Citation
The echoic poetry of Jonathan Swift

Material Information

Title:
The echoic poetry of Jonathan Swift studies in its meaning
Creator:
Fischer, John Irwin, 1940-
Publication Date:
Copyright Date:
1968
Language:
English
Physical Description:
xi, 144 leaves : ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Death ( jstor )
Irony ( jstor )
Literary criticism ( jstor )
Love ( jstor )
Love poetry ( jstor )
Maxims ( jstor )
Meditation ( jstor )
Morality ( jstor )
Odes ( jstor )
Poetry ( jstor )
Dissertations, Academic -- English -- UF
English thesis Ph. D
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis - University of Florida.
Bibliography:
Bibliography: leaves 141-144.
Additional Physical Form:
Also available on World Wide Web
General Note:
Manuscript copy.
General Note:
Vita.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
022127984 ( AlephBibNum )
13528862 ( OCLC )
ACY7352 ( NOTIS )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text












THE ECHOIC POETRY OF JONATHAN SWIFT:
STUDIES IN ITS MEANING













By

JOHN IRWIN FISCHER


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO TIIE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DECREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY











UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1968































COPYRIGHT BY

JOHN FISCHER

1968

































FOR JUDITH














PREFACE


Even today there probably are more students of literature

who know that apocryphal story according to which Dryden is sup-

posed once to have told his young relative, "Cousin Swift, you will

never be a poet,"l than there are students who can correctly quote

one line of Swift's poetry. But this almost traditional neglect of

Swift's poetry is giving way to a new interest and even as I write

this preface there are other students in other places and in

increasing numbers who are reading, and writing about Swift's verse.

Happily, this dissertation is only a small part of a much larger

re-examination of Swift's poetry which, begun in the early 1950's,

has each year since then precipitated more--and more careful--essays

that examine the force and value of Swift's poetry. Therefore,

although I increasingly feel my own inadequacy as an explicator

of Swift's poetry, I also grow increasingly sure that the attempt

itself no longer requires any special justification.

Of the kinds of essays on Swift's verse which have been

recently written, the most valuable, it has seemed to me, have

been those which have been confined to the explication of particular

poems. Of course, we will ultimately need to make general state-

ments about Swift's poetic achievement and to place his work in

some just context. But many students must walk before one student

can run, and general statements on the nature of Swift's verse,

when such statements come to be made, will necessarily depend upon






a backlog of poems understood. In the meantime, careful and thought-

ful essays, such as Peter Ohlin's examination of Cadenus and Vanessa2

or Marshall Waingrow's subtle reading of Verses on the Death of Dr.

Swift, D.S.P.D.3 have done more both to illuminate the actual nature

of Swift's poetry and to dispel the charges of misanthropy and ob-

scenity which have darkened our view of that poetry than have those

more general overviews of Swift's poetry which have recently appeared.

Feeling this way, I have, of course, written the four chap-

ters of this dissertation as individual examinations of four particular

poems. Each chapter is written to stand by itself and, indeed, the

four poems considered in these chapters have been chosen specifically

to illustrate the variousness of Swift's poetic achievement. But,

though these four poems, written at three distinct periods in Swift's

life and on four quite different subjects, were chosen for their

variety of manner and matter, they somehow are all tenaciously

characteristic of Swift, and share some things unmistakably in com-

mon. Therefore, although there are enough unhappy examples to

make one very aware of the danger in freely generalizing about

Swift's verse, I offer the following very brief and very broad

remarks about his verse, not, certainly, as a positive thesis, but

only as tentative landmarks in a country not yet very well known.

To observe that Swift was, all of his life, an omnivorous

reader is to begin with what is well enough known.4 What is not

nearly as well known, however, is how much of what Swift read he

re-directed back into his own verse. For, although too many of

Swift's readers have apparently agreed with Samuel Johnson's opinion

that, "the peruser of Swift wants little previous knowledge; it







will be sufficient that he is acquainted with common words and common

things,"5 Dr. Johnson was never more wrong in his life.

Often enough, however, the almost traditional failure to

see how much borrowed material Swift has re-incorporated into his

own poetry is more than understandable, for Swift was frequently

coy about this technique. There are many borrowed lines in Swift's

verse which are so skillfully fitted to their new text that only a

very strong memory or a lucky hit is likely to detect them. Thus,

for example, it is not at all surprising that for years it went

unnoticed that Swift's proclamation of his own originality in Verses

on the Death of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D.,--


To steal a Hint was never known,
But what he writ was all his own,--
(317-318)


was itself a stolen and slightly altered version of Denham's elegiac

praise of Cowley:6


To him no author was unknown,
But what he writ was all his own.


Knowing that these lines are borrowed must make a very great difference

in the way we understand them. Appearing at first to be only a piece

of pointless boasting, these lines prove, once their source is known,

to be a subtle comment on the nature of originality by being themselves

an illustration of the paradox that Denham describes. Here, then,

as so often in Swift's poems, meaning resides precisely in the con-

flation of two or more texts: Swift's new one and the borrowed

materials which inform it.








