![]() |
Before this thread sinks back into the archives again, I wanted to add one little bit of Muir’s criticism, plus another poem.
Somebody in this thread said that Muir was nothing special as a critic. I was surprised at the comment, since for me Muir’s criticism is always worthwhile, if humanity and imagination have anything to do with it. Which I suppose is asking for a lot. Muir’s best book of criticism is The Estate of Poetry, which came from his Charles Eliot Norton lectures at Harvard in the 1950s. This passage is from “Criticism and the Poet,” where he discusses a bit the New Criticism at that time, in particular Cleanth Brooks: Quote:
And this is from “The Public and the Poet.” Quote:
The Good Man in Hell If a good man were ever housed in Hell By needful error of the qualities, Perhaps to prove the rule or shame the devil, Or speak the truth only a stranger sees, Would he, surrendering quick to obvious hate, Fill half eternity with cries and tears, Or watch beside Hell's little wicket gate In patience for the first ten thousand years, Feeling the curse climb slowly to his throat That, uttered, dooms him to rescindless ill, Forcing his praying tongue to run by rote, Eternity entire before him still? Would he at last, grown faithful in his station, Kindle a little hope in hopeless Hell, And sow among the damned doubts of damnation, Since here someone could live, and live well? One doubt of evil would bring down such a grace, Open such a gate, and Eden could enter in, Hell be a place like any other place, And love and hate and life and death begin. |
Thank you, Andrew, and you, Alicia, for bringing Muir back to our attention. Too many current critics (including Edna Longley, whose reason for being apprars at times to be to promote her husband's verse) have damned him.
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:38 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.