Thomas Moore- Collected Poetical Works

by Thomas Moore

  “I recollect the effect on me of the Edinburgh on my first poem; it was rage, and resistance, and redress — but not despondency nor despair. I grant that those are not amiable feelings; but, in this world of bustle and broil, and especially in the career of writing, a man should calculate upon his powers of resistance before he goes into the arena.

  “‘Expect not life from pain nor danger free, Nor deem the doom of man reversed for thee.’

  “You know my opinion of that second-hand school of poetry. You also know my high opinion of your own poetry, — because it is of no school. I read Cenci — but, besides that I think the subject essentially undramatic, I am not an admirer of our old dramatists, as models. I deny that the English have hitherto had a drama at all. Your Cenci, however, was a work of power, and poetry. As to my drama, pray revenge yourself upon it, by being as free as I have been with yours.

  “I have not yet got your Prometheus, which I long to see. I have heard nothing of mine, and do not know that it is yet published. I have published a pamphlet on the Pope controversy, which you will not like. Had I known that Keats was dead — or that he was alive and so sensitive — I should have omitted some remarks upon his poetry, to which I was provoked by his attack upon Pope, and my disapprobation of his own style of writing.

  “You want me to undertake a great poem — I have not the inclination nor the power. As I grow older, the indifference — not to life, for we love it by instinct — but to the stimuli of life, increases. Besides, this late failure of the Italians has latterly disappointed me for many reasons, — some public, some personal. My respects to Mrs. S.

  “Yours ever.

  “P.S. Could not you and I contrive to meet this summer? Could not you take a run here alone?”

  LETTER 420. TO MR. MURRAY.

  “Ravenna, April 26. 1821.

  “I sent you by last postis a large packet, which will not do for publication (I suspect), being, as the apprentices say, ‘damned low.’ I put off also for a week or two sending the Italian scrawl which will form a note to it. The reason is that, letters being opened, I wish to ‘bide a wee.’

  “Well, have you published the Tragedy? and does the Letter take?

  “Is it true, what Shelley writes me, that poor John Keats died at Rome of the Quarterly Review? I am very sorry for it, though I think he took the wrong line as a poet, and was spoilt by Cockneyfying, and suburbing, and versifying Tooke’s Pantheon and Lempriere’s Dictionary. I know, by experience, that a savage review is hemlock to a sucking author; and the one on me (which produced the English Bards, &c.) knocked me down — but I got up again. Instead of bursting a blood-vessel, I drank three bottles of claret, and began an answer, finding that there was nothing in the article for which I could lawfully knock Jeffrey on the head, in an honourable way. However, I would not be the person who wrote the homicidal article for all the honour and glory in the world, though I by no means approve of that school of scribbling which it treats upon.

  “You see the Italians have made a sad business of it, — all owing to treachery and disunion amongst themselves. It has given me great vexation. The execrations heaped upon the Neapolitans by the other Italians are quite in unison with those of the rest of Europe.

  “Yours, &c.

  “P.S. Your latest packet of books is on its way here, but not arrived. Kenilworth excellent. Thanks for the pocket-books, of which I have made presents to those ladies who like cuts, and landscapes, and all that. I have got an Italian book or two which I should like to send you if I had an opportunity.

  “I am not at present in the very highest health, — spring probably; so I have lowered my diet and taken to Epsom salts.

  “As you say my prose is good, why don’t you treat with Moore for the reversion of the Memoirs? — conditionally, recollect; not to be published before decease. He has the permission to dispose of them, and I advised him to do so.”

  LETTER 421. TO MR. MOORE.

  “Ravenna, April 28. 1821.

  “You cannot have been more disappointed than myself, nor so much deceived. I have been so at some personal risk also, which is not yet done away with. However, no time nor circumstances shall alter my tone nor my feelings of indignation against tyranny triumphant. The present business has been as much a work of treachery as of cowardice, — though both may have done their part. If ever you and I meet again, I will have a talk with you upon the subject. At present, for obvious reasons, I ran write but little, as all letters are opened. In mine they shall always find my sentiments, but nothing that can lead to the oppression of others.

