查看: 20350|回复: 16
打印 上一主题 下一主题

Preface to Lyrical Ballads (被称为“英国浪漫主义宣言”)

[复制链接]

21

精华

9520

帖子

2万

积分

牧场主

跳转到指定楼层
1#
发表于 2005-8-25 10:10 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
Preface to Lyrical Ballads



William Wordsworth (1800)

  
  
THE FIRST volume of these Poems has already been submitted to general perusal. It was published, as an experiment, which, I hoped, might be of some use to ascertain, how far, by fitting to metrical arrangement a selection of the real language of men in a state of vivid sensation, that sort of pleasure and that quantity of pleasure may be imparted, which a Poet may rationally endeavour to impart.   1
  I had formed no very inaccurate estimate of the probable effect of those Poems: I flattered myself that they who should be pleased with them would read them with more than common pleasure: and, on the other hand, I was well aware, that by those who should dislike them, they would be read with more than common dislike. The result has differed from my expectation in this only, that a greater number have been pleased than I ventured to hope I should please.   2
  Several of my Friends are anxious for the success of these Poems, from a belief, that, if the views with which they were composed were indeed realized, a class of Poetry would be produced, well adapted to interest mankind permanently, and not unimportant in the quality, and in the multiplicity of its moral relations: and on this account they have advised me to prefix a systematic defence of the theory upon which the Poems were written. But I was unwilling to undertake the task, knowing that on this occasion the Reader would look coldly upon my arguments, since I might be suspected of having been principally influenced by the selfish and foolish hope of reasoning him into an approbation of these particular Poems: and I was still more unwilling to undertake the task, because, adequately to display the opinions, and fully to enforce the arguments, would require a space wholly disproportionate to a preface. For, to treat the subject with the clearness and coherence of which it is susceptible, it would be necessary to give a full account of the present state of the public taste in this country, and to determine how far this taste is healthy or depraved; which, again, could not be determined, without pointing out in what manner language and the human mind act and re-act on each other, and without retracing the revolutions, not of literature alone, but likewise of society itself. I have therefore altogether declined to enter regularly upon this defence; yet I am sensible, that there would be something like impropriety in abruptly obtruding upon the Public, without a few words of introduction, Poems so materially different from those upon which general approbation is at present bestowed.   3
  It is supposed, that by the act of writing in verse an Author makes a formal engagement that he will gratify certain known habits of association; that he not only thus apprises the Reader that certain classes of ideas and expressions will be found in his book, but that others will be carefully excluded. This exponent or symbol held forth by metrical language must in different eras of literature have excited very different expectations: for example, in the age of Catullus, Terence, and Lucretius, and that of Statius or Claudian; and in our own country, in the age of Shakespeare and Beaumont and Fletcher, and that of Donne and Cowley, or Dryden, or Pope. I will not take upon me to determine the exact import of the promise which, by the act of writing in verse, an Author in the present day makes to his reader: but it will undoubtedly appear to many persons that I have not fulfilled the terms of an engagement thus voluntarily contracted. They who have been accustomed to the gaudiness and inane phraseology of many modern writers, if they persist in reading this book to its conclusion, will, no doubt, frequently have to struggle with feelings of strangeness and awkwardness: they will look round for poetry, and will be induced to inquire by what species of courtesy these attempts can be permitted to assume that title. I hope therefore the reader will not censure me for attempting to state what I have proposed to myself to perform; and also (as far as the limits of a preface will permit) to explain some of the chief reasons which have determined me in the choice of my purpose: that at least he may be spared any unpleasant feeling of disappointment, and that I myself may be protected from one of the most dishonourable accusations which can be brought against an Author, namely, that of an indolence which prevents him from endeavouring to ascertain what is his duty, or, when his duty is ascertained, prevents him from performing it.   4
  The principal object, then, proposed in these Poems was to choose incidents and situations from common life, and to relate or describe them, throughout, as far as was possible in a selection of language really used by men, and, at the same time, to throw over them a certain colouring of imagination, whereby ordinary things should be presented to the mind in an unusual aspect; and, further, and above all, to make these incidents and situations interesting by tracing in them, truly though not ostentatiously, the primary laws of our nature: chiefly, as far as regards the manner in which we associate ideas in a state of excitement. Humble and rustic life was generally chosen, because, in that condition, the essential passions 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. The language, too, of these men has been adopted (purified indeed from what appear 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 part 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 influence of social vanity, they convey their feelings and notions in simple and unelaborated expressions. Accordingly, such a language, arising out of repeated experience and regular feelings, is a more permanent, and a far more philosophical language, than that which is frequently substituted for it by Poets, who think that they are conferring honour upon themselves and their art, in proportion as they separate themselves from the sympathies of men, and indulge in arbitrary and capricious habits of expression, in order to furnish food for fickle tastes, and fickle appetites, of their own creation. 1   5
  I cannot, however, be insensible to the present outcry against the triviality and meanness, both of thought and language, which some of my contemporaries have occasionally introduced into their metrical compositions; and I acknowledge that this defect, where it exists, is more dishonourable to the Writer’s own character than false refinement or arbitrary innovation, though I should contend at the same time, that it is far less pernicious in the sum of its consequences. From such verses the Poems in these volumes will be found distinguished at least by one mark of difference, that each of them has a worthy purpose. Not that I always began to write with a distinct purpose formerly conceived; but habits of meditation have, I trust, so prompted and regulated my feelings, that my descriptions of such objects as strongly excite those feelings, will be found to carry along with them a purpose. If this opinion be erroneous, I can have little right to the name of a Poet. For all good poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings: and though this be true, Poems to which any value can be attached were never produced on any variety of subjects but by a man who, being possessed of more than usual organic sensibility, had also thought long and deeply. For our continued influxes of feeling are modified and directed by our thoughts, which are indeed the representatives of all our past feelings; and, as by contemplating the relation of these general representatives to each other, we discover what is really important to men, so, by the repetition and continuance of this act, our feelings will be connected with important subjects, till at length, if we be originally possessed of much sensibility, such habits of mind will be produced, that, by obeying blindly and mechanically the impulses of those habits, we shall describe objects, and utter sentiments, of such a nature, and in such connexion with each other, that the understanding of the Reader must necessarily be in some degree enlightened, and his affections strengthened and purified.   6
  It has been said that each of these poems has a purpose. Another circumstance must be mentioned which distinguishes these Poems from the popular Poetry of the day; it is this, that the feeling therein developed gives importance to the action and situation, and not the action and situation to the feeling.   7
  A sense of false modesty shall not prevent me from asserting, that the Reader’s attention is pointed to this mark of distinction, far less for the sake of these particular Poems than from the general importance of the subject. The subject is indeed important! For the human mind is capable of being excited without the application of gross and violent stimulants; and he must have a very faint perception of its beauty and dignity who does not know this, and who does not further know, that one being is elevated above another, in proportion as he possesses this capability. It has therefore appeared to me, that to endeavour to produce or enlarge this capability is one of the best services in which, at any period, a Writer can be engaged; but this service, excellent at all times, is especially so at the present day. For a multitude of causes, unknown to former times, are now acting with a combined force to blunt the discriminating powers of the mind, and, unfitting it for all voluntary exertion, to reduce it to a state of almost savage torpor. The most effective of these causes are the great national events which are daily taking place, and the increasing accumulation of men in cities, where the uniformity of their occupations produces a craving for extraordinary incident, which the rapid communication of intelligence hourly gratifies. to this tendency of life and manners the literature and theatrical exhibitions of the country have conformed themselves. The invaluable works of our elder writers, I had almost said the works of Shakespeare and Milton, are driven into neglect by frantic novels, sickly and stupid German Tragedies, and deluges of idle and extravagant stories in verse.—When I think upon this degrading thirst after outrageous stimulation, I am almost ashamed to have spoken of the feeble endeavour made in these volumes to counteract it; and, reflecting upon the magnitude of the general evil, I should be oppressed with no dishonourable melancholy, had I not a deep impression of certain inherent and indestructible qualities of the human mind, and likewise of certain powers in the great and permanent objects that act upon it, which are equally inherent and indestructible; and were there not added to this impression a belief, that the time is approaching when the evil will be systematically opposed, by men of greater powers, and with far more distinguished success.   8
  Having dwelt thus long on the subjects and aim of these Poems, I shall request the Reader’s permission to apprise him of a few circumstances relating to their style, in order, among other reasons, that he may not censure me for not having performed what I never attempted. The Reader will find that personifications of abstract ideas rarely occur in these volumes; and are utterly rejected, as an ordinary device to elevate the style, and raise it above prose. My purpose was to imitate, and, as far as possible, to adopt the very language of men; and assuredly such personifications do not make any natural or regular part of that language. They are, indeed, a figure of speech occasionally prompted by passion, and I have made use of them as such; but have endeavoured utterly to reject them as a mechanical device of style, or as a family language which Writers in metre seem to lay claim to by prescription. I have wished to keep the Reader in the company of flesh and blood, persuaded that by so doing I shall interest him. Others who pursue a different track will interest him likewise; I do not interfere with their claim, but wish to prefer a claim of my own. There will also be found in these volumes little of what is usually called poetic diction; as much pains has been taken to avoid it as is ordinarily taken to produce it; this has been done for the reason already alleged, to bring my language near to the language of men; and further, because the pleasure which I have proposed to myself to impart, is of a kind very different from that which is supposed by many persons to be the proper object of poetry. Without being culpably particular, I do not know how to give my Reader a more exact notion of the style in which it was my wish and intention to write, than by informing him that I have at all times endeavoured to look steadily at my subject; consequently, there is I hope in these Poems little falsehood of description, and my ideas are expressed in language fitted to their respective importance. Something must have been gained by this practice, as it is friendly to one property of all good poetry, namely, good sense: but it has necessarily cut me off from a large portion of phrases and figures of speech which from father to son have long been regarded as the common inheritance of Poets. I have also thought it expedient to restrict myself still further, having abstained from the use of many expressions, in themselves proper and beautiful, but which have been foolishly repeated by bad Poets, till such feelings of disgust are connected with them as it is scarcely possible by any art of association to overpower.   9