No technique, I think, is either more common or more crucial

to Swift's poetry than is this penchant of his to pour old wine into

new bottles. For Swift did not confine this technique to simply

borrowing whole lines and placing them within his poems. Rather,

Swift could, as we shall see, borrow only a few scattered words

from Milton's Paradise Lost and yet make them suggest, in his Ode

to Sancroft, the relevance of Milton's theodicy to his own ode.

Or, on the other hand, Swift could borrow the entire form of the

seventeenth century meditation mortis and then build his own Verses

on the Death of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D. within that form. But in

either case what we ultimately see is Swift forming through allusion,

imitation and direct quotation, the very meaning of his poetry from

the contrast between the materials he borrows and the uses he makes

of it. Finally, that is, Swift's poetic genius--the peculiar

originality he imparted to his poetry--was best defined by Swift

himself when he, ingeniously re-working Denham's lines, made them

"all his own."

Given, then, the subtlety of Swift's borrowing, it is un-

fortunate that there has been a tendency on the part of Swift's

critics to huddle all the instances of Swift's borrowings that they

have noticed under the simplistic title of parody. For to label

Swift's poetry as parody does not explain it; it is only to assume

that Swift had no better use for any of the materials he re-incor-

porates in his own verse than to make them look silly. The result

of such criticism has been that even when Swift's borrowing has

been detected it has usually been badly misunderstood. Thus, for

example, generations of critics have understood Swift's On Poetry:







A Rapsody as being an attack upon the "cant" of "poetic inspiration."

Or again, Cadenus and Vanessa has been understood--apart from its

biographical interest--as being only another variant of Swift's

lifelong attack on romantic love and on all the silly forms of

verse fools stricken with such love have begotten.

But both these poems, I hope to show, mean more richly than

this. For, just because these poems--like most of Swift's poetry--

are written within earshot of other men's verses and thus reflect

a wide range of human values, they must mean complexly. Indeed,

even when Swift's poetry comes closest to being what Swift's critics

have pretty generally said it is--a kind of anti-poetry7 that

savagely parodies the "softer" or "finer" feelings which are usually

thought of as poetic--even then, I think there is embedded in Swift's

very parody not only Swift's willingness to tell a harsh truth

when it is needed but also his recognition, sometimes almost wist-

ful, that the truth he is telling is harsh. Thus, even when Swift

parodies the material which he borrows, the material continues to

ramify and complicate his meaning. For, ultimately, Swift's parody

only suggests what all the other effects of Swift's collage-like

poetry suggests; that the world with which Swift's poetry grapples

is not a simple one. It is, rather, a world of gain and loss, of

constant and necessary adjustments, a world where quotations must

be measured by other quotations, men by other men, and values by

other values, in order that so much of the truth as men do know

may be evoked.

In the preparation of this dissertation I have been so

fortunate as to contract more debts than my work can repay and


viii










more kindness than I can acknowledge. My fellow students, Mr. J.

Douglas Canfield, Miss Gail H. Compton, Mr. Michael J. Conlon,

Mr. James G. Richardson III and Mr. Lawrence P. Vonalt have all

been both helpful and patient. My seniors, Mr. J. David Walker

and Mr. C. Earl Ramsey have taught me much by precept and more

by example. Mr. Robert H. Bowers and Mr. Ashby E. Hammond have

graciously served on my doctoral committee.

Mr. Aubrey L. Williams has guided this dissertation and

saved it from as many blunders as he could. He is the best teacher

I know, the best I have ever heard of.

Judith always thought I was right. She has been -my worse

critic, and this dissertation is dedicated to her.














NOTES


All quotations of Swift's poetry in my text are to The Poems of
Jonathan Swift, ed. Sir Harold Williams, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1953).


1. There is simply no evidence that this line was ever spoken.
Therefore, Swift's most recent biographer, Irvin Ehrenpreis,
lists it as one of a "long train of legendary Swiftiana."
Swift: the man, his works, and the age, 2 vols. (Cambridua,
Mass., 1962-).

2. 'Cadenus and Vanessa:' Reason and Passion," SEL, IV (13954
485-496.

3. "Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift," SEL, V (1965), 513-518.

4. See, for example, Swift's reading list of 1697-98 in Jonartha
Swift: A Tale of a Tub, ed. A. C. Guthkelch and D. Nichol
Smith (Oxford, 1958), pp. Ivi-lvii.

5. Samuel Johnson, Lives of the English Poets, ed. George
Birkbeck Hill, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1905), III, 52.

6. First noticed by Hill in the edition of Johnson cited above,
III, 66, n. 3.

7. See E. San Juan, Jr., "The Anti-Poetry of Jonachan Swift,"
PQ, XLIV (1965), 387-396.

















CONTENTS


Preface


One


Two


Three


Four


Works Cited


Ode to Dr. William Sancroft


Cadenus and Vanessa


On Poetry: A Rapsodv


Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D.














CHAPTER ONE
Ode to Dr. William Sancroft

I


In 1689 Jonathan Swift, then twenty-one, began to compose

that series of poems, usually called the "early odes," which are zhe

first of his known literary productions. The style of these odes

has usually been condemned and, indeed, their cram.ed and som~ciaeo

cryptic manner does often obscure their sense. But cramped and cryp-

tic though these early odes are, they have, I think, a wider scope

and demonstrate a deeper understanding than has so far been recogrzzec.

