Tit, meet tat
29 May 2007 12:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Those who liked the earlier comments on Tennyson may enjoy this -- a contemporary slagging off by Edward Bulwer Lytton (yes, that Bulwer Lytton) in The New Timon (1846):
Tennyson, btw, responded with a direct attack -- a poem he suppressed from his collected works -- in which he points out that a man who made his reputation through dandyism has no business talking about others' tinsel, roasts again the old "critics are failed writers" chestnut:
There ain't nothin' like a literary spat. Makes me want to write a dedication to Robert Bly modeled on Byron's to Robert Southey.
---L.
Not mine, not mine, (O Muse forbid!) the boonWhat strikes me the most, I confess, is how surprisingly competent the verse is -- not graceful, but brisk and unstrained, with less teeth-grinding than usual for Victorian satire. It's not that I didn't know Bulwer Lytton could write, but I didn't know he could write this.
Of borrowed notes, the mock-bird's modish tune,
The jingling medley of purloin'd conceits,
Outbaying Wordsworth, and outglittering Keats,
Where all the airs of patchwork-pastoral chime
To drowsy ears in Tennysonian rhyme!
... [obligatory praise of Pope and Dryden omitted]
Let School-Miss Alfred vent her chaste delight
On 'darling little rooms so warm and bright!'
Chaunt, 'I'm aweary,' in infectious strain,
And catch her 'blue fly singing i' the pane.' ...
Rather, be thou, my poor Pierian Maid,
Decent at least, in Hayley's weeds array'd,
Than patch with frippery every tinsel line,
And flaunt, admired, the Rag Fair of the Nine!
Tennyson, btw, responded with a direct attack -- a poem he suppressed from his collected works -- in which he points out that a man who made his reputation through dandyism has no business talking about others' tinsel, roasts again the old "critics are failed writers" chestnut:
And once you tried the Muses too;... and concludes that Bulwer Lytton doesn't deserve to live up to Timon's name, which in any case he doesn't. The interested can find both poems in The Penguin Book of Satirical Verse ed. Edward Lucie-Smith (1967).
You fail'd, Sir: therefore now you turn,
You fall on those who are to you,
As Captain is to Subaltern.
There ain't nothin' like a literary spat. Makes me want to write a dedication to Robert Bly modeled on Byron's to Robert Southey.
---L.
no subject
Date: 29 May 2007 08:00 pm (UTC)Like Anthony Hope, if he's stayed with wit and satire, he would be a lot more famous, but he made the terrible mistake (like Hope) of suppressing his greatest work (and bowdlerizing it when he couldn't entirely suppress it--it took me years to obtain a copy of the 1828, uncut version of "Pelham") and then churning out a series of dull, preachy lead bricks meant to be High Literature.
"Lord save us from the earnest jester"
Date: 29 May 2007 08:26 pm (UTC)---L.
Re: "Lord save us from the earnest jester"
Date: 29 May 2007 09:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 29 May 2007 08:49 pm (UTC)The thing is, nuts and bolts workshops are great-but when they are also taught with the history and heart it is so much better.
I can't really discuss here, because I'm pretty far out of this circle, but did the female bards spar too? Or better yet, a Billie Jean-King/Bobbie Riggs type of a thing? (Why do I keep wanting to ask about Ninjas??)
no subject
Date: 29 May 2007 09:32 pm (UTC)Someone who's studied women poets has a better chance of answering the second question -- I've a reading acquaintence with the major names, but not past the standard women's studies anthologies. I vaguely recall some snark-in-verse between a couple Romantic-era poets (Joanna Bailie may have been involved? and maybe some Dellacrucians?) but mutual support and props seems to have been the norm.
---L.
no subject
Date: 29 May 2007 09:38 pm (UTC)Mutual support makes sense, I think that is mostly the case now too.