  “You will please to recollect that the Neapolitans are nowhere now more execrated than in Italy, and not blame a whole people for the vices of a province. That would be like condemning Great Britain because they plunder wrecks in Cornwall.

  “And now let us be literary; — a sad falling off, but it is always a consolation. If ‘Othello’s occupation be gone,’ let us take to the next best; and, if we cannot contribute to make mankind more free and wise, we may amuse ourselves and those who like it. What are you writing? I have been scribbling at intervals, and Murray will be publishing about now.

  “Lady Noel has, as you say, been dangerously ill; but it may console you to learn that she is dangerously well again.

  “I have written a sheet or two more of Memoranda for you; and I kept a little Journal for about a month or two, till I had filled the paper-book. I then left it off, as things grew busy, and, afterwards, too gloomy to set down without a painful feeling. This I should be glad to send you, if I had an opportunity; but a volume, however small, don’t go well by such posts as exist in this Inquisition of a country.

  “I have no news. As a very pretty woman said to me a few nights ago, with the tears in her eyes, as she sat at the harpsichord, ‘Alas! the Italians must now return to making operas.’ I fear that and maccaroni are their forte, and ‘motley their only wear.’ However, there are some high spirits among them still. Pray write. And believe me,” &c.

  LETTER 422. TO MR. MOORE.

  “Ravenna, May 3. 1821.

  “Though I wrote to you on the 28th ultimo, I must acknowledge yours of this day, with the lines. They are sublime, as well as beautiful, and in your very best mood and manner. They are also but too true. However, do not confound the scoundrels at the heel of the boot with their betters at the top of it. I assure you that there are some loftier spirits.

  “Nothing, however, can be better than your poem, or more deserved by the Lazzaroni. They are now abhorred and disclaimed nowhere more than here. We will talk over these things (if we meet) some day, and I will recount my own adventures, some of which have been a little hazardous, perhaps.

  “So, you have got the Letter on Bowles? I do not recollect to have said any thing of you that could offend, — certainly, nothing intentionally. As for * *, I meant him a compliment. I wrote the whole off-hand, without copy or correction, and expecting then every day to be called into the field. What have I said of you? I am sure I forget. It must be something of regret for your approbation of Bowles. And did you not approve, as he says? Would I had known that before! I would have given him some more gruel. My intention was to make fun of all these fellows; but how I succeeded, I don’t know.

  “As to Pope, I have always regarded him as the greatest name in our poetry. Depend upon it, the rest are barbarians. He is a Greek Temple, with a Gothic Cathedral on one hand, and a Turkish Mosque and all sorts of fantastic pagodas and conventicles about him. You may call Shakspeare and Milton pyramids, if you please, but I prefer the Temple of Theseus or the Parthenon to a mountain of burnt brick-work.

  “The Murray has written to me but once, the day of its publication, when it seemed prosperous. But I have heard of late from England but rarely. Of Murray’s other publications (of mine), I know nothing, — nor whether he has published. He was to have done so a month ago. I wish you would do something, — or that we were together.

  “Ever yours and affectionately,

 
; “B.”

  It was at this time that he began, under the title of “Detached Thoughts,” that Book of Notices or Memorandums, from which, in the course of these pages, I have extracted so many curious illustrations of his life and opinions, and of which the opening article is as follows: —

  “Amongst various Journals, Memoranda, Diaries, &c. which I have kept in the course of my living, I began one about three months ago, and carried it on till I had filled one paper-book (thinnish), and two sheets or so of another. I then left off, partly because I thought we should have some business here, and I had furbished up my arms and got my apparatus ready for taking a turn with the patriots, having my drawers full of their proclamations, oaths, and resolutions, and my lower rooms of their hidden weapons, of most calibres, — and partly because I had filled my paper-book.

  “But the Neapolitans have betrayed themselves and all the world; and those who would have given their blood for Italy can now only give her their tears.