They are the poems of a very young man, it is true, but a young man

who had been cultivating, as Swift later recorded, his instincts for

literature by vigorous reading.2

Early onward in Swift's youthful and apparently highly varie-

gated course of reading he came to admire the poetry of Abraham Cowley3

and, as Swift matured into his twenties and composed his "early odes,"

Cowley remained his dominant model. So great, in fact, was Swift's

youthful admiration for Cowley that, in a letter written to Thomas

Swift in 1692, Jonathan, rather ingenuously, commented that though he

could not easily please himself, yet "when I write what pleases me I
,,4
am Cowley to myself and can read it an hundred times over."

Whether or not the young Swift was often quite so pleased with

his performances one cannot say, but modern critical estimates of the

poems have certainly been far from enthusiastic. Even Irvin Ehrenpreis,

whose study of the odes is both the most thorough and sympathetic so

1







far undertaken, nevertheless slights them with conscious generosity.

"Since," Ehrenpreis comments, Swift's


. themes and values are blamelessly conventional,
he is, in his search for freshness of effect, flung
upon ingenious hyperbole; and since his language is
too weak for the extravagance of his feelings, the
outcome is bathos.5


Many another critic has rendered the same judgment in cerms which are

both less graceful and less precise, and most, I suppose, would agree

with Ehrenpreis' final judgment that Swift, already in his middle

twenties, was rather too old to attribute to mere mortals "such in-

candescent perfections as Swift lent to his subjects 6 But, although

Swift's apparently over-inflated celebrations of his subject's virtue

have irritated almost every reader of his early odes, these celebrations

are, I believe, the most significant element of those odes. To under-

stand these celebrations, however, we will have to briefly examine

first a characteristic of Pindar's odes, and then the development of

that characteristic in the pindarique odes of Swift's model, Abraham

Cowley.

Pindar's odes, written in celebration of specific victors in

the Greek games, portray two related but partly opposed views of the

human situation. On the one hand the odes were composed to celebrate

a victor at the height of his success, at a moment when he is a

type--indeed, seems almost the equal of--the gods and heroes for whose

honor the Greek games existed. Cowley's translation of the first four

lines of Pindar's Second Olympiad makes Pindar's celebration of the

god-like potentialities of man perfectly clear.








Queen of all Harmonious things,
Dancing Words, and Speaking Strings,
What God, what Hero wilt thou sing?
What happy Man to equal glories bring?
(1-4).


On the other hand, just at this most triumphant moment Pindar's typi-

cal subject faces his greatest danger, and so Pindar must warn his

subject against the deadly sin of pride. That is why, in Pindar's odes,

"however great men's golden triumphs may seem, thoughts of the gods'

dazzling eminence intervene to put them in their place."7

Of this second aspect of Pindar, Cowley himself, apparently,

was not always quite conscious. Thus when Pindar, in the Second

Olympiad, warns its subject, Theron, against pride by reminding him

of the fate of his great ancestor, Oedipus, Cowley, in the notes which

he supplied to his translation, somewhat obtusely comments:


One may ask, why he [Pindar] makes mention of these
tragical accidents and action of Oedipus and his Sons
in an Ode dedicated to the praise of Theron and his
ancestors? I answer, that they were so notorious that
it was better to excuse than conceal them....8


But, if Cowley occasionally missed the point of Pindar's

warnings he did not entirely miss seeing Pindar the moralist. Thus,

when Pindar admonishes at the end of the Eighth Pythian,

We are things of a day. What are we? What are we not?
the shadow of a dream
is man, no more,

Cowley both hears and repeats, in a poem of his own, Pindar's warning

against pride.


What's Some Body, or No Body?

Dream of a Shadow! A Reflection made









From the false glories of the gay reflected Bow,
Is a more solid thing than Thou.
(Life and Fame, 3,6,7,8)


Andbecause Cowley did respond, to a degree, to both aspects of

Pindar, and because, as a Christian, Cowley had at least as pro-

found a sense as Pindar himself both that man was formed in the

image of God and yet that man was capable of falling away from

God, he was able, in the last of his pindarique odes, to work an

interesting and impressive variation on Pindar. What he did was

to versify, in the form of the pindarique ode, sections from the

Old Testament which emphasize both the potential glory and the

present ruin of mankind.


Is this thy Brav'ry Man, is this thy Pride
Rebel to God, and slave to all beside!
Captive'd by everything! and only Free
To fly from thine own Liberty!
All Creatures the Creator said Were Thine:
No Creature but might since, say, Man is Mine.
(The Plagues of Egypt, 1-6)


This contrast between man's present ruin and his possible glory

was hardly a new poetic theme when Cowley employed it, of course.

Cowley's contribution was simply that he recognized the theme

as the natural link between Pindar's odes and the interests of

his own age, thus teaching many, Swift among them, the use of a

genre new to them.

