our "major" poets have described the chaotic flux of life very well, but they have done little to help us understand or experience life more deeply.


9/21 - On the Poets and Professors

from the "INTRODUCTION" (1967) to "FORMS OF DISCOVERY"

The only important difference between a chimpanzee and a professor of English is that the professor has a greater command of language. The professor may think himself more handsome, but the chimp thinks otherwise, and the chimp is beyond argument the better athlete. The chimp, of course, would not admit the one kind of superiority which belongs to the professor, because he does not know what it is. The only important difference between the professor and a distinguished poet is that the poet has a greater command of language; but few professors will admit this difference, because almost none understand the nature of the difference -- it is for this reason that nearly all are so feeble when they come to the defense of their profession. The scientist knows what he is doing; the professor of literature does not.

** COMMENT: Here is another of Winters's gibes at professors of English, whom he attacked right up to the end of his career. This passage comes from one of his last writings, and still we find Winters irritated that professors cannot see an important point that he had been expounding his entire career: that it is only poet-critics who know enough about the true meaning of literature to decide what is good and great literary art. Winters believed that, like chimps who do not and cannot know of their lack of intelligence compared to human beings, professors are unqualified to pass judgment on the Winters Canon or on the critical theories that led to it. The put-down is a harsh one, and it was never forgiven and will not be easily forgotten. This last book has been often dismissed as Winters at his belligerent worst, and perhaps it is. But the point is well taken, in my view. Nonetheless, poet-critics have dismissed Winters's theory and practice right along with the professors for decades right up to the present. Winters's rejection is almost complete, and he has now settled into an obscurity from which few writers have ever arisen. Though, perhaps, as Melville did, Winters is yet destined to make a recovery. That is my hope and the purpose of this compendium.


9/22 - On Spiritual Control in Poem and Poet

from the essay "THE MORALITY OF POETRY" from "PRIMITIVISM AND DECADENCE" (1937) republished in "IN DEFENSE OF REASON"

The spiritual control in a poem, then, is simply a manifestation of the spiritual control within the poet, and, as I have already indicated, it may have been an important means by which the poet arrived at a realization of spiritual control. This conception must not be confused with the conception of the poem as a safety valve, by which feeling is diverted from action, by which the writer escapes from an attitude by pouring it into his work and leaving it behind him. The conception which I am trying to define is a conception of poetry as a technique of contemplation, of comprehension, a technique which does not eliminate the need of philosophy or of religion, but which, rather, completes and enriches them.

One feels, whether rightly or wrongly, a correlation between the control evinced within a poem and the control within the poet behind it. The laxity of the one ordinarily appears to involve laxity in the other. The rather limp versification of Mr. Eliot and of Mr. MacLeish is inseparable from the spiritual limpness that one feels behind the poems, as the fragmentary, ejaculatory, and overexcited quality of a great many of the poems of Hart Crane is inseparable from the intellectual confusion upon which these particular poems seem to rest.

** COMMENT: A definite connection exists between literature and life: nothing could be further from theories of art-for-art's-sake than these words from early in Winters's career. Writing reflects one's life and soul, as reading influences the life and soul of readers. These are the reasons that Winters takes the study of literature so seriously and why he considers the setting of a Canon so important: if we read the bad, it can influence us in such a way that we can lose control of our spirit, just as the poet has lost control of his spirit in writing badly. It is a demanding theory that exalts the literary arts, and Winters never backed away from its demands throughout his career, neither in his criticism nor in his poetry. Note also Winters's surmise that literature "completes" the work of philosophy and religion (another idea that he defended throughout his career). For literature seeks to convey the emotions that ought to be aroused or, in Winters's terminology, "motivated" by the writer's rational understanding of her subject, which was not the goal of philosophy. I tend to think that this is slightly off the mark. The concentration of poetry is greater than expository writing, true; but there are many writers of philosophy who convey a great deal of emotion through their prose, and their work might convey a much richer understanding of a particular subject than the short poem -- the greatest genre of literature in Winters's view -- can bear. As an example, I think of the writings of William James. Much of his general essays on philosophical subjects are emotion laden, and they seek to be emotional in the sense that they urge his readers to come to an intellectual and emotional understanding of the subjects under discussion. This is another area that Winters's critical theory must be expanded to take in those writers of expository prose who have achieved literary greatness.