  If in a poem there should be found a series of lines, or even a single line, in which the language, though naturally arranged, and according to the strict laws of metre, does not differ from that of prose, there is a numerous class of critics, who, when they stumble upon these prosaisms, as they call them, imagine that they have made a notable discovery, and exult over the Poet as over a man ignorant of his own profession. Now these men would establish a canon of criticism which the Reader will conclude he must utterly reject, if he wishes to be pleased with these volumes. and it would be a most easy task to prove to him, that not only the language of a large portion of every good poem, even of the most elevated character, must necessarily, except with reference to the metre, in no respect differ from that of good prose, but likewise that some of the most interesting parts of the best poems will be found to be strictly the language of prose when prose is well written. The truth of this assertion might be demonstrated by innumerable passages from almost all the poetical writings, even of Milton himself. to illustrate the subject in a general manner, I will here adduce a short composition of Gray, who was at the head of those who, by their reasonings, have attempted to widen the space of separation betwixt Prose and Metrical composition, and was more than any other man curiously elaborate in the structure of his own poetic diction.         In vain to me the smiling mornings shine,
And reddening Phœbus lifts his golden fire:
The birds in vain their amorous descant join,
Or cheerful fields resume their green attire.
These ears, alas! for other notes repine;
A different object do these eyes require;
My lonely anguish melts no heart but mine;
And in my breast the imperfect joys expire;
Yet morning smiles the busy race to cheer,
And new-born pleasure brings to happier men;
The fields to all their wonted tribute bear;
To warm their little loves the birds complain.
I fruitless mourn to him that cannot hear,
And weep the more because I weep in vain.
   10
  It will easily be perceived, that the only part of this Sonnet which is of any value is the lines printed in Italics; it is equally obvious, that, except in the rhyme, and in the use of the single word ’fruitless’ for fruitlessly, which is so far a defect, the language of these lines does in no respect differ from that of prose.   11
  By the foregoing quotation it has been shown that the language of Prose may yet be well adapted to Poetry; and it was previously asserted, that a large portion of the language of every good poem can in no respect differ from that of good Prose. We will go further. It may be safely affirmed, that there neither is, nor can be, any essential difference between the language of prose and metrical composition. We are fond of tracing the resemblance between Poetry and Painting, and, accordingly, we call them Sisters: but where shall we find bonds of connexion sufficiently strict to typify the affinity betwixt metrical and prose composition? They both speak by and to the same organs; the bodies in which both of them are clothed may be said to be of the same substance, their affections are kindred, and almost identical, not necessarily differing even in degree; Poetry 2 sheds no tears ’such as Angels weep,’ but natural and human tears; she can boast of no celestial choir that distinguishes her vital juices from those of prose; the same human blood circulates through the veins of them both.   12
  If it be affirmed that rhyme and metrical arrangement of themselves constitute a distinction which overturns what has just been said on the strict affinity of metrical language with that of prose, and paves the way for other artificial distinctions which the mind voluntarily admits, I answer that the language of such Poetry as is here recommended is, as far as is possible, a selection of the language really spoken by men; that this selection, wherever it is made with true taste and feeling, will of itself form a distinction far greater than would at first be imagined, and will entirely separate the composition from the vulgarity and meanness of ordinary life; and, if metre be superadded thereto, I believe that a dissimilitude will be produced altogether sufficient for the gratification of a rational mind. What other distinction would we have? Whence is it to come? and where is it to exist? Not, surely, where the Poet speaks through the mouths of his characters: it cannot be necessary here, either for elevation of style, or any of its supposed ornaments: for, if the Poet’s subject be judiciously chosen, it will naturally, and upon fit occasion, lead him to passions the language of which, if selected truly and judiciously, must necessarily be dignified and variegated, and alive with metaphors and figures. I forbear to speak of an incongruity which would shock the intelligent Reader, should the Poet interweave any foreign splendour of his own with that which the passion naturally suggests: it is sufficient to say that such addition is unnecessary. and, surely, it is more probable that those passages, which with propriety abound with metaphors and figures, will have their due effect, if, upon other occasions where the passions are of a milder character, the style also be subdued and temperate.   13
  But, as the pleasure which I hope to give by the Poems now presented to the Reader must depend entirely on just notions upon this subject, and, as it is in itself of high importance to our taste and moral feelings, I cannot content myself with these detached remarks. and if, in what I am about to say, it shall appear to some that my labour is unnecessary, and that I am like a man fighting a battle without enemies, such persons may be reminded, that, whatever be the language outwardly holden by men, a practical faith in the opinions which I am wishing to establish is almost unknown. If my conclusions are admitted, and carried as far as they must be carried if admitted at all, our judgements concerning the works of the greatest Poets both ancient and modern will be far different from what they are at present, both when we praise, and when we censure: and our moral feelings influencing and influenced by these judgements will, I believe, be corrected and purified.   14
  Taking up the subject, then, upon general grounds, let me ask, what is meant by the word Poet? What is a Poet? to whom does he address himself? and what language is to be expected from him?—He is a man speaking to men: a man, it is true, endowed with more lively sensibility, more enthusiasm and tenderness, who has a greater knowledge of human nature, and a more comprehensive soul, than are supposed to be common among mankind; a man pleased with his own passions and volitions, and who rejoices more than other men in the spirit of life that is in him; delighting to contemplate similar volitions and passions as manifested in the goings-on of the Universe, and habitually impelled to create them where he does not find them. to these qualities he has added a disposition to be affected more than other men by absent things as if they were present; an ability of conjuring up in himself passions, which are indeed far from being the same as those produced by real events, yet (especially in those parts of the general sympathy which are pleasing and delightful) do more nearly resemble the passions produced by real events, than anything which, from the motions of their own minds merely, other men are accustomed to feel in themselves:— whence, and from practice, he has acquired a greater readiness and power in expressing what he thinks and feels, and especially those thoughts and feelings which, by his own choice, or from the structure of his own mind, arise in him without immediate external excitement.   15
  But whatever portion of this faculty we may suppose even the greatest Poet to possess, there cannot be a doubt that the language which it will suggest to him, must often, in liveliness and truth, fall short of that which is uttered by men in real life, under the actual pressure of those passions, certain shadows of which the Poet thus produces, or feels to be produced, in himself.   16
  However exalted a notion we would wish to cherish of the character of a Poet, it is obvious, that while he describes and imitates passions, his employment is in some degree mechanical, compared with the freedom and power of real and substantial action and suffering. So that it will be the wish of the Poet to bring his feelings near to those of the persons whose feelings he describes, nay, for short spaces of time, perhaps, to let himself slip into an entire delusion, and even confound and identify his own feelings with theirs; modifying only the language which is thus suggested to him by a consideration that he describes for a particular purpose, that of giving pleasure. Here, then, he will apply the principle of selection which has been already insisted upon. He will depend upon this for removing what would otherwise be painful or disgusting in the passion; he will feel that there is no necessity to trick out or to elevate nature: and, the more industriously he applies this principle, the deeper will be his faith that no words, which his fancy or imagination can suggest, will be to be compared with those which are the emanations of reality and truth.   17
  But it may be said by those who do not object to the general spirit of these remarks, that, as it is impossible for the Poet to produce upon all occasions language as exquisitely fitted for the passion as that which the real passion itself suggests, it is proper that he should consider himself as in the situation of a translator, who does not scruple to substitute excellencies of another kind for those which are unattainable by him; and endeavours occasionally to surpass his original, in order to make some amends for the general inferiority to which he feels that he must submit. But this would be to encourage idleness and unmanly despair. Further, it is the language of men who speak of what they do not understand; who talk of Poetry as of a matter of amusement and idle pleasure; who will converse with us as gravely about a taste for Poetry, as they express it, as if it were a thing as indifferent as a taste for rope-dancing, or Frontiniac or Sherry. Aristotle, I have been told, has said, that Poetry is the most philosophic of all writing: it is so: its object is truth, not individual and local, but general, and operative; not standing upon external testimony, but carried alive into the heart by passion; truth which is its own testimony, which gives competence and confidence to the tribunal to which it appeals, and receives them from the same tribunal. Poetry is the image of man and nature. The obstacles which stand in the way of the fidelity of the Biographer and Historian, and of their consequent utility, are incalculably greater than those which are to be encountered by the Poet who comprehends the dignity of his art. The Poet writes under one restriction only, namely, the necessity of giving immediate pleasure to a human Being possessed of that information which may be expected from him, not as a lawyer, a physician, a mariner, an astronomer, or a natural philosopher, but as a Man. Except this one restriction, there is no object standing between the Poet and the image of things; between this, and the Biographer and Historian, there are a thousand.   18