Swift's odes all, following Cowley's, are made to focus on

the contrast between man's potential glory, emblemized by the

heroes of Swift's odes, and man's usual degradation. Therefore,

while it is no doubt true that none of Swift's subjects was really









so heroic as the models Swift constructed, one might as easily

make that charge against Pindar as against Swift--and it would

be equally meaningless in both cases. Rather than make such charges

we ought, I think, examine these odes for what they are, since

in them the young Swift portrays his models of what man ought be.

For this purpose Swift's Ode to Dr. William Sancroft serves

better, for two reasons, than any of the other odes. First, it

alone among the odes seems to have been in a state of composition

and revision from 1689 to 1693, that is, during the entire time

Swift was busying himself about these odes. Second, perhaps

because this ode apparently cost him more trouble than any of the

others, the theological assumptions from which Swift constructed

all his models of perfection and all his pictures of ruin are

closer to the surface in the Ode to Sancroft than in any other of

the six early odes.


II


A few years ago Joseph Horrell commented, in his edition

of Swift's poems, that the entire theme of the Ode to Sancroft "is

truth," and thus Horrell joined that small group of critics who have

hazarded, in print, a guess at the ode's meaning which was not

intended to bludgeon Swift with his own ode.9 True, the remark

seems rather oracular, coming as it does with no further explication

or justification, but it is, nevertheless, among the first which

indicate that the ode may be something more than a badly over-

inflated praise of Sancroft.








Irvin Ehrenpreis, despite his evident annoyance with much

of the poem, carried analysis of it a step further by observing

that the poem's nominal subject, Sancroft, is meant by Swift to

emblemize "Truth."10 But Ehrenpreis feels that the Sancroft of

the poem, laboring as the earthly, "image of eternal truth," often

sunk under that unnatural load. Consequently he did not pursue

further the grounds which the poem might provide for the connection

of Sancroft and "Truth." Nor are the grounds of this connection

explored in either of the only two other recent considerations of

the ode.

Both of these remaining considerations, however, make inter-

esting, although perhaps too constricted, observations on the poem.

Ronald Paulson examined the ode in an essay which analyzed Swift's

position in a classic debate: the relationship of spirit to matter.

His intent is to demonstrate that Swift was, at heart, a dualist,

that Swift felt that everything of true worth was "other-worldly,"

hence divorced from this world of matter and change. The Ode to

Sancroft, Paulson argues, helps confirm this thesis, since in that

ode we actually see the "good" becoming "other-worldly."


. .Sancroft puts down the symbols of worldly
power rather than compromise his ideals; and in
Sancroft, who is compared to a star and to Christ,
the "Good" has become other-worldly.11


There is much in the poem which seemingly recommends Paulson's

position. For example, Swift describes this world first as ". .this

inferior world. .but heaven's dusky shade"(21), and later, even

more forcefully as "that worthless clod"(64). Further, whether









one agrees with Paulson's particular position or not, his considera-

tion of this poem in an essay devoted to the problem of matter and

spirit in Swift's work points out a dimension of the ode which had

not been noted in previous discussions.

It may be felt, however, that Paulson's own position is too

daring: to suggest that Swift, even at age twenty-six, is a dualist,

is perhaps to take too lightly Swift's later comment respecting a

philosopher who, because he stared too constantly at the scars, "found

himself seduced by his lower Parts into a Ditch."2 Further, there is

much in the ode itself which suggests that Paulson's emphasis, at

least, is in error. The truth which, after all, Swift bluntly states

is available and appropriate to man is "That Heaven's high Son was in

a village born" (172), fully God and fully man, the spirit incarnated

in the flesh.

Kathleen Williams' comments on the Ode to Sancroft are closer

than any other criticism I have seen to my own view of the poem. She

argues cnat, in Swift's view, the foolishness and knavery of which men

are guilty, and which serve to make a world of "giddy circumstances,"

all derive from man's desire to be that which he is not. A creature

of but feeble understanding and feebler will, man insists on spinning

out the guts of his own authority presumptuously rigid systems:

this poor creature, man, would, if he could, make himself the measure

of all truth. That such presumption is one of the dominant themes of

the Ode to Sancroft, Swift himself makes perfectly clear:


Thus fools, for being strong and numerous known,
Suppose the truth, like all the world, their own.
(79-80)








But the way in which Kathleen Williams applies this theme to the

Ode to Sancroft is, perhaps, open to objection:


Even in the early odes, where the old-fashioned form
and the "sublime" style imply a more ambitious attempt
to organize experience in the shape of eternal truth
than is to be found elsewhere, Swift's real theme is the
impossibility of succeeding in such an attempt, ...in
the Ode to Sancroft the bishop's "secret regular sphere"
is misunderstood and appears of irregular motion to the
"strong and numerous' fools, and its effect lon us, the
poem's readers] is secondary to that made by such phrases
as "our weak knowledge," "opinion dark and blind," "con-
tradiction's vortex," "crazy composition," and the recur-
ring "giddy" and "giddily." In this poem Swift makes
overt use of religion comparisons, and his sense of man's
intellectual, moral, and spiritual confusion is most
vividly expressed.13