9/23 - On Defects in Style

from a letter to T.C. WILSON (1933) in "SELECTED LETTERS"

When you speak of stylistic advances, you perhaps inadvertently indulge in nonsense. There is no such thing as progress in literature after a certain degree of civilization has been reached. Williams is as fine a poet as you will find in English in a few poems and within a certain range; he has worked out a new technique and mastered it; but he is bound to certain limitations of subject matter by that very technique. Pound is a remarkable poet, but not much better than Swinburne, I suspect, and of much the same type. Stevens is occasionally as fine as Williams and covers more ground. Neither one appears to me as great as [T. Sturge] Moore by a very wide margin; and I prefer Bridges to Moore and probably Hardy, though I am not sure. A few years ago I should have placed Hardy above either. The poets you defend against me I have defended for years, and all poets, in so far as they are good, are defensible on the same general grounds. But the defects of these poets are not adequately recognized by the younger writers and the defects are of the utmost seriousness; I do not want to see them passed on.

** COMMENT: The essential work of literary development was done long ago, in Yvor Winters's opinion. Writers can continue to work out the implications of the rational and moral approach to literature and apply it to ever more subjects, perhaps subjects never before considered, but if they wish to write well they must approach their subjects as Winters theorized to achieve excellence and perhaps greatness. This astonishing and seemingly arrogant view, expressed rather early in his career before any of his major writings had been published, runs counter to the wildly experimental bent of the modern era. The common view has been that there are yet countless discoveries to be made in literature, and the way to make them is to keep on experimenting. But Winters viewed most experiments (as he probably would today's continuing experiments) as nothing more than further extensions of the sentimental-Romantic decadence that began to ruin literature with the rise of Romanticism and associationism in the eighteenth century. The defects Romanticism has caused are a serious matter, for the reasons given in the yesterday's selection, 9/22. His summary of the work of W.C. Williams in this passage is expert. But Williams has continued to inspire many thousands more writers and poets than Bridges or Moore or Hardy (who traded places near the top of Winters's pantheon of the greats several times during his career). Once again, we see him struggling to justly assess Pound. He considers Pound a good poet in some ways, though a full comprehension of his work shows how seriously flawed it is. For Winters, our recognition and understanding of the flaws in Pound (or any poet), however serious, enables us to properly enjoy and profit from the considerable merits of Pound's work. These ideas counter the common accusation against Winters that he wished to banish every poem that did not make his special Winters Canon of the greatest poems in English. Nothing, I believe, could be further from the truth, though this censure has been leveled at Winters again and again.


9/24 - On the Logic of Narration

from the section "NARRATIVE" in the essay "THE MORALITY OF POETRY" from "PRIMITIVISM AND DECADENCE" (1937) republished in "IN DEFENSE OF REASON"

Narrative achieves coherence largely through a feeling that the events of a sequence are necessary parts of a causative chain, or plausible inferences with a natural causative chain. In this it is similar to logic. The hero, being what he is and in a given situation, seems to act naturally or unnaturally; if his action seems natural, and is in addition reasonably interesting and, from an ethical point of view, important, the narrative is in the main successful. To this extent, Mr. Kenneth Burke is wrong, I believe, in censuring nineteenth century fiction for its concern with what he calls the psychology of the hero as opposed to the concern with the psychology of the audience: by the former, he means the plausibility of the portrait; by the latter the concern with those rhetorical devices which please and surprise the reader, devices, for example, of the type of which Fielding was a consummate master. Mr. Burke overlooks the facts that rhetoric cannot exist without a subject matter, and that the subject matter of fiction is narration, that, in short, the author's most important instrument for controlling the attitude of the audience is precisely the psychology of the hero.