  Nor let this necessity of producing immediate pleasure be considered as a degradation of the Poet’s art. It is far otherwise. It is an acknowledgement of the beauty of the universe, an acknowledgement the more sincere, because not formal, but indirect; it is a task light and easy to him who looks at the world in the spirit of love: further, it is a homage paid to the native and naked dignity of man, to the grand elementary principle of pleasure, by which he knows, and feels, and lives, and moves. We have no sympathy but what is propagated by pleasure: I would not be misunderstood; but wherever we sympathize with pain, it will be found that the sympathy is produced and carried on by subtle combinations with pleasure. We have no knowledge, that is, no general principles drawn from the contemplation of particular facts, but what has been built up by pleasure, and exists in us by pleasure alone. The Man of science, the Chemist and Mathematician, whatever difficulties and disgusts they may have had to struggle with, know and feel this. However painful may be the objects with which the Anatomist’s knowledge is connected, he feels that his knowledge is pleasure; and where he has no pleasure he has no knowledge. What then does the Poet? He considers man and the objects that surround him as acting and re-acting upon each other, so as to produce an infinite complexity of pain and pleasure; he considers man in his own nature and in his ordinary life as contemplating this with a certain quantity of immediate knowledge, with certain convictions, intuitions, and deductions, which from habit acquire the quality of intuitions; he considers him as looking upon this complex scene of ideas and sensations, and finding everywhere objects that immediately excite in him sympathies which, from the necessities of his nature, are accompanied by an overbalance of enjoyment.   19
  To this knowledge which all men carry about with them, and to these sympathies in which, without any other discipline than that of our daily life, we are fitted to take delight, the Poet principally directs his attention. He considers man and nature as essentially adapted to each other, and the mind of man as naturally the mirror of the fairest and most interesting properties of nature. and thus the Poet, prompted by this feeling of pleasure, which accompanies him through the whole course of his studies, converses with general nature, with affections akin to those, which, through labour and length of time, the Man of science has raised up in himself, by conversing with those particular parts of nature which are the objects of his studies. The knowledge both of the Poet and the Man of science is pleasure; but the knowledge of the one cleaves to us as a necessary part of our existence, our natural and unalienable inheritance; the other is a personal and individual acquisition, slow to come to us, and by no habitual and direct sympathy connecting us with our fellow-beings. The Man of science seeks truth as a remote and unknown benefactor; he cherishes and loves it in his solitude: the Poet, singing a song in which all human beings join with him, rejoices in the presence of truth as our visible friend and hourly companion. Poetry is the breath and finer spirit of all knowledge; it is the impassioned expression which is in the countenance of all Science. Emphatically may it be said of the Poet, as Shakespeare hath said of man, ‘that he looks before and after.’ He is the rock of defence for human nature; an upholder and preserver, carrying everywhere with him relationship and love. In spite of difference of soil and climate, of language and manners, of laws and customs: in spite of things silently gone out of mind, and things violently destroyed; the Poet binds together by passion and knowledge the vast empire of human society, as it is spread over the whole earth, and over all time. The objects of the Poet’s thoughts are everywhere; though the eyes and senses of man are, it is true, his favourite guides, yet he will follow wheresoever he can find an atmosphere of sensation in which to move his wings. Poetry is the first and last of all knowledge—it is as immortal as the heart of man. If the labours of Men of science should ever create any material revolution, direct or indirect, in our condition, and in the impressions which we habitually receive, the Poet will sleep then no more than at present; he will be ready to follow the steps of the Man of science, not only in those general indirect effects, but he will be at his side, carrying sensation into the midst of the objects of the science itself. The remotest discoveries of the Chemist, the Botanist, or Mineralogist, will be as proper objects of the Poet’s art as any upon which it can be employed, if the time should ever come when these things shall be familiar to us, and the relations under which they are contemplated by the followers of these respective sciences shall be manifestly and palpably material to us as enjoying and suffering beings. If the time should ever come when what is now called science, thus familiarized to men, shall be ready to put on, as it were, a form of flesh and blood, the Poet will lend his divine spirit to aid the transfiguration, and will welcome the Being thus produced, as a dear and genuine inmate of the household of man.—It is not, then, to be supposed that any one, who holds that sublime notion of Poetry which I have attempted to convey, will break in upon the sanctity and truth of his pictures by transitory and accidental ornaments, and endeavour to excite admiration of himself by arts, the necessity of which must manifestly depend upon the assumed meanness of his subject.   20
  What has been thus far said applies to Poetry in general; but especially to those parts of composition where the Poet speaks through the mouths of his characters; and upon this point it appears to authorize the conclusion that there are few persons of good sense, who would not allow that the dramatic parts of composition are defective, in proportion as they deviate from the real language of nature, and are coloured by a diction of the Poet’s own, either peculiar to him as an individual Poet or belonging simply to Poets in general; to a body of men who, from the circumstance of their compositions being in metre, it is expected will employ a particular language.   21
  It is not, then, in the dramatic parts of composition that we look for this distinction of language; but still it may be proper and necessary where the Poet speaks to us in his own person and character. to this I answer by referring the Reader to the description before given of a Poet. Among the qualities there enumerated as principally conducing to form a Poet, is implied nothing differing in kind from other men, but only in degree. The sum of what was said is, that the Poet is chiefly distinguished from other men by a greater promptness to think and feel without immediate external excitement, and a greater power in expressing such thoughts and feelings as are produced in him in that manner. But these passions and thoughts and feelings are the general passions and thoughts and feelings of men. and with what are they connected? Undoubtedly with our moral sentiments and animal sensations, and with the causes which excite these; with the operations of the elements, and the appearances of the visible universe; with storm and sunshine, with the revolutions of the seasons, with cold and heat, with loss of friends and kindred, with injuries and resentments, gratitude and hope, with fear and sorrow. These, and the like, are the sensations and objects which the Poet describes, as they are the sensations of other men, and the objects which interest them. The Poet thinks and feels in the spirit of human passions. How, then, can his language differ in any material degree from that of all other men who feel vividly and see clearly? It might be proved that it is impossible. But supposing that this were not the case, the Poet might then be allowed to use a peculiar language when expressing his feelings for his own gratification, or that of men like himself. But Poets do not write for Poets alone, but for men. Unless therefore we are advocates for that admiration which subsists upon ignorance, and that pleasure which arises from hearing what we do not understand, the Poet must descend from this supposed height; and, in order to excite rational sympathy, he must express himself as other men express themselves. to this it may be added, that while he is only selecting from the real language of men, or, which amounts to the same thing, composing accurately in the spirit of such selection, he is treading upon safe ground, and we know what we are to expect from him. Our feelings are the same with respect to metre; for, as it may be proper to remind the Reader, the distinction of metre is regular and uniform, and not, like that which is produced by what is usually called POETIC DICTION, arbitrary, and subject to infinite caprices upon which no calculation whatever can be made. In the one case, the Reader is utterly at the mercy of the Poet, respecting what imagery or diction he may choose to connect with the passion; whereas, in the other, the metre obeys certain laws, to which the Poet and Reader both willingly submit because they are certain, and because no interference is made by them with the passion, but such as the concurring testimony of ages has shown to heighten and improve the pleasure which co-exists with it.   22
  It will now be proper to answer an obvious question, namely, Why, professing these opinions, have I written in verse? to this, in addition to such answer as is included in what has been already said, I reply, in the first place, because however I may have restricted myself, there is still left open to me what confessedly constitutes the most valuable object of all writing, whether in prose or verse; the great and universal passions of men, the most general and interesting of their occupations, and the entire world of nature before me—to supply endless combinations of forms and imagery. Now, supposing for a moment that whatever is interesting in these objects may be as vividly described in prose, why should I be condemned for attempting to superadd to such description the charm which, by the consent of all nations, is acknowledged to exist in metrical language? to this, by such as are yet unconvinced, it may be answered that a very small part of the pleasure given by Poetry depends upon the metre, and that it is injudicious to write in metre, unless it be accompanied with the other artificial distinctions of style with which metre is usually accompanied, and that, by such deviation, more will be lost from the shock which will thereby be given to the Reader’s associations than will be counterbalanced by any pleasure which he can derive from the general power of numbers. In answer to those who still contend for the necessity of accompanying metre with certain appropriate colours of style in order to the accomplishment of its appropriate end, and who also, in my opinion, greatly underrate the power of metre in itself, it might, perhaps, as far as relates to these Volumes, have been almost sufficient to observe, that poems are extant, written upon more humble subjects, and in a still more naked and simple style, which have continued to give pleasure from generation to generation. Now, if nakedness and simplicity be a defect, the fact here mentioned affords a strong presumption that poems somewhat less naked and simple are capable of affording pleasure at the present day; and, what I wish chiefly to attempt, at present, was to justify myself for having written under the impression of this belief.   23
  But various causes might be pointed out why, when the style is manly, and the subject of some importance, words metrically arranged will long continue to impart such a pleasure to mankind as he who proves the extent of that pleasure will be desirous to impart. The end of Poetry is to produce excitement in co-existence with an overbalance of pleasure; but, by the supposition, excitement is an unusual and irregular state of the mind; ideas and feelings do not, in that state, succeed each other in accustomed order. If the words, however, by which this excitement is produced be in themselves powerful, or the images and feelings have an undue proportion of pain connected with them, there is some danger that the excitement may be carried beyond its proper bounds. Now the co-presence of something regular, something to which the mind has been accustomed in various moods and in a less excited state, cannot but have great efficacy in tempering and restraining the passion by an intertexture of ordinary feeling, and of feeling not strictly and necessarily connected with the passion. This is unquestionably true; and hence, though the opinion will at first appear paradoxical, from the tendency of metre to divest language, in a certain degree, of its reality, and thus to throw a sort of half-consciousness of unsubstantial existence over the whole composition, there can be little doubt but that more pathetic situations and sentiments, that is, those which have a greater proportion of pain connected with them, may be endured in metrical composition, especially in rhyme, than in prose. The metre of the old ballads is very artless; yet they contain many passages which would illustrate this opinion; and, I hope, if the following Poems be attentively perused, similar instances will be found in them. This opinion may be further illustrated by appealing to the Reader’s own experience of the reluctance with which he comes to the reperusal of the distressful parts of Clarissa Harlowe, or The Gamester; while Shakespeare’s writings, in the most pathetic scenes, never act upon us, as pathetic, beyond the bounds of pleasure—an effect which, in a much greater degree than might at first be imagined, is to be ascribed to small, but continual and regular impulses of pleasurable surprise from the metrical arrangement.—On the other hand (what it must be allowed will much more frequently happen) if the Poet’s words should be incommensurate with the passion, and inadequate to raise the Reader to a height of desirable excitement, then (unless the Poet’s choice of his metre has been grossly injudicious), in the feelings of pleasure which the Reader has been accustomed to connect with metre in general, and in the feeling, whether cheerful or melancholy, which he has been accustomed to connect with that particular movement of metre, there will be found something which will greatly contribute to impart passion to the words, and to effect the complex end which the Poet proposes to himself.   24