As there was much in the ode which supported Paulson's vis

of it, so there is much which justifies Kathleen Wil-ia-ms' co.:va-

tions. But, as Paulson's argument that, in Swift's view, tha "Goc:"

is ultimately "other-worldly" seemed shaky when posed against Swif.'s

insistence "Tha. Heaven's high Son was in a village born" (172), so

Williams' view that the ode's real theme is the impossibility of

orga izing experience in the shape of eternal truth seems to falter

at the same point. For, as we have noted, Swift insists that man

misses the way to truth not because truth is.completely unavailable

to him nor because man is altogether too weak for it, but because

man is perverse. Both Williams and Paulson, then, have isolated

real themes in the poem; it is concerned with both man's struggle

with mind and body and with man's tendency to over-reach and thus

weaken himself. But both these critics have pushed these themes to

the exclusion of everything else in the poem--and thus pushed the

poem into a dualism which, I hope to demonstrate, Swift was

specifically refuting.








To recapitulate: the poem's most recent critics have estab-

lished firmly at least some of the terms in which it must be discussed.

They have isolated, as its central theme, man's struggle to achieve

some vision of the truth. But they have also, perhaps, shown the

poem to be more complex than they themselves realized. Swift's view

of man's relation to eternal truth was, I think, more sophisticated

than their views of the poem. That is likely, of course, to be the

fate of any reading of so complex a poem, but perhaps we can proceed

more prudently, at least, by anchoring our discussion of the poem in

the question, what was there in Sancroft's life and circumstances which

called forth this poem from Swift?


III


William Sancroft was born on January 30, 1616-1617, the second

son of Francis Sandcroft (William dropped the "d" from the name).14

He attended grammar school at Bury St. Edmunds where, on the evidence

of his own manuscripts dating from that time, he demonstrated an early

aptitude for learning. He went up to Emmanuel College, Cambridge in

1633, received his B.A. in 1637, his M.A. in 1641 and his B.D. in 1648.

He retained a fellowship there until 1651 and then, in 1657, went

abroad where he remained until the restoration. On his return he

received, in rapid succession, the Mastership of Emmanuel College, the

Deanery of York and the Deanery of St. Paul's. The latter post he

retained until 1678, during which time he was instrumental in the re-

building of St. Paul's Cathedral.

In 1678 he was elevated to the Archbishopric of Canterbury

where he, whose life had been both quiet and fruitful, was to have







but little of either peace of joy in his eminence. His attempt to

avoid a direct confrontation with James II over James' interference

with ecclesiastical policy was shattered in 1688 when he, along with

six other bishops, refused to order his clergy to read James'

Declaration of Liberty of Conscience. In a petition to the king,

Sancroft defended his refusal as arising not from "any want of tender-

ness to dissenters," but from his own conviction that James' Declaration,

being founded on nothing more than James' assumed kingly prerogative to

govern as he wished, usurped such power as might "at pleasure put aside

all laws ecclesiastical and civil." Therefore, Sancroft concluded,

the Declaration "appeared to be illegal."

The seven bishops were placed in the tower in May of that year

and brought to trial at the end of June. Their defense was conducted

along the lines of the petition, and it was successful. But despite

the general jubilation in London at the freeing of the seven, the die

for Sancroft himself was cast. For, if he was unwilling to grant the

king "such dispensing power as may at pleasure put aside all laws ec-

clesiastical and civil," he was yet less willing to grant it to the con-

vention which, in 1689, bestowed the throne on William of Orange.

Sancroft did not see how the convention's decision released him, who

had himself annointed James II, from his oath of loyalty to that king.

Consequently, in February 1690-1691, Sancroft was deprived of his

position, and, because he chose to bring it to that point, was ejected

by law in late June from Lambeth Castle. The remaining two years of

his life were spent in seclusion but not in quiet, for he dedicated

himself to securing the succession of what he considered to be England's

true church, a church comprised of men who, like himself, did not

swear their allegiance to William III. He was, of course, almost as









universally despised for this activity as he had been praised for his

stand against James, and he was generally regarded as a turncoat.

This sketch, brief as it is, serves to point out how very

little of Sancroft's actual life and character Swift chose to include

in his ode. Indeed, even the very circumstances of Sancroft's depriva-

tion, which are the occasion of the ode, are referred to only obl) cely.

Irvin Ehrenpreis has objected to the ode on the grounds zhac Swif

was unreasonably attempting to praise Sancroft, who refused co ackr.ow-

edge William III, while simultaneously praising William III. But, chit

is an objection which Ehrenpreis has had to bring from outside the

poem, for there is nothing in the poem which implies that the two men

were at odds. Swift has stripped Sancroft's deprivation of all the

historical circumstances reviewed above in order that what Swift iflt

to be its real significance might appear more clearly. For us u ... dr-

stand that significance, however, we shall have to examine a crucial

part of the circumstances of Sancroft's conduct more carefully.