** COMMENT: Winters refused to give his approval of the great experiments in fiction that came about in the first half of the twentieth century. It is a suggestive idea that he offers here, that narrative is a form of logical structure, which, as we have seen, qualifies narrative as an acceptable literary structure to bear the weight of both rational content and the evocation of proper emotions. Winters never had much to say about later experiments with narrative poetry, some of which were written by students of his former students. He had a good deal to say about novels and narration in his much later essay on the evaluation of genres, "Problems for the Modern Critic of Literature", which appeared in "The Function of Criticism" and from which we have seen many selections. It is probably safe to guess that most of the experiments of our day would not have impressed Winters very deeply, for he was not much interested in clever writing. Still, despite all the experimenting among the high-cult novelists nowadays, a logical, causative chain of events and the psychology of a hero should remain the focus of most popular mid-cult novels. The top writers, those who aspire to write literature, seem uninterested in writing fiction in this manner any longer and find themselves endlessly and almost pointlessly experimenting. Unlike Winters, though, I find some of the experiments in narrative to be meaningful. They point, I believe, to a better future for the novel, when the time comes 'round that these techniques are employed to gain rational understanding and evoke appropriate emotions as in Winters's critical theory.


9/25 - On Emerson's Influence on Frost

from the essay "ROBERT FROST, OR THE POET AS SPIRITUAL DRIFTER" (1956) republished in "THE FUNCTION OF CRITICISM"

Frost has said that Emerson is his favorite American poet, and he himself appears to be something of an Emersonian. Emerson was a Romantic pantheist: he identified God with the universe; he taught that impulse comes directly from God and should be obeyed, that through surrender to impulse we become one with God; he taught that reason is man-made and bungling and should be suppressed. In moral and aesthetic doctrine, Emerson was a relativist; his most thoroughgoing disciples in American literature were Walt Whitman and Hart Crane. In Frost, on the other hand, we find a disciple with Emerson's religious conviction: Frost believes in the rightness of impulse, but does not discuss the pantheistic doctrine which would give authority to impulse; as a result of his belief in impulse, he is of necessity a relativist, but his relativism, apparently since it derives from no intense religious conviction, has resulted mainly in ill-natured eccentricity and in increasing melancholy.

** COMMENT: That Emerson's romantic theorizing heavily influenced the world-view of Robert Frost is a matter that could arouse a great deal of scholarly debate, if any one paid attention to Winters at all any longer. There is little question, I believe, that Frost is a Romantic, though many of his readers and admirers continue to befuddle us all by pigeonholing him as a classicist. Described as he is here in Winters's fine essay on Frost, he seems hardly worth reading at all if such are Frost's views of human nature and life. There might be, and I believe there is, more to Frost than this summary implies, though I agree that he is not the great poet his purported to be. Because many influences push Frost to and fro in his work, the best Winters can say about him is that he was a spiritual drifter. Finally, anything that smacked of reliance on impulse, for Winters, as a proponent of reason in all serious matters of life, was abominably foolish.


9/26 - On Obscurity in Modern Poetry

from the chapter "THE SHORTER POEMS" from "EDWIN ARLINGTON ROBINSON" (1946)

There has been a great deal of obscurity in modern verse, and where it has not been due merely to incompetent writing, it has been mainly of two kinds. Sometimes the poet endeavors to be perfectly lucid, but he thinks so badly that he makes statements which are without his realizing it incomprehensible. Such statements in modern American verse belong most frequently to the tradition of Emerson and Whitman, and there are a few mild examples to which I shall eventually refer. When Emerson, in "The Problem", tells us that the artist produces art unconsciously, functioning as a divinely controlled automaton, we cannot understand him, because we can imagine an automaton only as a madman. When Hart Crane, in "The Dance", describes under veils of metaphor the apotheosis of Maquokeeta as union with the American soil, we are similarly baffled, for a man cannot be imagined as both keeping and losing his personal identity. Sometimes, however, the poet may be fully conscious that he is obscure; he may follow the example of the later Mallarme and suppress the rational element in his poems in the mistaken idea that he is thus strengthening the emotional; or he may write as it would seem that Rimbaud frequently wrote, more or less automatically, in a state more or less approximating hallucination, with the mistaken idea (one which Emerson shared without putting it into practice) that the automatic is of necessity divinely inspired, thus achieving fantastic symbols with the empty semblance only of significance, symbols arranged in a meaningless sequence. Reference to strange bits of erudition, such as we get in Pound, may cause temporary obscurity, but only till an appropriate doctoral dissertation may be written; and this is true likewise of reference to a private set of symbols, such as we get in Blake. The method of progression by revery, or random association, which we get in Pound's "Cantos", may seem to result in obscurity, but only if one fails to recognize the method and is expecting to disentangle something which was never there.