  If I had undertaken a SYSTEMATIC defence of the theory here maintained, it would have been my duty to develop the various causes upon which the pleasure received from metrical language depends. Among the chief of these causes is to be reckoned a principle which must be well known to those who have made any of the Arts the object of accurate reflection; namely, the pleasure which the mind derives from the perception of similitude in dissimilitude. This principle is the great spring of the activity of our minds, and their chief feeder. From this principle the direction of the sexual appetite, and all the passions connected with it, take their origin: it is the life of our ordinary conversation; and upon the accuracy with which similitude in dissimilitude, and dissimilitude in similitude are perceived, depend our taste and our moral feelings. It would not be a useless employment to apply this principle to the consideration of metre, and to show that metre is hence enabled to afford much pleasure, and to point out in what manner that pleasure is produced. But my limits will not permit me to enter upon this subject, and I must content myself with a general summary.   25
  I have said that poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings: it takes its origin from emotion recollected in tranquillity: the emotion is contemplated till, by a species of reaction, the tranquillity gradually disappears, and an emotion, kindred to that which was before the subject of contemplation, is gradually produced, and does itself actually exist in the mind. In this mood successful composition generally begins, and in a mood similar to this it is carried on; but the emotion, of whatever kind, and in whatever degree, from various causes, is qualified by various pleasures, so that in describing any passions whatsoever, which are voluntarily described, the mind will, upon the whole, be in a state of enjoyment. If Nature be thus cautious to preserve in a state of enjoyment a being so employed, the Poet ought to profit by the lesson held forth to him, and ought especially to take care, that, whatever passions he communicates to his Reader, those passions, if his Reader’s mind be sound and vigorous, should always be accompanied with an overbalance of pleasure. Now the music of harmonious metrical language, the sense of difficulty overcome, and the blind association of pleasure which has been previously received from works of rhyme or metre of the same or similar construction, an indistinct perception perpetually renewed of language closely resembling that of real life, and yet, in the circumstance of metre, differing from it so widely—all these imperceptibly make up a complex feeling of delight, which is of the most important use in tempering the painful feeling always found intermingled with powerful descriptions of the deeper passions. This effect is always produced in pathetic and impassioned poetry; while, in lighter compositions, the ease and gracefulness with which the Poet manages his numbers are themselves confessedly a principal source of the gratification of the Reader. All that it is necessary to say, however, upon this subject, may be effected by affirming, what few persons will deny, that, of two descriptions, either of passions, manners, or characters, each of them equally well executed, the one in prose and the other in verse, the verse will be read a hundred times where the prose is read once.   26
  Having thus explained a few of my reasons for writing in verse, and why I have chosen subjects from common life, and endeavoured to bring my language near to the real language of men, if I have been too minute in pleading my own cause, I have at the same time been treating a subject of general interest; and for this reason a few words shall be added with reference solely to these particular poems, and to some defects which will probably be found in them. I am sensible that my associations must have sometimes been particular instead of general, and that, consequently, giving to things a false importance, I may have sometimes written upon unworthy subjects; but I am less apprehensive on this account, than that my language may frequently have suffered from those arbitrary connexions of feelings and ideas with particular words and phrases, from which no man can altogether protect himself. Hence I have no doubt, that, in some instances, feelings, even of the ludicrous, may be given to my Readers by expressions which appeared to me tender and pathetic. Such faulty expressions, were I convinced they were faulty at present, and that they must necessarily continue to be so, I would willingly take all reasonable pains to correct. But it is dangerous to make these alterations on the simple authority of a few individuals, or even of certain classes of men; for where the understanding of an Author is not convinced, or his feelings altered, this cannot be done without great injury to himself: for his own feelings are his stay and support; and, if he set them aside in one instance, he may be induced to repeat this act till his mind shall lose all confidence in itself, and become utterly debilitated. to this it may be added, that the critic ought never to forget that he is himself exposed to the same errors as the Poet, and, perhaps, in a much greater degree: for there can be no presumption in saying of most readers, that it is not probable they will be so well acquainted with the various stages of meaning through which words have passed, or with the fickleness or stability of the relations of particular ideas to each other; and, above all, since they are so much less interested in the subject, they may decide lightly and carelessly.   27
  Long as the Reader has been detained, I hope he will permit me to caution him against a mode of false criticism which has been applied to Poetry, in which the language closely resembles that of life and nature. Such verses have been triumphed over in parodies, of which Dr. Johnson’s stanza is a fair specimen:—         I put my hat upon my head
And walked into the Strand,
And there I met another man
Whose hat was in his hand.
   28
  Immediately under these lines let us place one of the most justly admired stanzas of the ‘Babes in the Wood.’         These pretty Babes with hand in hand
Went wandering up and down;
But never more they saw the Man
Approaching from the town.
  In both these stanzas the words, and the order of the words, in no respect differ from the most unimpassioned conversation. There are words in both, for example, ‘the Strand,’ and ‘the town,’ connected with none but the most familiar ideas; yet the one stanza we admit as admirable, and the other as a fair example of the superlatively contemptible. Whence arises this difference? Not from the metre, not from the language, not from the order of the words; but the matter expressed in Dr. Johnson’s stanza is contemptible. The proper method of treating trivial and simple verses, to which Dr. Johnson’s stanza would be a fair parallelism, is not to say, this is a bad kind of poetry, or, this is not poetry; but, this wants sense; it is neither interesting in itself nor can lead to anything interesting; the images neither originate in that sane state of feeling which arises out of thought, nor can excite thought or feeling in the Reader. This is the only sensible manner of dealing with such verses. Why trouble yourself about the species till you have previously decided upon the genus? Why take pains to prove that an ape is not a Newton, when it is self-evident that he is not a man?   29
  One request I must make of my reader, which is, that in judging these Poems he would decide by his own feelings genuinely, and not by reflection upon what will probably be the judgement of others. How common is it to hear a person say, I myself do not object to this style of composition, or this or that expression, but, to such and such classes of people it will appear mean or ludicrous! This mode of criticism, so destructive of all sound unadulterated judgement, is almost universal: let the Reader then abide, independently, by his own feelings, and, if he finds himself affected, let him not suffer such conjectures to interfere with his pleasure.   31
  If an Author, by any single composition, has impressed us with respect for his talents, it is useful to consider this as affording a presumption, that on other occasions where we have been displeased, he, nevertheless, may not have written ill or absurdly; and further, to give him so much credit for this one composition as may induce us to review what has displeased us, with more care than we should otherwise have bestowed upon it. This is not only an act of justice, but, in our decisions upon poetry especially, may conduce, in a high degree, to the improvement of our own taste; for an accurate taste in poetry, and in all the other arts, as Sir Joshua Reynolds has observed, is an acquired talent, which can only be produced by thought and a long continued intercourse with the best models of composition. This is mentioned, not with so ridiculous a purpose as to prevent the most inexperienced Reader from judging for himself (I have already said that I wish him to judge for himself), but merely to temper the rashness of decision, and to suggest, that, if Poetry be a subject on which much time has not been bestowed, the judgement may be erroneous; and that, in many cases, it necessarily will be so.   32
  Nothing would, I know, have so effectually contributed to further the end which I have in view, as to have shown of what kind the pleasure is, and how that pleasure is produced, which is confessedly produced by metrical composition essentially different from that which I have here endeavoured to recommend: for the Reader will say that he has been pleased by such composition; and what more can be done for him? The power of any art is limited; and he will suspect, that, if it be proposed to furnish him with new friends, that can be only upon condition of his abandoning his old friends. Besides, as I have said, the Reader is himself conscious of the pleasure which he has received from such composition, composition to which he has peculiarly attached the endearing name of Poetry; and all men feel an habitual gratitude, and something of an honourable bigotry, for the objects which have long continued to please them: we not only wish to be pleased, but to be pleased in that particular way in which we have been accustomed to be pleased. There is in these feelings enough to resist a host of arguments; and I should be the less able to combat them successfully, as I am willing to allow, that, in order entirely to enjoy the Poetry which I am recommending, it would be necessary to give up much of what is ordinarily enjoyed. But, would my limits have permitted me to point out how this pleasure is produced, many obstacles might have been removed, and the Reader assisted in perceiving that the powers of language are not so limited as he may suppose; and that it is possible for poetry to give other enjoyments, of a purer, more lasting, and more exquisite nature. This part of the subject has not been altogether neglected, but it has not been so much my present aim to prove, that the interest excited by some other kinds of poetry is less vivid, and less worthy of the nobler powers of the mind, as to offer reasons for presuming, that if my purpose were fulfilled, a species of poetry would be produced, which is genuine poetry; in its nature well adapted to interest mankind permanently, and likewise important in the multiplicity and quality of its moral relations.   33
  From what has been said, and from a perusal of the Poems, the Reader will be able clearly to perceive the object which I had in view: he will determine how far it has been attained; and, what is a much more important question, whether it be worth attaining: and upon the decision of these two questions will rest my claim to the approbation of the Public.   34
  