The revolutionary settlement of 1689, to which Sancroft was

asked to put his hand, in effect rendered the doctrine of the divine

hereditary right of kings a dead letter as English political theory.15

Of course, the divine right of kings to reign, if it really exists,

cannot be circumvented--it rests upon a principle which Swift himself

stated years later in his sermon, Doing Good, "It is apparent from

Scripture, and most agreeable to reason, that the safety and welfare

of nations are under the most peculiar care of God's providence."16

Since, that is, there is either such a thing as God's providence, or

there is not, and if there is, and if William is king, it must follow

that he is king through God's will, no matter by what means. This,








since he held that William was king, and that providence was operative,

was presumably Swift's own view. It may well have been Sancroft's

view too; at least, Sancroft did nothing to actually oppose William.

But that did not mean that Sancroft would second the action of a con-

vention which had claimed--first by voting the English throne vacant,

and then voting to fill it--that the power to make and unmake kings

did not operate through them, but originated with them. To Sancroft,

setting his hand to this work of the convention was striking at the

very life of the church. For, from his point of view, the convention,

in seeking to limit the authority of the king, had actually presumed

to eliminate the authority of God from the civil acts of man.

In the Ode to Sancroft, Swift traces, in a multitude of in-

stances, such foolish, prideful, dangerous and yet ludicrously piti-

able attempts of man to reach truth after having removed himself from

the eye and will of God. In each of these instances Swift illumi-

nates the contradictory and impossible nature of such an attempt.

Sancroft, for having resisted such attempts in a crucial instance,

for his insistence that a just and true government cannot be achieved

by attempting to reject the source of all truth, is the ode's image of

the truth which men may know.


IV


When its connectionswith the rest of the poem are understood,

and its allusions outside of the poem are clarified, the first stanza

of the Ode to Sancroft is seen to reflect in small the entire meaning

of the poem. But the stanza is best examined in stages, and initially

it appears to suggest that neither truth nor any other heavenly virtue








can penetrate the darkness of sublunary climes, to suggest, that is,

the position which Sancroft himself had found untenable--that a com-

plete separation exists between things heavenly and things mundane.

The very structure of the stanza seems to reflect this kind

of dualism. The first six lines of the stanza salute "Truth" in a

glorious heaven; lines seven and eight contrast truth's fixity with the

"giddy circumstances" of "time" and "place"; the final seven lines

darkly image this world and man's estate. By the interposition, then,

of time and place, the realms of heaven and earth are apparently

rendered entirely separate. Further, the two dominant image patterns

of the stanza, light versus dark and fixity versus motion,seem to af-

firm this separation between heaven and earth. The description of

heaven is filled with an imagery of light (bright effluence, chief

lamp, light seest),while in the lines devoted to this world we meet

only darkness (dark disputes, weak arguments and doubt). Similarly,

while heaven is described in the first stanza as constant and fixed,

the world of men which Swift pictures is rocked by random and destruc-

tive motion. Thus man, simply by being born a sublunary creature,

subject to night, time, place and motion seems (though only seems, I

think) condemned, in this first stanza, to a life of constant disorder.

Apparently, it was just such an initial bleakly hopeless view of man's

condition as pictured in this ode that lead Paulson and Williams to

develop their particular readings of it.

Ultimately, however, I think we shall see that the separation

of heaven and earth which seems so striking in this stanza is not

nearly as absolute as it first appears. For while Swift does, in

this stanza portray man as a profoundly limited creature, nevertheless,








the evils which Swift describes as attendant on the human condition

do not seem to derive directly from either man's limitations or from

his sublunary status. Rather, the nature of these evils (dark disputes,

dagger contests, and battles) seemsto type them as being evils of

man's own making. Thus, even as Swift powerfully depicts the wide

disparity between heaven and earth, he suggests that this disparity

is caused not by man's sublunary estate, but rather by his response

to that estate.

It is precisely from man's response to his sublunary environ-

ment, from the cosmologies man has developed to understand and ex-

plain that environment, that Swift draws much of the imagery he uses

to describe man's usual befuddlement. Characteristically, in this ode,

human error is imaged as random and eccentric motion. Men expand their

minds through infinity of space in stanza four; grow in rank profusion

and disorder in stanza-five; run pell mell into heresy in stanza eight.

And this confused motion is reminiscent, Swift notes in the fourth

stanza, of the completely inaccurate but wildly complicated startracks

of such astronomers as Ptolemy and his disciples "who"


. .like hard masters, taught the sun
Through many a needless sphere to run.
(67-68)


Cosmological confusion, that is, and particularly, as we shall see,

the giddy eccentricities of the Ptolemaic and Cartesian systems,

becomes, in this ode, a "type" of all human error. And what Swift's

imagistic equation of human error with confused cosmologies suggests

is that the giddy circumstances of time and place which, in the first

stanza, seem to separate man from heaven and truth and to foredoom









him to constant error are themselves the product of human error. Put

as simply as possible, I think we shall see that in this ode it is

man himself who is responsible for his own benighted and giddy cir-

cumstances.