* COMMENT: This passage offers a tidy summary of the way poetry is still being written in the modern age, though Winters does not discuss the one other major structural focus of the modern period: sensory impression, which he writes of elsewhere at length and which we have discussed in regard to many of our selections. It is surely no longer necessary to point out that Winters disapproves of all methods that breed such obscurity. Intellectual depth and clarity are the chief virtues of all literature, as Winters argues throughout his essays. In this chapter, Winters later specifically contrasts Robinson and his clear and rational poetic structures to the obscurity of the major moderns. It would surely be instructive to find a copy of the Hart Crane poem mentioned here, for this much praised poem has elicited countless interpretations from English professors for more than half a century. Modern poetry, as most of you know, is written just to elicit multiple, if not infinite, interpretations. It would also seem clear, at least to me, that this has been one of the great joys of reading poetry for most lovers of the modern literature: the open and endless possibilities for interpretation. The openness suggests depth and power. To the contrary, Winters believed it merely reveals thoughtlessness and willful obscurity, and such poetry lacks both depth and power for these very reasons.


9/27 - On the Experiments of James Joyce and Gertrude Stein

from the review "THE INDIAN IN ENGLISH" (1926) in "UNCOLLECTED ESSAYS AND REVIEWS"

In a primitive, non-specialized society, every mind gravitates toward the religious center, by which the race is preserved. All art, therefore, will have a definitely ritualistic nature or will be strongly colored by ritual, and will so be in a greater or less degree comprehensible, or at any rate useful, to all the community. Likewise, as all the community has a practical use for art, and as the individual members of the community are not, as in a modern city, forced to divert all of their energies into narrowly specialized channels, the average taste in artistic matters will be rather high.... My own slight experience substantiates this: I have found the taste of several quite commonplace Indians to be all but infallible in such fields as, say, medieval German art.

** COMMENT: This review was published just a year before Winters began to change his mind about how to write and about what is good in literature. First, note that he toys here with the idea that art is the new religion, a common idea at the time, common for a couple centuries in fact, and one which still has life in our own era as well (though much of its original strength is now dissipated). Winters would retreat from such ideas shortly, though there is no question that to his dying day he held that the writing and studying of great poetry, as a form of contemplation, to be among the highest intellectual and spiritual activities of humankind. Second, Winters believed that the Indian communities he knew in New Mexico exhibited a high degree of literary taste. He held views similar to this to the end of his career. Finally, he offered here a thought-provoking speculation on the causes of the aesthetic weakness of taste in modern urban cultures: the lack of a practical and community use for art.


9/28 - On Moral Judgment in Literature - KP

from the essay "PRELIMINARY PROBLEMS in "THE ANATOMY OF NONSENSE" (1943), republished in "IN DEFENSE OF REASON" (1947)

The relationship in the poem of rational meaning to feeling we have seen to be that of motive to emotion; and we have seen that this must be a satisfactory relationship. How do we determine whether such a relationship is satisfactory? We determine it by an act of moral judgment. The question then arises whether moral judgments can be made, whether the concept of morality is or is not an illusion.

If morality can be considered real, if a theory of morality can be said to derive from reality, it is because it guides us toward the greatest happiness which the accidents of life permit: that is, toward the fullest realization of our nature, in the Aristotelian or Thomistic sense. But is there such a thing, abstractly considered, as full realization of our nature?