Note 1. I here use the word ’Poetry’ (though against my own judgement) as opposed to the word Prose, and synonymous with metrical composition. But much confusion has been introduced into criticism by this contradistinction of Poetry and Prose, instead of the more philosophical one of Poetry and Matter of Fact, or Science. The only strict antithesis to Prose is Metre; nor is this, in truth, a strict antithesis, because lines and passages of metre so naturally occur in writing prose, that it would be scarcely possible to avoid them, even were it desirable. [back]
Note 2. As sensibility to harmony of numbers, and the power of producing it, are invariably attendants upon the faculties above specified, nothing has been said upon those requisites.
Tout ce qui est vrai est démontrable.

3

精华

1070

帖子

3544

积分

荣誉居民

Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8

2#
发表于 2005-8-25 13:00 | 只看该作者
能不能翻译一下啊~~多谢!
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

21

精华

9520

帖子

2万

积分

牧场主

3#
 楼主| 发表于 2005-8-25 13:18 | 只看该作者
Originally posted by 南溟望月 at 2005-8-25 01:00 PM:
能不能翻译一下啊~~多谢!


:!#$
我又不是神仙,这样的文章起码得一天才能准确翻译出来~
Tout ce qui est vrai est démontrable.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

3

精华

1070

帖子

3544

积分

荣誉居民

Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8

4#
发表于 2005-8-25 13:23 | 只看该作者
我没说你是神仙啊~~我说过吗?
不过如果你不翻我就慢慢看吧~~~
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

0

精华

1万

帖子

9万

积分

duke

Rank: 10Rank: 10

5#
发表于 2005-9-3 14:08 | 只看该作者
乖乖,我先好好学习英语先。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

21

精华

9520

帖子

2万

积分

牧场主

6#
 楼主| 发表于 2005-9-3 14:22 | 只看该作者
Originally posted by 石瞒芋 at 2005-9-3 02:08 PM:
乖乖,我先好好学习英语先。


:happy看过你的网站啦(是你的吧?),不错啊,欢迎你多来牧场做客哦
Tout ce qui est vrai est démontrable.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

2

精华

934

帖子

2812

积分

荣誉居民

Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8

7#
发表于 2005-9-10 10:29 | 只看该作者
还是英语亲切啊!最近在研究法语,我的头都大了~
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

21

精华

9520

帖子

2万

积分

牧场主

8#
 楼主| 发表于 2005-9-10 11:07 | 只看该作者
法语?太好了……
Tout ce qui est vrai est démontrable.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

2

精华

934

帖子

2812

积分

荣誉居民

Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8

9#
发表于 2005-9-10 11:28 | 只看该作者
为什么啊?
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

7

精华

652

帖子

2031

积分

荣誉居民

陨星最后的金色

Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8Rank: 8

10#
发表于 2006-5-16 10:31 | 只看该作者
原帖由 牧场看守人 于 2005-8-25 13:18 发表


:!#$
我又不是神仙,这样的文章起码得一天才能准确翻译出来~


哈哈哈哈!终于被我看到了,我这里刚好有我自己翻译的,以前贴到"德里奥斯大学 -> 没/文化研究:A/Cultural Studies  http://deliios.org/bbs/thread.php?fid=7 (我在那里的ID是"记得要记得"也被人叫做"抱花小孩")
被那里的牛人们强烈鄙视.他们说从来不看翻译的文章.(那里的人大多文学博士博导之类,最少也是硕士什么的,就我跟一个叫99的是本科).既然有很要求就发出来吧,不要再鄙视我啊!
另:我的英语很烂,翻译肯定有很多谬误,建议去看专家的翻译.但是好象网上没有,我在网上搜了很长时间没找到才自己翻译的.
<<抒情歌谣>>序言
  
  第一本书已经被大家检阅过了.它出版了,作为一个实验,我希望籍此来确定,当我们赋予人们现实生活中饱含深情的语言以诗的韵律时,应用这种语言我们能够在多大程度上表达一个诗人可能尽力理性地表达的那种快乐.
  我大体上预见到了这些诗带来的效果:我安慰自己说那些喜欢的人会带着非同一般的喜悦来读他们,另一方面,我也清楚的知道,那些不喜欢的人也会带着非同一般的厌恶来读他们.有一点跟我想象的不一样的是,有比我敢于希望的多得多的人喜欢这些诗.
  我的一些朋友急切地盼望着这些诗的成功,因为他们相信如果这些诗的写作所表达的观点真的成为现实,那么一种不仅在质量上而且在精神表达的多样性上将永远吸引人们的重要诗作会被创造出来:鉴于此他们建议我在这本诗集的前面加一个关于这些诗写作理论的辩护性序言。但是我不愿意承担这项工作,我知道这种情况下读者会很冷淡地看待我的意见,因为他们会觉得我自私而愚蠢地希望得到他们对于这些与众不同的诗歌的认可,而且我不愿意从事这项工作的更深的原因是,我知道想要充分地表达自己的观点和进一步巩固自己的观点,需要对于一篇序言来说太不成比例的篇幅。因为想给这种和感情密切相关的观点以清晰而一致的表达,需要涉及到我们国家现在公众品位的各个方面。而要确定公众品位健康或者堕落的程度又必须涉及到人类语言与精神怎样相互作用的问题,又不得不转到文学革命甚至社会革命本身的问题。因此我倾向于循序渐进地进行这场辩护。然而我明白,不预先对与那些被广泛接受和认同的作品有着本质不同的诗做一些介绍就唐突地打搅读者是很不恰当的。
  人们普遍认为,当一个人开始用韵文写作时,他跟读者之间就有了一个秘密的约定:某些观点和表达方式将会被读者在他的作品里找到,而另一些观点和表达永远不会出现。这种由诗歌语言带来的解释和象征必定会在不同的文学时代激起不同的期待:比如在卡图卢斯,特伦斯,卢克莱修时代,和斯塔提乌斯,克劳狄安时代,以及在我们国家的莎士比亚,鲍蒙特,弗莱彻时代,和多恩,考理,蒲柏时代。我不会预先判断在我们现代诗人写作时跟读者的约定应该是什么,但是好象对于很多人来说在我写作的时候必须履行某种不成文的约定。对于那些已经习惯于华美而空洞措辞的现代读者来说,如果他们坚持着某种预先的结论来读这些诗,他们会经常为一种陌生而笨拙的感觉而挣扎。他们会到处寻找诗句,他们会禁不住问出于怎样的好意才能把这些尝试之作称为诗。因此我希望读者不要因为企图阐明我建议自己表达的是什么,和(只要这篇序言的篇幅允许)解释促使我选择自己意图的主要原因而责备我。这个意图就是:至少他会不再对我有失望的感觉,至少我可以避免一个作家可能受到的最不名誉的责难,也就是是懒惰让他不尽力了解自己的责任所在,或者当他的责任明确时又让他不去履行。
  写作这些诗的主要宗旨就是,从普通生活中选择事件和遭遇,尽可能地用人们的口头语言来叙述和描绘他们,同时加以想象的色彩,籍此使日常的事物以一种不寻常的面貌呈现在我们的面前;更重要的是,通过毫不张扬地描摹自然的性质使这些事件和遭遇显得生动有趣起来:当然,尽量尊重我们在结合思想和激情时的方式。卑微的乡村生活被大量采用,因为,在那里,真实的感情和心灵能找到促使成熟的沃土,更少受到压抑,说着一种朴素但更果断有力的语言;因为在那种生活条件下,我们最基本的感情在一种更简单朴素的状态下共存,从而可以被更加正确的思量,和更强有力地表达;因为田园生活方式产生于那些最原始的感情,也来自于乡村劳动所必需的品格,更加容易被理解,也更容易持久;而且,也是因为在这种环境下人们的感情和美丽永恒的大自然融合.这些人们的语言(确实从看似是它的缺憾,即令人讨厌和恶心的持久和理性的因素中净化了)也被采用了,因为他们每一分钟都在跟语言的最好部分产生的对象交流;也是因为他们的社会阶层和语言的简单性和重复性,极少受社会空虚风气的影响,他们用简单而不加修饰的语言表达自己的感情和想法.因此,这种产生于重复经验和普通感情的语言比那些以脱离人们共同感情为荣,为了满足他们作品变化无常的品位和欲望而滥用武断而变化无常的表达方式的诗人们的语言更加持久,也更富于哲理.
  尽管如此,我不能无视关于我们同时代某些诗人作品思想和语言上表现出来的琐屑和卑劣的批评.而且我也知道这种缺点比俗艳和武断的创新对于作者来说更加不名誉;虽然我也觉得它比后者带来的危害小得多.从这本诗集的诗句中读者至少将发现一个很大不同的地方,即这里的每一首诗都蕴涵着有价值的意图.不是说我总是带着一个明确的意图在写作,而是说我相信沉思的习惯已经如此地影响和训练着自己的感情,以至于这些意图那样强烈地存在我的诗句中,看起来就像故意为之的一样.如果这种观念是错误的,我就没有资格被称做诗人.因为所有好的诗作都是强烈感情的自然流露:虽然这是正确的,但是能被赋予任何价值的诗作,不是产生于任何题材,而是产生于有着不同于常人的敏感和深刻而持久思想的诗人.因为我们感情的运动确实是被我们以往一些感情的结晶所引导和规范着;进一步我们对这些感情的结晶的关系作一下比较,我们会发现什么是对人们最重要,通过这种引导和规范的反复和继续,我们的感情将会和一些最重要的事情联系起来,直到最后,如果我们本身拥有足够的敏感,我们的思想将会形成一种习惯,在这种习惯盲目而机械的驱使下,我们描绘的事物和表达的思想以及他们之间的联系必定会给读者带来某些启迪,加强和净化他们的感情.
  我已经说过这里的每首诗都有各自的意图,另一个不得不说明的把这些作品与当今流行的诗作区别开的特点是:在这些诗里,是发展了的感情使诗中的情节和故事显得重要,而不是相反.
  错误的谦虚不能阻止我说明:向读者指明这些区别,不是为了这些与众不同的诗作,而是因为这些区别所表现出的观念的重要.这些观念确实是重要的!因为人类感情可以在没有粗俗和暴力的刺激下而激动.如果一个人不知道当他拥有这种能力时,他的精神就会得到升华的话,他就无法理解人类精神的美丽与尊严.因此我认为,唤醒和提高这种能力,对于任何时代的任何作家来说,都是他能做的最好的工作.但是这个杰出的工作对于我们的时代尤其重要.因为大量不为以前的时代所知的因素在钝化着人们的心灵,使它自觉地滑向一种近乎野蛮的迟钝.这些因素中最有效的是每天都在进行着的国家活动,和持续的城市人口增长.在那里人们呆板的的职业是他们渴望迅速的信息交流和智力带来的不一般的事件,国家的文学和戏剧表演已经屈服于这种生活倾向.我们无价的古代作品,像我提到的莎士比亚和弥尔顿的作品,在疯狂的小说,无聊而愚蠢的德国悲剧,和空虚而荒淫的叙事诗的充斥下已经被忽视.每当我想起那些对于暴力刺激的低级趣味时,就羞于说出自己为了反抗这些而作出了微不足道的努力.想起那些邪恶数量的巨大,我会被一种并非不名誉的忧伤所压抑,如果不是对人类精神的某些内在而不灭的品质,和对作用于这种品质的伟大而永恒的目标有着深刻的印象,而且对这种印象有一种信念:很快就会有一些强大的人,来系统地与这些邪恶抗争,并且取得非同一般的胜利.
  已经对于诗作的主题和目的讲了这么多,我请求读者允许我对于这些诗的写作风格作一些介绍,以防读者因为某些其他的原因而责备我写了些自己从未写过的东西.读者将很难从中找到一些抽象而深刻的东西,这种被普遍用来升华诗歌主题,使其高于散文的风格完全被我舍弃了.我的目的是尽力模仿和采用普通人的语言,当然那种抽象的东西不会是这种语言自然而规则的一部分.这种语言有时候确实像激情澎湃的演讲,我也是这样应用他们的.但是尽力避免把他们用作诗歌风格的机械装饰,或者像一个诗人通常被要求的一样把他们当作家庭语言.我希望给他们带来有血有肉的写作,保证这样会让他们感兴趣.那些期待不同东西的人也会感兴趣;我不妨害他们的主张,但是希望他们更加喜欢我的主张.他们也很难找到通常所谓的诗的语言,由于已经被说明的原因,我像人们尽力使用他们一样尽力避免他们,以使我自己的句子更接近于口语.因为我建议自己表达的欢乐与很多读者所期待和认可的有着太大的差异,我不知道除了告诉他们我一直在坚持着自己的主题还有什么更好的方式,让他们明白我的愿望和意图所要求的风格;因此我希望在我的诗作里没有错误的描述,也希望我的观点是用适合他们重要性的语言表达出来的.通过这种实践,我们一定会得到某些东西,因为它有利于所有诗作的共同财产,即良好的判断:但是它也必要地切断了很久以来被认为世代相传的诗人们共同财产的成语和比喻之间的联系.我也认为必须更加严格要求自己,放弃了一些本身很正确而漂亮,但是被一些愚蠢的诗人一再的重复而染上恶心的几乎无法消除的印记的许多表达方式.如果在一首诗有一些句子或者一行句子,虽然是被很自然地安排的,而且也符合韵律的规则,如果被一些批评家发现跟散文没有任何不同,即像他们说的散文体,那些批评家就会像发现一个人不知道自己的财产一样为之狂喜.现在这些批评家们想确定一些作品,如果一个读者想从阅读这些作品中获得享受,就必须完全拒绝其中的散文体部分.很容易向他证明,不仅每一首好诗的很大一部分甚至其最好的章节除了韵律方面再没有与散文不同的地方.而且我们会发现一些最好的诗的最有趣的部分跟写得好的散文几乎完全相似.这种论断的真实性几乎可以从所有的诗歌的大部分篇幅中得到证实,甚至弥尔顿自己的诗.为了大体上阐明这个观点,我将引证格雷的一首短诗.他是那些想扩大散文与诗歌之间距离的人中最突出的一个,他也比任何人更精心地设计自己的诗句结构.