  “Some day or other, if dust holds together, I have been enough in the secret (at least in this part of the country) to cast perhaps some little light upon the atrocious treachery which has replunged Italy into barbarism: at present, I have neither the time nor the temper. However the real Italians are not to blame; merely the scoundrels at the heel of the boot, which the Hun now wears, and will trample them to ashes with for their servility. I have risked myself with the others here, and how far I may or may not be compromised is a problem at this moment. Some of them, like Craigengelt, would ‘tell all, and more than all, to save themselves.’ But, come what may, the cause was a glorious one, though it reads at present as if the Greeks had run away from Xerxes. Happy the few who have only to reproach themselves with believing that these rascals were less ‘rascaille’ than they proved! — Here in Romagna, the efforts were necessarily limited to preparations and good intentions, until the Germans were fairly engaged in equal warfare — as we are upon their very frontiers, without a single fort or hill nearer than San Marino. Whether ‘hell will be paved with’ those ‘good intentions,’ I know not; but there will probably be good store of Neapolitans to walk upon the pavement, whatever may be its composition. Slabs of lava from their mountain, with the bodies of their own damned souls for cement, would be the fittest causeway for Satan’s ‘Corso.’”

  LETTER 423. TO MR. MURRAY.

  “Ravenna, May 10. 1821.

  “I have just got your packet. I am obliged to Mr. Bowles, and Mr. Bowles is obliged to me, for having restored him to good-humour. He is to write, and you to publish, what you please, — motto and subject. I desire nothing but fair play for all parties. Of course, after the new tone of Mr. Bowles, you will not publish my defence of Gilchrist: it would be brutal to do so after his urbanity, for it is rather too rough, like his own attack upon Gilchrist. You may tell him what I say there of his Missionary (it is praised, as it deserves). However, and if there are any passages not personal to Bowles, and yet bearing upon the question, you may add them to the reprint (if it is reprinted) of my first Letter to you. Upon this consult Gifford; and, above all, don’t let any thing be added which can personally affect Mr. Bowles.

  “In the enclosed notes, of course what I say of the democracy of poetry cannot apply to Mr. Bowles, but to the Cockney and water washing-tub schools.

  “I hope and trust that Elliston won’t be permitted to act the drama. Surely he might have the grace to wait for Kean’s return before he attempted it; though, even then, I should be as much against the attempt as ever.

  “I have got a small packet of books, but neither Waldegrave, Oxford, nor Scott’s novels among them. Why don’t you republish Hodgson’s Childe Harold’s Monitor and Latino-mastix? They are excellent. Think of this — they are all for Pope.

  “Yours,” &c.

  The controversy, in which Lord Byron, with so much grace and good-humour, thus allowed himself to be disarmed by the courtesy of his antagonist, it is not my intention to run the risk of reviving by any enquiry into its origin or merits. In all such discussions on matters of mere taste and opinion, where, on one side, it is the aim of the disputants to elevate the object of the contest, and on the other, to depreciate it, Truth will usually be found, like Shakspeare’s gatherer of samphire on the cliff, “halfway down.” Whatever judgment, however, may be formed respecting the controversy itself, of the urbanity and gentle feeling on both sides, which (notwithstanding some slight trials of this good understanding afterwards) led ultimately to the result anticipated in the foregoing letter, there can be but one opinion; and it is only to be wished that such honourable forbearance were as sure of imitators as it is, deservedly, of eulogists. In the lively pages thus suppressed, when ready fledged for flight, with a power of self-command rarely exercised by wit, there are some passages, of a general nature, too curious to be lost, which I shall accordingly proceed to extract for the reader.

  “Pope himself ‘sleeps well — nothing can touch him further;’ but those who love the honour of their country, the perfection of her literature, the glory of her language, are not to be expected to permit an atom of his dust to be stirred in his tomb, or a leaf to be stripped from the laurel which grows over it. * * *