Let us take, for example, Swift's poetic explanation for the

animosity with which most men regarded Sancroft's actions. It will

be remembered that Sancroft was generally regarded in his own age as

a turncoat, one who, having staunchly defied James II, incongruously

refused to support William III. In our examination Sancroft's reasons

for acting as he did seemed to be consistent, but, Swift explains, to

most of his contemporaries,


. .Holy Sancroft's motion quite irregular appears
because 'tis opposite to theirs.
(80-81)


This (apparently obscure) explanation of the reason Sancroz't

contemporaries mistakenly ought his course "irregular" follows im-

mediately after Swift's discussion of the Ptolemaic system; and it

depends upon that discussion. As we have seen above, Swift knew that

the Ptolemaic system both inaccurately described the actual course of

heavenly bodies and was enormously, needlessly complicated. Of

course, both the inaccuracies of the Ptolemaic system and its endless

complications are caused by one, single, fundamental error. "Led on"

as Swift puts it, "by gross philosophy and pride"; Ptolemy, and those

who followed him, assumed that the earth--their observatory--was still.

From this proud error--the assumption that the earth was still while

all else moved--springsall the "unthrifty motion" and "incoherent

journeys" of the system.17









Among the other needless complexities of this system is the

elaborate mathematical schema Ptolemy and his successors devised in

order to account for the apparently irregular motion of the stars.

Of course, this apparent irregularity of starpath (technically called

retrograde and as observable today as it was to Ptolemy) results

simply from watching one moving body from another moving body. But

if, like Ptolemy, one assumes one's own position to be a still point,

one will assume the observed irregularity of starpaths to be a pheno-

menon of the stars themselves. The point of Swift's lines on

Sancroft's critics then is that those critics, like Ptolemy, er-

roneously assume their position to be stable and therefore wrongly

attribute an irregularity to Sancroft's actions. Like Ptolemy,

Sancroft's critics fall into giddy errors not because the phenomenon

they are observing is either giddy or incomprehensible, but because

they are proud and unstable.

Successful as the lines discussed above are in illustrating

man's propensity to stumble over his own pride into giddy circum-

stances, nevertheless, to most of Swift's contemporaries the system

which ideally illustrated that propensity was not the Ptolemaic but

rather the Cartesian system.18 And it is to Descartes' vortex cos-

mology that Swift refers in the following lines.


And some, to be large ciphers in a state,
Pleas'd with an empty swelling to be counted great;
Make their minds travel o'er infinity of space,
Rapp'd through the wide expanse of thought
And oft in contradiction's vortex caught,
To keep that worthless clod, the body, in one place.
(59-64)


These lines make, I think, an observation about the results of

human pride which is of considerable importance to Swift's entire








ode, but the lines are also, unfortunately, more than a little

cryptic. To understand what Swift is saying here we will have to

briefly glance both at Descartes' cosmology and at the criticism

19
leveled at that cosmology by Descartes' critics.1

The primary characteristics of the universe postulated in

Descartes' cosmology are three: first, the universe is a plenum,

it is absolutely full of matter; second, the universe is infinite;

third, the universe is arranged in a series of circular corpuscular

streams, called vortices.20 The mathematical basis on which Descartes

raised this system is, to say the least, extremely rickety. But it

was not for the flaws of its mathematical foundations that Descartes'

system became an anathema to many in the seventeenth century; rather,

the system was reviled for its theological implications. As was

recognized by men like the very famous Cambridge platonist, Henry/

More (whose objections to Descartes' system were almost certainly

21
known to Swift), to postulate a universe which was absolutely matter,

absolutely full, and absolutely infinite was to effectively banish

God from the universe for simple lack of room. As one of Henry More's

contemporaries commented, Descartes, in this system, has outdone "even

22
the very Atheists themselves"; for while Descartes does not deny

God's existence, he reasons Him both homeless and irrelevant. Descartes'

system, that is, portrays cosmologically that separation of man's es-

tate from God's influence which, from Sancroft's point of view, the

convention that deposed James II attempted to make a political reality.

That the effect of such presumptuous politics is to turn states and

statesmanship into something very like the whirling, Godless, Cartesian

cosmos is, I think, the point of Swift's description of such politicians







as would be "large ciphers in a state," in terms of the Cartesian

system.

It should by now be rather obvious that those giddy circum-

stances which Swift portrays in the first stanza and throughout the

poem as darkening the human estate are not the necessary effects of

man's sublunary condition, but are, rather, the results of man's pre-

sumption. In fact, so far is the universe which Swift himself postu-

lates in this poem from being the giddy, dark and Godless cosmos

Descartes' describes, that Swift's universe resembles instead that

universe which Henry More proposed in opposition to Descartes' system.

In More's cosmology, the most important fact of the physical universe

is that God "is omnipresent and occupies intimately the whole machine. .

as well as its singular particles."23 And that God is actively present

(though hidden) in His universe is exactly the point which Swift him-

self suggests through the two biblical echoes which, as we shall see,

he has incorporated in the first four lines of the Ode to Sancroft.


Truth is eternal, and the Son of Heav'n,
Bright effluence of th' immortal ray,
Chief cherub, and chief lamp of that high sacred Seven,
Which guard the throne by night, and are its light by day.
(1-4)


The third line of the ode describes truth as the "Chief

cherub, and chief lamp of that high sacred Seven" which surround the

throne of God. The phrase "chief lamp of that high sacred seven"

may very well refer to a historical event we have already mentioned.