In vain to me
the smiling mornings shine,
And reddening Phœbus lifts his golden fire:
The birds in vain their amorous descant(歌,伴唱) join,
Or cheerful fields resume their green attire.
These ears, alas! for other notes repine(抱怨);
A different object do these eyes require;
My lonely anguish (痛苦)melts no heart but mine;
And in my breast the imperfect joys expire(终止,消失);
Yet morning smiles the busy race to cheer,
And new-born pleasure brings to happier men;
The fields to all their wonted(习惯的) tribute(贡品,颂词) bear;
To warm their little loves the birds complain.
I fruitless mourn to him that cannot hear,
And weep the more because I weep in vain.

  很容易明白这首诗中唯一有价值的部分就是那些被印成斜体的句子.很明显,除了压韵和那个唯一的用来替换fruitlessly的fruitless(这种替换在我们今天看来是很错误的),这些句子里的语言跟散文里的没有任何不同.
  上面的引证表明散文的语言也适于诗歌.也表明每首诗的大部分语言跟散文没有什么不同.我们可以进一步说,它确实表明,用韵的诗跟散文之间没有也不可能有什么本质的不同.我们很欣喜地发现诗歌与绘画之间的相似之处,并且我们称它们为姐妹:但是我们到哪里去寻找代表诗歌与散文之间密切联系的纽带呢?他们都被同样的器官创造和感知;他们存在于其中的身体是同一种物质构成的,他们之间近乎亲属关系,甚至可以说是一体的.没有必要甚至搞成阶级对立.诗歌流不出天使的眼泪,也只是自然和人的眼泪罢了.它不能自诩为天上的唱诗班来区别散文的乳汁.同样的人类之血在它们的经脉中流淌.
  如果说诗歌的节奏和韵律推翻了上面说的诗歌语言与散文语言之间坚固的联系,并且让人们很自觉地承认别的人为的差别.那么我会说这里介绍的诗作,都是尽量应用口语.而且这些用真实的感觉和感情创造的作品,它们本身将比它们开始被预计的要好的多,完全不同于日常生活的粗俗和卑微;再加上韵律,我相信会让所有有理性的人都感到满意.我们有什么其他方面的差异呢?它什么时候会显现,它存在于哪里?当然不是通过诗歌的角色之口:为了风格的升华或者任何被认可的修饰目的都没有必要.因为如果主题选择得当,而且表现它的语言被真实而明智地采用,并且这种语言在修辞和形象的衬托下显得高尚丰富而鲜活;这个主题就会很自然地在适当的时候把他引向感情的高潮.为了不令读者震惊,我克制着不说那种把任何个人不相干的文采和自然生发的感情混杂起来是不协调,但完全可以说这种附加没有必要.能够肯定的是,那些适当富于修辞与形象的将得到他们应有的效果.如果在另外的场合,感情的特质更加柔和,表现风格也应该更加克制和适度.
  但是,因为现在呈现在读者面前的我希望通过自己的诗作给予的快乐,完全依赖于这种主题的观念.而且因为这种观念本身对于我们的品味和道德感情非常重要,我无法让自己满足于这些零散的讨论.如果对于某些人我所说的都不重要,我仿佛在一个没有敌人的战场上作战.这些人必须被提醒:我希望建立的观念几乎是未知的.如果我的理论被承认,而且被允许实施到它必需的程度.不管是颂扬还是批评,我们对于古代和现代的伟大作品的评判都会远不同于现在的观点.而且我们影响和被这些判断影响的道德感情,我相信,也会被修正和净化.
  让我们从更广泛的背景来继续这个主题,让我问诗人这个词是什么意思?什么是诗人?我们应该从他那里期待什么样的语言?----他是一个向人们说话的人:一个人,真的,这个人被赋予更多活跃的敏感,更加激烈的热情,和更多的温柔.这个人有着对人性深刻的了解,和比普通人被期待的更能理解和包容一切的灵魂,这个人欣喜于自己的激情和才华,比别人更满足于内在的精神生活.欢欣于沉思呈现于整个宇宙的相似的意志和激情.被迫习惯性地把他们从虚无之中创造出来.在这些品质之外他还有比别人更强的感受虚无之境的能力,在自己的内心中召唤感情的能力,这些感情确实比真实事件激发的感情大不相同,而且(特别是那些令人愉悦的悲悯情怀)比那些别人习惯出于自己的意图而感知的更接近真实的所在.从自己的内心和现实中,他已经得到更充分的准备,有更强大的能力来表达自己的所想和所感,特别是那些经过自己的选择和从自己内心中产生的并非一时冲动的感情.
  但是不管我们怎样假设甚至最伟大的诗人的才华,毫无疑问这种才华带给他的语言,在生动性和真实性上都会逊色于人们在真实的生活场景中在各种压力的作用下说出的话,诗人们自己创造或者他们感觉是从自己内心产生的语言只是人们日常口语的影子.
  不管我们期望诗人品格多么高尚,很明显,当他描绘和模仿感情时,他的工作在某种程度上相对于真实的行为和苦难的自由和力量来说是相当机械的,以至于他希望把自己的感情和他要写的人物的感情拉得更近,不是缩短时空的距离,而是使自己完全陷入一种幻觉,甚至把自己的和他们的感情混淆起来,看成一样的.仅仅修改那些在自己的写作只是为了给予快乐的信念的引导下得到的句子.这时,他将应用已经一直被坚持的选择原则.他将依靠这种原则来抵消那些如果不坚持它就会产生的痛苦而恶心的感情.他会觉得没有必要装饰和提高自然.他越是严格地遵循这种原则,他越会深深地觉得他的幻想和想象创造不出任何词语,能够跟事实和真理所展示的相比.
  那些大体上同意以上观点的人可能会说,诗人不可能在所有情况下足够精巧地创造出符合真实感情的语言,他应该把自己当成一个翻译者,他会毫不犹豫地用另一种杰作来代替自己难以达到的完美,有时候也会竭力超越自己的原作,为了减少点自己觉得必须承认的自卑.但是这将滋生空虚和没有男人气概的绝望.可以进一步说,这是那些不知道自己在说什么的人的妄言,他们用一种娱乐和空虚无聊的方式来谈论诗歌.他们将很严肃地跟我们谈论诗歌的品位问题,当他们说到它时,就像跟对于走索或者Frontiniac或者雪利酒的品位一样无关紧要的东西.据说亚里士多德说过诗歌是所有写作形式中最富于哲理的一种,确实是这样的,它的目标是真理,不是个人或者某个地方的真理,而是广泛而有效的真理;不是依赖于外部的证辞,而是被激情带入心中的真理;这种真理是它自己的证辞,给予它申诉的法庭以能力与信心,并且反过来从那法庭里得到这些.诗是人和自然的映象,他们跟历史学家和传记作家的忠实之间的距离,跟他们的作品的作用之间的距离,比其跟诗人将遇到的懂得其艺术高贵性的人之间的距离要大得多.诗人唯一受约束的地方就是,他要马上给予快乐的对象,不是单独作为律师,物理学家,水手,天文学家或者自然哲学家的人,而是一个人.除了这个障碍,诗人跟物象之间再没有其他的阻隔.而在这之间历史学家和传记作家的障碍有上千个.
  我们不是说,给予即刻的快乐是诗人艺术的降格.正相反,它是对宇宙之美的认知,是一种更加真挚的认知.因为它不是通过普通的而是间接的方法得到的.对于那些用爱的精神来看待世界的人来说,这种工作是轻松而简单的.更进一步说,它是对人类本来而原始高贵的敬意,是对人类伟大的基本快乐原则的敬意,人们就是根据这种原则感知,感觉,生存和活动着.除了这种快乐繁衍出来的东西我们没有其他共通的感觉,这一点我是不会被误解的.无论我们在哪里带着痛苦同情(别人),会发现这种同情是带着一种微妙的快乐产生和施与的.我们无法从具体事件的沉思中得到普遍的真理,除了那些产生于快乐而且依靠快乐存在的东西.科学家们,像化学家或数学家们,不管他们的工作多么的困难和厌烦,他们也知道这一点.不管解剖学家们获取知识的对象多么的令人痛苦,他们感到这种知识是快乐的,而且他们也觉得没有快乐的地方也没有知识.那么诗人们又怎样呢?在他们看来人们和他们周围的物体相互作用,产生的痛苦和快乐是无限复杂的.他认为人们在思考这些的时候凭的是一种获取直接知识的能力,一种确信,一种直觉和习惯上需要某种知觉的推理和演绎.他认为自己注视着这种思想与感情的复杂现象,在自己的内心找到对这种快乐失衡时的怜悯.
  我们能够欣喜于每个人都拥有的这种知识,和不需要任何日常生活之外的准则的怜悯,诗人只是指出他的关注.他认为人与自然在本质上是相互依存的,而人的思想是自然道具最美好最有趣的镜子.而诗人在伴随着他的沉思之路的快乐的驱使下,用跟科学家们通过劳动和长时间的等待在他们内心获得的相似的快乐,跟他研究的自然的特殊部分交谈.科学家和诗人的知识都是快乐,但是诗人的知识关联着我们存在的必需的部分,我们自然而不可剥夺的财产.而科学家的知识是一种个人单独的获得,传达给我们的速度很慢,没有习惯而直接的把我们和自己的同类联系起来的感情.科学家把真理当作遥远而未知的恩赐来探求,他在自己的孤独中珍惜和热爱它.而诗人吟唱着所有人共同的歌,他把真理当作我们可见的朋友和时刻的伴侣.诗是所有知识的呼吸和精华.它是对所有知识热情洋溢的表达,我们可以像莎士比亚说人一样说诗人:他思考着过去和未来.他是捍卫人性的基石,一个无论走到哪里都心怀关切和爱心的人性的支持者和保护者.不管土壤和气候,语言和礼仪,法律和风俗是多么的不同,不管在人们内心默默流淌的是什么,不管被暴力毁坏的是什么.诗人们用热情和知识把整个地球的所有世代的人类帝国都联系起来.诗人思接万物,虽然眼睛和感觉是人最好的向导,但是他能凭借自己的思想之翼到达任何他能找到感动的地方.诗是所有知识的开始和结束---它像人类的心灵一样不朽.如果说科学家的劳动间接地或直接地在我们的生活环境中,或我们习惯性接受的印象方面创造物质上的革命,那么诗人不止现在安睡.他将准备跟随科学家的脚步,不仅在那些普遍的非直接的方面,他将与科学家站在一起,感受他们科学对象本身.如果那些分离的科学的追随者们能创造出像懂得欢乐和痛苦的生命一样能够被明白地感知的材料,那么化学家,植物学家和矿物学家们最细微的发现,都将成为像他们能被采用的诗人们艺术的极好的对象.如果未来的某天现在被称为科学的东西能被赋予有血有肉的实体.诗人们将借出自己神圣的精神来帮助这种转变,将欢迎这种实体作为我们亲切而真实的人类家庭的同住者.将很难设想任何怀有我已经极力表达的诗歌的崇高概念的人,会用短暂而次要的装饰来破坏它的圣洁和真实.或者用所谓的艺术来刺激自己的喜好,而本来这种喜好是应该由自己选择的主题的高尚性来决定的.