  “To me it appears of no very great consequence whether Martha Blount was or was not Pope’s mistress, though I could have wished him a better. She appears to have been a cold-hearted, interested, ignorant, disagreeable woman, upon whom the tenderness of Pope’s heart in the desolation of his latter days was cast away, not knowing whither to turn, as he drew towards his premature old age, childless and lonely, — like the needle which, approaching within a certain distance of the pole, becomes helpless and useless, and ceasing to tremble, rusts. She seems to have been so totally unworthy of tenderness, that it is an additional proof of the kindness of Pope’s heart to have been able to love such a being. But we must love something. I agree with Mr. B. that she ‘could at no time have regarded Pope personally with attachment,’ because she was incapable of attachment; but I deny that Pope could not be regarded with personal attachment by a worthier woman. It is not probable, indeed, that a woman would have fallen in love with him as he walked along the Mall, or in a box at the opera, nor from a balcony, nor in a ball-room: but in society he seems to have been as amiable as unassuming, and, with the greatest disadvantages of figure, his head and face were remarkably handsome, especially his eyes. He was adored by his friends — friends of the most opposite dispositions, ages, and talents — by the old and wayward Wycherley, by the cynical Swift, the rough Atterbury, the gentle Spence, the stern attorney-bishop Warburton, the virtuous Berkeley, and the ‘cankered Bolingbroke.’ Bolingbroke wept over him like a child; and Spence’s description of his last moments is at least as edifying as the more ostentatious account of the deathbed of Addison. The soldier Peterborough and the poet Gay, the witty Congreve and the laughing Rowe, the eccentric Cromwell and the steady Bathurst, were all his intimates. The man who could conciliate so many men of the most opposite description, not one of whom but was a remarkable or a celebrated character, might well have pretended to all the attachment which a reasonable man would desire of an amiable woman.

  “Pope, in fact, wherever he got it, appears to have understood the sex well. Bolingbroke, ‘a judge of the subject,’ says Warton, thought his ‘Epistle on the Characters of Women’ his ‘masterpiece.’ And even with respect to the grosser passion, which takes occasionally the name of ‘romantic,’ accordingly as the degree of sentiment elevates it above the definition of love by Buffon, it may be remarked, that it does not always depend upon personal appearance, even in a woman. Madame Cottin was a plain woman, and might have been virtuous, it may be presumed, without much interruption. Virtuous she was, and the consequences of this inveterate virtue were that two different admirers (one an elderly gentleman) killed themselves in despair (see Lady Morgan’s ‘France’). I would not, however, recommend this rigour to plain women in general, in the hope of securing the glory of two suicides apiece. I believe
that there are few men who, in the course of their observations on life, may not have perceived that it is not the greatest female beauty who forms the longest and the strongest passions.

  “But, apropos of Pope. — Voltaire tells us that the Marechal Luxembourg (who had precisely Pope’s figure) was not only somewhat too amatory for a great man, but fortunate in his attachments. La Valière, the passion of Louis XIV. had an unsightly defect. The Princess of Eboli, the mistress of Philip the Second of Spain, and Maugiron, the minion of Henry the Third of France, had each of them lost an eye; and the famous Latin epigram was written upon them, which has, I believe, been either translated or imitated by Goldsmith:

  “‘Lumine Acon dextro, capta est Leonilla sinistro, Et potis est forma vincere uterque Deos: Blande puer, lumen quod habes concede sorori, Sic tu cæcus Amor, sic erit illa Venus.’

  “Wilkes, with his ugliness, used to say that ‘he was but a quarter of an hour behind the handsomest man in England;’ and this vaunt of his is said not to have been disproved by circumstances. Swift, when neither young, nor handsome, nor rich, nor even amiable, inspired the two most extraordinary passions upon record, Vanessa’s and Stella’s.

  “‘Vanessa, aged scarce a score. Sighs for a gown of forty-four.’

  He requited them bitterly; for he seems to have broken the heart of the one, and worn out that of the other; and he had his reward, for he died a solitary idiot in the hands of servants.

  “For my own part, I am of the opinion of Pausanias, that success in love depends upon Fortune. ‘They particularly renounce Celestial Venus, into whose temple, &c. &c. &c. I remember, too, to have seen a building in Ægina in which there is a statue of Fortune, holding a horn of Amalthea; and near here there is a winged Love. The meaning of this is, that the success of men in love affairs depends more on the assistance of Fortune than the charms of beauty. I am persuaded, too, with Pindar (to whose opinion I submit in other particulars), that Fortune is one of the Fates, and that in a certain respect she is more powerful than her sisters.’ — See Pausanias, Achaics, book vii. cha page 246. ‘Taylor’s Translation.’