To avoid discussion of too great length, let us consider the opposite question: is there such a thing as obviously unfulfilled human nature? Obviously there is. We need only turn to the feeble-minded, who cannot think and so cannot perceive or feel with any clarity; or to the insane, who sometimes perceive and feel with great intensity, but whose feelings and perceptions are so improperly motivated that they are classed as illusions. At slightly higher levels, the criminal, the dissolute, the unscrupulously selfish, and various types of neurotics are likely to arouse but little disagreement as examples.

** COMMENT: This passage comes from one of the foundational essays in Winters's career, an essay that concisely laid out and argued cogently for the basic principles of his critical theory. We see here that Winters justified his moral theory of literature on Thomistic and rationalist grounds. Literature, Winters is suggesting (and he states this clearly and openly in many other writings), is an important part of the development of the human being toward the full realization of his nature. This is why he took the study of literature and poetry so seriously, and why he considered various weak forms of or procedures in the literary arts to be so dangerous: they warp us away from full sanity, full knowledge, full virtue, full and proper emotion.


9/29 - On Moral Literature

from the essay "THE POETRY OF GERARD MANLY HOPKINS" (1948) from "THE FUNCTION OF CRITICISM"

One observes here [in a critical passage from Hopkins's notebooks] that a work may have an ART VALUE ALONE, but that it should also deal with an innocent subject, that is, should not be "immoral". But the concept of art [in Hopkins's judgment] is completely divorced from the concept of morality so far as any functional relationship goes. Swinburne is immoral [in Hopkins's opinion] because of the nature of his subjects, not because he falsifies them in the interests of excessive and sentimental decoration. In these terms, Baudelaire would be quite as immoral as Swinburne, because of his subjects, and Hopkins himself would be invariably a moral poet because of his subjects. Yet in my own terms, Baudelaire is at least very often a profoundly moral poet because of his understanding of his subjects, and Hopkins is very often an immoral poet for much the same reasons why Swinburne seems to be immoral.

** COMMENT: This selection makes a very interesting companion to yesterday's, 9/28. Winters's conception of morality is quite different from the common definition of the term. Literature is not moral only by virtue of the ethicality of the subject matter -- that is, the statements it makes or the content it offers; it is moral in the way a literary artwork judges a human experience through rational understanding and properly motivated emotion. Thus, surprisingly, Winters seems to be stating that Hopkins, a priest and a conscientious writer, was "immoral" because he incompletely and improperly understood his art and wrote weak and bad poems that reflect his deficient understanding. Winters believed that there was no sole aesthetic value for literature, simply because literary artworks employ language, and the highest and fullest realization of the nature of language is in rational understanding (again see the selection for yesterday). Art for art's sake is not only immoral, in Winters's sense of the term, but properly impossible, since it is a denial of the primary function of language in rational communication. For the artists to use language as both a rational and emotional instrument is its most glorious, vital, and fullest use.


9/30 - On the Mock-Heroic

from the essay "THE POETRY OF CHARLES CHURCHILL" (1961) in "FORMS OF DISCOVERY" (1967)

The best single poem by Dryden is certainly "MacFlecknoe", and the best by Pope "The Rape of the Lock". Yet these are mock-heroic poems; their principal virtues arise from the fact that they exploit the ridiculous aspects of the style that both poets held in the highest esteem. This is a sad commentary on the main preoccupations of the period; and parody is a dangerous style, because it depends upon cliches for its effectiveness, and cliches are still cliches even when used in the interest of wit. Even poems as remarkable as these are essentially a kind of light verse.

** COMMENT: "MacFlecknoe" made Winters's special Winters Canon of the greatest poems in English, published in "Quest for Reality". However, Winters seldom referred to the poem in his essays, and it came as a surprise that he judged it so highly when I first read "Quest". Winters was generally wary of the comic, ironic, and the mocking, however gentle it might be. He might have seen a significance to such uses of language, but he could not consider such techniques among the very finest uses of language because of the problem discussed in this passage from an important late essay. The comic, I believe, has not been fully investigated through the principles of Winters's critical theory; I am hoping that some able critic will take up the work of extending Winters's theory to account for the comic in the years to come.


A YEAR with YVOR WINTERS Introduction

YVOR WINTERS Home Page