  上面提到的适合于所有的诗作,但是特别适合于那些诗人通过自己的角色之口说出的部分.在这一点上我们可以得出一个结论,没有判断力强的人会不容忍作品的戏剧性部分是有缺陷的,这种缺陷来自于诗人对自然语言的偏离,和诗人自己语言的渲染,这种语言或者来自于他自己,或者来自于所有诗人共同的特质.对于一个用韵文写作,被期待运用特别语言的人尤其如此.
  我们不是从诗歌的戏剧性段落中寻找这种语言,而是应该从那些诗人发自内心的段落中去寻找.在阐明这种观点之前,我没有特别先描述诗人的内心特质.在我们列举的能够形成一个诗人的素质当中,没有什么特别暗示与普通人的有什么不同,只是程度大小的问题.总之我们要说的诗人不同于普通人的地方在于,诗人拥有在没有直接刺激的情况下更好的思考和感受的能力,一种更强大的表达在这种方式下的思考和感受的能力.但是这些激情,思想,感受是人类共有的.他们是用什么联系起来的呢?毫无疑问是通过我们的道德感觉和身体感官,和促脉在这些的原因;通过可见世界的运作,元素和外表.通过风雨与阳光,通过季节的更替,通过冷暖,通过朋友和亲人的失去,通过伤害和怨恨,感激和希望,恐惧和痛苦.这些和跟这些相似的东西都是描绘的感觉和对象.就像他们也是别人的感觉和使之感兴趣的对象一样.诗人思考和感受人类感情的精神.那么他的语言在材料上能高于那些能够清晰观察和感受的所有别的人吗?这可能被证明是不可能的.但是假设这不是事实,诗人可能被允许为了使自己和像自己一样的人满意而运用一种特殊的语言来表达自己的感情.但是诗人不只是为自己写作,而是为整个人类.因此除非我们是对无知艳羡的提倡者,除非我们愿意听到自己不懂的东西,诗人必须从那种假想的高度下来.为了引起理性的共鸣,必须像别人一样表达自己.我们还要补充一点,只有从口语或者跟口语相似的方式中选择语言,并且在这种选择的基础上正确地写作,他才是立足于坚实的大地,而且我们也知道能从他那里期待什么.我们对于韵律的感觉是相同的,可能我们应该提醒读者,韵律的差别是规则而统一的,不像所谓"诗的措辞",是任意的,没有任何规律可循的.另一方面,说到诗人可能选择什么样的比喻和措辞来观念感情,读者是完全受诗人支配的.另一方面,韵律有其诗人和读者都愿意服从的规律,因为这些规律是确定的.也是因为它跟要表达的感情没有冲突,而且就像许多时代已经显示的一样,它跟感情的结合,提升和促进了诗人要表达的快乐.
  现在可以回答一个很简单的问题,也就是既然我持有这样的观点,为什么一定要用诗的语言写作.在前面的基础上回答这个问题时,我第一个要说明的是,不管我怎样限制自己,我仍然不清楚,是什么组成了所有写作(散文或者诗歌)中最有价值的部分来提供无穷的形象和比喻的结合,是伟大普遍的人类感情,是他们工作中最普遍最有趣的部分,还是在我面前的自然的全部.现在设想一下,如果所有这些对象中的最有趣的部分都能够被散文清晰地描绘出来,我们为什么还要在那些描绘里加上被所有的民族都认可的存在于诗的语言中的魔力呢?关于这个问题,有一个不太令人信服的答案,即诗歌给予的快乐中只有极少一部分来自于韵律,而且用韵文写作是很浅薄的,除非伴随它的是与压韵有关的人为的文体上的差异;而且这种差异给予读者的震动将多于读者从这种强大文体中得到的快乐.为了回答那些坚持运用韵文的目的是给文章以某些文采来使文章更趋完美.还有那些在我看来过于低估了韵律本身力量的人.我们可以提到足够考察的大量诗作,那些现存的用很简单很直接的方式描写卑微生活的诗作,他们已经一代一代地流传并给予人们精神享受的诗作.现在,如果说简单和直接是缺憾的话,这里提到的事实也许表明既不简单也不直接诗作可能满足现代的要求.现在我主要想证明的是自己在这种观念下写作的正确性.
  但是可能有不同的因素被提出来导致了这样的结果,即为什么果断的文风,重要的主题,合理的压韵能持续地产生那种被人们证明是人们想要的快乐的一部分.诗歌的终极目的是创造一种极度快乐的激动.但是在我们的想象中激动是一种反常而不规则的心理状态,在这种状态下,思想和感情无法像平常一样契合.如果这种激动产生的语言本身是强大的,或者说这种语言中的形象和感情有连接着一种不正常的痛苦,则这种激动有超出它极限的危险.现在那种规则的我们的大脑在各种情绪和更少激动状态下已经适应的东西,只有通过日常感情和与激情联系不太紧密的别的感情的交织,才能缓和和克制激情.这一点毫无疑问是正确的,因此虽然这种理论粗看起来是荒谬的:通过韵律的特质来消解语言表现出来的真实,给予整个文本以非本质存在的半自觉状态,毫无疑问,包含着更大痛苦的悲惨境遇和感情能够在用韵的文章中得到慰籍,特别在诗歌中比在散文中更是这样.古代民谣中的韵律是非常朴实的,但是从中仍然能找到很多篇章证明这种观点.而且,我希望,如果细读他们之后的诗歌,也能从中找到相似的例子.如果读者勉强细读<<克拉丽莎>>和<<Gamester>>中难度很大的篇幅他也能从中得到类似的感受.莎士比亚的悲剧出来没有给予我们无法承受的悲哀----这种我们不我们能预见到的更好的效果应该归功于诗歌韵律带来的微小但规则而持续不断的喜悦.另一方面(这种必须被允许的情况将更加频繁地发生)如果诗人的语言和要表达的感情不相称,没有带给读者要求的激动(除非诗人的对韵律的选择相当粗糙),在读者已经习惯地把某种韵律与之联系起来的快乐感情中,在读者已经把某种韵律安排与之对应的不管是悲还是喜的感情中,将会发现某些语言被赋予了特殊的感情,使诗人的写作变得复杂.
  如果说我已经对自己的文学理论做了系统的辩护,那么我也将有义务对诗歌语言产生快乐的原因做一些展开.在这些原因中必定有一个所有深思过艺术的人都了解的主要原因,即思想从丰富多采的外部表象中获得快乐.这种准则是我们思想获得快乐的伟大源泉,和他的供养者.性欲和所有和它有关的感觉都来自于这个准则.它是我们日常交流的动力.在这种原则的指导下我们根据自己的品位和道德感情理解异中之同和同中之异.我们不能把这种原则用于对韵律的考虑之中,并且说因此韵律能够提供更多的快乐.并且指出这种快乐是怎样产生的.但是文章的篇幅不允许我在这方面做进一步的展开.我只能做一个简单的概述来满足自己.
  我已经说过诗歌是强烈感情的自然流露:它来源于在平静中积累起来的情绪.这种情绪在沉思中酝酿,直到平静消失,通过一定的相互作用,一种跟沉思之前的状态有点相象的情绪逐渐被产生出来,存在于自己的大脑里.在这种情绪下好的诗作开始出现,而且在类似的情绪下继续被写出来.但是不管什么样的怎样程度的由什么原因产生的情绪,都是被不同的快乐赋予的.在不管我们主动描述什么样的感情时,我们整个心灵都处于一种欢乐的状态.如果自然把从事这种工作的人这样细心地保护在这种欢乐的状态下,诗人应该得益于这种天赐,应该特别地注意,不管他传达给读者的是什么的激情,只要他的心志足够健全,都能在这种激情中感受到一种极度的欢乐.现在诗歌语言的和谐悦耳的音乐,感觉的困难被我们克服了,那种从富有节奏和韵律的作品中预先得到的快乐的盲目结合,那种近似于口语而在韵律的运用下与之大不相同的语言永远带来的模糊理解,所有这些微妙地组成了一种复杂的欢欣的感情.这种欢欣对于那种经常被发现混杂在激烈描写和深沉激情中的痛苦感情起着非常重要的抑制作用.这种效果经常在悲惨而又热情洋溢的诗歌中出现.相对的,在更平和的文章里诗人们极力营造的安详和优雅本身,无疑就是令读者满意的源泉.所有的这些都证明(没有人会否认),在这点上可能被确定的,所有关于激情,风格,性格的在散文和诗歌中同样被很好地表达的描述中,诗歌将会被读上百遍,而散文只会被读上一遍.
    已经谈了这么多我为什么用韵文写作的原因,和为什么我要从日常生活中选择题材,以及为什么我竭力使自己的语言贴近日常口语,如果说我太过谨慎地阐述自己的原因,但是同时我也在探讨一个大家都感兴趣的话题.也正是因为这个原因,我必须增加一点关于这些特别诗的特别原因,也是那些在这些诗中可能找到的缺点的原因.我知道我的联想肯定有时候太特别而不广泛,因此,有时候赋予某些事物不恰当的重要性,写了一些不太有价值的题材.但是相对于这一点我更在乎,我的语言可能受到任何人都无法避免的在特殊词语和句子作用下的感情和思想的随意结合带来的伤害.因此,我毫不怀疑在一些句子中,有一些甚至滑稽可笑的感情,在我的印象中被自己用温柔和凄惨的感情表现出来.这些错误的表达,如果我确信是错误的,而且也有必要继续这样,我将竭力理性地改正他们.但是仅仅在某些人甚至某一类人的要求下改正是危险的,因为在作者不太确定的地方,或者他的感情改变的地方这种改动都会带来某中伤害.因为他自己的感情是支持他自己的动力.如果他马上把他们丢在一边,他可能被诱使重复这种行为,知道失去所以的自信,变得彻底的疲惫不堪.必须说明的是,批评家们必须记住他跟诗人一样容易受这种诱惑.可能程度更深.因为不能假定大多数读者都不懂得语言已经展示的纷繁的意义的台阶,和特别思想之间关系的变化性和稳定性.最重要的是,既然他们这样地不在乎主题,他们可能轻易而又漫不经心的判断这些.
    既然读者已经被厌烦了这么久,我希望读者允许我警告他抵制关于这些诗的错误批评,在这些诗中语言跟自然和生活中的很接近.这些诗作已经被拙劣的模仿所打败.在这些虚假的作品中约翰逊的十四行诗是一个很好的例子.

