The poet is
evidently struggling with a subject that is too weighty for him, and at
times he staggers and sinks beneath his burden.
evidently struggling with a subject that is too weighty for him, and at
times he staggers and sinks beneath his burden.
Alexander Pope
Objectors who would construct a system in
which all virtuous men are blest, are challenged to define the virtuous
and to specify what is meant by blessings. Honors, nobility, fame,
superior talents, often merely serve to make their possessors unhappy.
Virtue alone is happiness, and virtue consists in a recognition of the
laws of Providence, and in love for one's fellow-man.
Even this brief outline will show, I think, some of the inconsistencies
and omissions of Pope's train of thought. A careful examination of his
arguments in detail would be wholly out of place here. The reader who
wishes to pursue the subject further may consult Warburton's elaborate
vindication of Pope's argument, and Elwin's equally prosy refutation, or
better still the admirable summary by Leslie Stephen in the chapter on
this poem in his life of Pope ('English Men of Letters'). No one is now
likely to turn to the writer of the early eighteenth century for a
system of the universe, least of all to a writer so incapable of exact
or systematic thinking as Alexander Pope. If the 'Essay on Man' has any
claim to be read to-day, it must be as a piece of literature pure and
simple. For philosophy and poetry combined, Browning and Tennyson lie
nearer to our age and mode of thought than Pope.
Even regarded as a piece of literature the 'Essay on Man' cannot, I
think, claim the highest place among Pope's works. It obtained, indeed,
a success at home and abroad such as was achieved by no other English
poem until the appearance of 'Childe Harold'. It was translated into
French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Polish, and Latin. It was imitated
by Wieland, praised by Voltaire, and quoted by Kant. But this success
was due in part to the accuracy with which it reflected ideas which were
the common property of its age, in part to the extraordinary vigor and
finish of its epigrams, which made it one of the most quotable of
English poems. But as a whole the Essay is not a great poem.
The poet is
evidently struggling with a subject that is too weighty for him, and at
times he staggers and sinks beneath his burden. The second and third
books in particular are, it must be confessed, with the exception of one
or two fine outbursts, little better than dull, and dullness is not a
quality one is accustomed to associate with Pope. The 'Essay on Man'
lacks the bright humor and imaginative artistry of 'The Rape of the
Lock,' and the lively portraiture, vigorous satire, and strong personal
note of the 'Moral Epistles' and 'Imitations of Horace'. Pope is at his
best when he is dealing with a concrete world of men and women as they
lived and moved in the London of his day; he is at his worst when he is
attempting to seize and render abstract ideas.
Yet the 'Essay on Man' is a very remarkable work. In the first place, it
shows Pope's wonderful power of expression. No one can read the poem for
the first time without meeting on page after page phrases and epigrams
which have become part of the common currency of our language. Pope's
"precision and firmness of touch," to quote the apt statement of Leslie
Stephen, "enables him to get the greatest possible meaning into a narrow
compass. He uses only one epithet, but it is the right one. " Even when
the thought is commonplace enough, the felicity of the expression gives
it a new and effective force. And there are whole passages where Pope
rises high above the mere coining of epigrams. As I have tried to show
in my notes he composed by separate paragraphs, and when he chances upon
a topic that appeals to his imagination or touches his heart, we get an
outburst of poetry that shines in splendid contrast to the prosaic
plainness of its surroundings. Such, for example, are the noble verses
that tell of the immanence of God in his creation at the close of the
first epistle, or the magnificent invective against tyranny and
superstition in the third (ll. 241-268).
Finally the 'Essay on Man' is of interest in what it tells us of Pope
himself. Mr.
which all virtuous men are blest, are challenged to define the virtuous
and to specify what is meant by blessings. Honors, nobility, fame,
superior talents, often merely serve to make their possessors unhappy.
Virtue alone is happiness, and virtue consists in a recognition of the
laws of Providence, and in love for one's fellow-man.
Even this brief outline will show, I think, some of the inconsistencies
and omissions of Pope's train of thought. A careful examination of his
arguments in detail would be wholly out of place here. The reader who
wishes to pursue the subject further may consult Warburton's elaborate
vindication of Pope's argument, and Elwin's equally prosy refutation, or
better still the admirable summary by Leslie Stephen in the chapter on
this poem in his life of Pope ('English Men of Letters'). No one is now
likely to turn to the writer of the early eighteenth century for a
system of the universe, least of all to a writer so incapable of exact
or systematic thinking as Alexander Pope. If the 'Essay on Man' has any
claim to be read to-day, it must be as a piece of literature pure and
simple. For philosophy and poetry combined, Browning and Tennyson lie
nearer to our age and mode of thought than Pope.
Even regarded as a piece of literature the 'Essay on Man' cannot, I
think, claim the highest place among Pope's works. It obtained, indeed,
a success at home and abroad such as was achieved by no other English
poem until the appearance of 'Childe Harold'. It was translated into
French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Polish, and Latin. It was imitated
by Wieland, praised by Voltaire, and quoted by Kant. But this success
was due in part to the accuracy with which it reflected ideas which were
the common property of its age, in part to the extraordinary vigor and
finish of its epigrams, which made it one of the most quotable of
English poems. But as a whole the Essay is not a great poem.
The poet is
evidently struggling with a subject that is too weighty for him, and at
times he staggers and sinks beneath his burden. The second and third
books in particular are, it must be confessed, with the exception of one
or two fine outbursts, little better than dull, and dullness is not a
quality one is accustomed to associate with Pope. The 'Essay on Man'
lacks the bright humor and imaginative artistry of 'The Rape of the
Lock,' and the lively portraiture, vigorous satire, and strong personal
note of the 'Moral Epistles' and 'Imitations of Horace'. Pope is at his
best when he is dealing with a concrete world of men and women as they
lived and moved in the London of his day; he is at his worst when he is
attempting to seize and render abstract ideas.
Yet the 'Essay on Man' is a very remarkable work. In the first place, it
shows Pope's wonderful power of expression. No one can read the poem for
the first time without meeting on page after page phrases and epigrams
which have become part of the common currency of our language. Pope's
"precision and firmness of touch," to quote the apt statement of Leslie
Stephen, "enables him to get the greatest possible meaning into a narrow
compass. He uses only one epithet, but it is the right one. " Even when
the thought is commonplace enough, the felicity of the expression gives
it a new and effective force. And there are whole passages where Pope
rises high above the mere coining of epigrams. As I have tried to show
in my notes he composed by separate paragraphs, and when he chances upon
a topic that appeals to his imagination or touches his heart, we get an
outburst of poetry that shines in splendid contrast to the prosaic
plainness of its surroundings. Such, for example, are the noble verses
that tell of the immanence of God in his creation at the close of the
first epistle, or the magnificent invective against tyranny and
superstition in the third (ll. 241-268).
Finally the 'Essay on Man' is of interest in what it tells us of Pope
himself. Mr.
