ENGLISH POETRY AND THE MODERN AGE-F.R.LEAVIS

 

F.R.LEAVIS' "ENGLISH POETRY AND THE MODERN AGE"-

 A CRITIQUE



F.R.LEAVIS

1.                                                                             

 F. R .Leavis is a great critic in modern times. He was an English literary critic of the early-to-mid twentieth century. He taught for much of his career at Downing college, Cambridge but often latterly at the University of York. This essay with the title F. R. Leavis’ English Poetry and the Modern Age was originally written in French in 1930. Later Q. D. Leavis translated it French into English. Being a professor of English at Oxford, he did not write any poetry but he had immense theoretical knowledge of poetry in general and the modern poetry specifically

This essay has similarity with his another book New Bearings in English Poetry. As he decided to expand it to the original essay into a book form, devoting separate chapters on Eliot, Pound and Hopkins. The twenty pages’ essay made it into a full length book. The main part is the description of 19th century poetry preoccupation and assumption in relation to Mathew Arnold’s statement that ‘John Dryden and Alexander Pope are not the classics of our poetry’. There were constricting effects on late 19th century poetry of the poetical convention and techniques which later forms the major portion of New Bearings in English Poetry. The comparison between Lord Tennyson and John Keats is followed by the discussion of Arnold’s verse. As Leavis points out it is extensive recognition of the contemporary disease malaise. There is also discussion on Robert Browning’s poetry which cannot be said to be a poetry of withdrawal. Later, there is a discussion of poetry of Thomas Hardy in the same book and the substantive difference is found. In his discussion of poem, ‘After A Journey’ followed by comment that in modern days’ skepticism is more radical and more complete. There is also reference to E. M. Forster’s novel ‘A Passage to India ‘. Leavis avoids the analysis of Edward Thomas’s poetry nor of Yeats’s, De La Mare and Blunden.  Leavis says that in the modern world poetry matters little. It has little of contemporary intelligence. Lots of poetry was published and anthologized by J. C. Square and Harold Munroe. There were nearly 500 excellent poems by 100 poets. There is no live tradition in poetry, no public capable of serious interest.

So many poets were born and they lived in different place and different ages. what matters is their use of talent. Every age has its own preoccupation and its own assumption. There were poetical subjects and poetical material and modes. Leavis repeats his statement in the middle of the essay that Arnold dismisses John Dryden and Alexander Pope as classics of poetry but regards them as classics of prose. Arnold shares a prejudice against Milton’s formula that poetry should be simple, sensuous and passionate. On the contrary, the poetry of the Metaphysical and the Neo-Classical[D1]  and some of the Modern is a play of intellect and stress of cerebral muscle. Such poetry never moved the heart of the readers. Next he discusses the poetry of the Romantics especially poetry of John Keats who wrote the poems for the sake of poetry. On the contrary, Mathew Arnold represents the poetry of the intellect and morality and wit. He is the great Victorian poet who reflected pessimism. So is the poetry of Lord Tennyson. So there is a obvious difference between these two opposite streams of poetry -  poetry of passion and the poetry of intellect. Poetry in every age, confines itself by the ideas of the essential poetical.

A poet is more alive to the problem, issues of the society of his age than other people. He is at most conscious point of the race in his time. The important poet is important because he belongs to tiny minority and his capacity to experience and communicate his ideas. His interest in his experience is not separable from his interest in words to sharpen his awareness of his ways of feelings so making this communicable.

F. R. Leavis comments that the Victorian poets are largely the poets of day-dreaming and away from the harsh reality of the society. On the contrary, the modern poets manifest themselves with their concern to social issues. He quotes a paragraph written by Robert Bridges in his book Testament of Beauty. His first sentence is that the old poets have done triumphantly arrested by sincerity and courage. Also he refers to Alfred Nose and his modern poems.

In the last segment of his essay, he discusses the poems of T. S. Eliot in contrast to Thomas Hardy, Meredith and Robert Browning. Hardy was regarded as the last Victorian and the first modern. Mainly he discusses  Eliot’s Wasteland which has originality of theme and expression. It expressed post- world war moral degradation set in the modern world. Many think that Eliot poetry is difficult and obscure and its incomprehensible without notes. Poems have units and structure, the personages who appear could not be assembled on any stage for there is no narrative and dramatic cohesion. As Eliot himself describes the poems as “heap of broken images”. Moral degradation, fragmentation, alienation and suffering are the main themes of Wasteland. The symbol of water is often used because of the lack of rain so it becomes wasteland. Symbolically represents infertility of the human race. The sound of rain is heard at the end of the poem. It is the masterpiece of 20th century modern poetry. At the end of the essay, Leavis says that poetry, literature and art, have less appeal for the larger segment of people,  but people will have less interest in poetry. 


References:

1.               Leavis, F.R.: New Bearings in English Poetry , Penguin, London, 1976.

2.               Eliot’ T .S : The Waste Land and Other Poems ,Barnes Noble Classics, London, 2005.

3.                 Sanderson, Andrew: The Short Oxford History of English Literature, Oxford,London,2005.

 

 [D1]

Comments

Post a Comment