  I put my hat
  upon my head
  And walked into the Strand(海滨),
  And there I met another man
  Whose hat was in his hand
   
    在这些句子下面让我们再给出最值得尊敬的十四行诗.
  
  ‘Babes in the Wood.’      
    These pretty Babes with hand in hand
    Went wandering up and down;
    But never more they saw the Man
    Approaching from the town.
  
    在这两首诗的词语和词语安排中,在任何方面都没有与最没有激情的谈话不同的地方.在这两首诗中都有像意义最平常的"the Strand"和‘the town’这样的单词,然而我们承认其中的一个值得尊敬,而另外一个登峰造极地可鄙.这种不同来源于何处?不是来自于韵律,也不是来自于语言,也不是来自于语言的安排.但是约翰逊的十四行诗里的内容是可鄙的.并不是说那种特有的处理轻浮而简单事情的写诗方法(约翰逊的这首诗是一个很好的例子)是很坏的,或者非诗.但是这些需要判断力,轻浮和简单本身并不有趣,也不能导致有趣的事情.其中的形象并不来源于从思考中产生的理智的感情状态,也不能激发读者的思想和感情.这是唯一的处理这种文章的方式.为什么在定义种类之前让自己为类别烦恼.为什么痛苦地证明猿不是牛顿,既然它本身就不是人?
    我必须问读者的是,在他判断一首诗的时候是根据他自己的真诚的的感觉,还是考虑到别人可能的判断.经常听到一个这样说,他个人并不反对这种文体风格,或者这种那种表达方式.但是对于某些阶层的人来说是拙劣而可笑的.这种对于所有合理而纯净的判断极具杀伤力的批评风格是极其普遍的.让读者用自己的感情独立地忍受这种这些,如果他发现自己受了影响,让他根据自己得到的快乐来承受这种臆测的干扰.
    如果一个作者的一篇文章让我们看到他的令人尊敬的天才,也许这点可以支持我们假设,在那些他让我们很不愉快的文章里,他也没有写什么恶意而荒谬的东西.进一步促使我们用否则不可能有的耐心来重读那些使我们不快的部分.这不仅是一种公正的行为,而且对于我们的诗歌来说跟是如此,可能导致我们的品位提升到一个更高的水平.因为一种正确的对于诗歌和其他艺术的品位,就像约书亚.雷诺兹先生说的,需要天赋.而这种天赋只产生于思考和长时间的跟优秀文本的交流.我没有提到不让最没有经验的读者自己判断(我甚至已经说让他自己判断),只是想帮助减少一点评价的轻率,建议如果没有花很多时间来阅读一首诗,这种判断可能是错误的,而且在很多情况下都是这样的.
  没有什么能够,我知道,那样有效地深化我的最终观点,以至于向读者表明那种与我在这里介绍的本质上不同的由韵文产生的快乐是什么,和这种快乐是怎样产生的.因为读者可能说他已经喜欢上那篇韵文了.那我们能为他做写别的什么?任何艺术的力量都是有限的,他可能感到,只有在他抛弃旧朋友的时候才能给予他新朋友.而且,我已经说过,读者自己能够从他自己认为是诗的文章里找到快乐,每个人都对已经长久给予他快乐的东西有一种感恩的心情和令人尊敬的固执.我们不仅希望被愉悦,而且希望是通过自己已经习惯的方式被愉悦,在这些感情中有足够多的东西引起争论.我不大可能战胜他们,我愿意承认为了欣赏我在这里推荐的诗作,必须放弃很多我们平常享受的快乐.如果我篇幅的局限已经允许我指出这种快乐是怎样产生的,而且读者理解这些语言的力量不像他想象的那样局限,许多障碍都将被消除.诗歌给予别样更纯净更持久更优雅的愉悦是可能的.主题的一部分还没有完全被忽略,但是表示我要证明的主要观点,也就是别样诗歌产生的快乐不够鲜明,更少的值得思想的更高贵部分来重新认真地阅读.而且如果我的目标达到了,一种真正的诗歌将被产生出来.本质上将永远吸引着人类的兴趣.在精神叙述的质量和多样性上同样重要.
  根据已经讲到的,通过对于这些诗歌的熟读,读者将能够清楚地懂得我的观点:他将知道这些作品向它的目标走了多远,而且更重要的是,这种目标是否值得达到,在对这两个问题的答案中存在着我们对于公众认可的要求.

[ 本帖最后由 怀抱花朵的孩子 于 2006-5-16 10:40 编辑 ]
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

移动版|Archiver|芦笛

GMT+8, 2024-5-6 21:34

Powered by Discuz! X3

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表