Sancroft, as the Archbishop of Canterbury, was the leading prelate

among the seven brought to trial by James II. But the origin of the

image itself is, probably, the Book of Zechariah.








The whole of the vision which is the fourth chapter of

Zechariah is of relevance to this ode. It was composed in post-exilic

Jerusalem when the Jews, returned from Babylonia and under King

Zerubbabel, were reconstructing the Temple. The reconstruction, and

all else, went slowly, and the vision of Zechariah is calculated to

encourage a flagging people by assuring them that God is intimately

concerned in the work undertaken.

The vision begins by Zechariah being waked by an angel, "as

a man that is wakened out of his sleep," and being shown


.. a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the
top of it, and seven lamps thereon, and seven pipes to
the seven lamps, which are upon the top thereof . .


Upon his inquiring after the meaning of all this, Zechariah is told,


This is the word of the LORD unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not
by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD.


Few chapters from Scripture might better refute the work of

the 1689 convention, which seemed to exclude God from the civil acts

of men, than this from Zechariah. For it not only states that kings

are kings by the will of God, its whole import is that God is always

present and actively concerned in the affairs of men. Indeed, God's

active involvement with mankind is stressed most emphatically in this

chapter at that point when Zechariah, inquiring about the significance

of those seven lamps which are the source of Swift's image, is told

that those lamps are "the eyes of the LORD, which run to and fro

through the whole earth."

The third line of the ode, then, is quite complex. It occurs

in a stanza which describes that separation of heaven and earth which







men, in their presumption, apparently create. But the line affirms,

both through its echo of Zechariah and,perhaps, in its reference to

Sancroft's successful trial, that not by might, nor by power, but by

God's spirit turn the affairs of men. Nor have we done with the line

yet, for it reads in full, "Chief cherub, and chief lamp of that high

sacred Seven." The vision of Zechariah does not, in fact, mention

a cherub; but Milton, remembering that vision, describes the Archangel

Uriel as


One of the Seven
Who in God's presence, nearest to his throne
Stand ready at command, and are his eyes
That run through all the Heavens, or down to the Earth
Bear his swift errands over moist and dry
O'er sea and land. . .
(P.L. III, 648-53)


While Milton does not actually mention the seven lamps of Zechariah's

vision and therefore could not have been the only source for Swift's

third line, from Milton's imaginative yoking of Uriel with Zechariah's

vision comes, probably, Swift's "chief cherub." Swift, then, draws

in this single line on both the Book of Zechariah and on Milton's

theodicy and thereby suggests that there are "ways of God to man."

Indeed, images which suggest that God actively participates

in this world are finally so pervasive in Swift's ode that the world

he describes seems, like More's universe, permeated with God. But,

often, even as these images suggest God's activity in the world,they

also suggest that this divine activity is somehow hidden. One of the

most striking of such images occurs in-the ode's fourth line. In

that line Swift describes the "high sacred Seven" as being those

cherubs who "guard the throne by night and are its light by day."








The echo in this line is no longer, I think, from Zechariah. Rather,

one hears in this line an echo from the Book of Exodus.


And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a
cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of
fire, to give them light; to go by day and night.
(13:21)


If this text is, indeed, what Swift is echoing, then he has touched

on one of the scriptural passages which are central to the Christian

conception of the hidden God, the Deus Absconditus Whom even Moses

could not view face to face, Who, though hidden from men, guides;

but, though guiding, remains forever hidden.

It is this very traditional conception of God, I think, which

permeates Swift's ode and which raises in the ode its most crucial

problem. Christ himself, as Swift implies in the eighth stanza,

though He was God come among men, remained still God hidden:


What could the sages gain but unbelieving scorn;
Their faith was so uncourtly when they said
That Heaven's high Son was in a village born;
That the world's Savior had been
In a vile manger laid,
And foster'd in a wretched inn.
(170-175)


And the idea of God, hidden away in a "vile manger," is hard to

answer with anything but "unbelieving scorn." It is, as Paul observed,

a folly to the Greeks and a stumbling block to the Jews. But to fail

to accept it, as Swift's imagery of space and motion have shown us,

is to pay for deposing God by crowning Whirl.













V


Swift's Ode to Sancroft, then, is concerned with the most

basic of human questions; what relationship is possible between man

and God, how can man approach a hidden God? This question is made

particularly difficult in this ode by Swift's constant reminders of

how limited, indeed, how untrustworthy, man's faculties really are.

Human reason, as we have already seen by the varieties of cosmolo-

gical confusion it can engender, is subject to all the errors of

pride. Human senses, too, Swift tells us in the second stanza, are

weak and distorting. But if man can trust neither his mind nor his

senses, then it seems that whirl alone is man's inheritance. Only

Sancroft, in his "secret regular sphere," has succeeded in surmount-

ing that inheritance; and Sancroft, in his isolated retreat, seems

both unapproachable and inexplicable.

Of Sancroft's life, as we have already noted, and of the

specific details of his deprivation and conduct, Swift's ode tells

us very little. Further, we are seemingly told almost as little of

his virtues. We are told that Sancroft possesses a mind which is,

paradoxically,


. .fix'd to combat fate
With those two powerful swords, Submission and Humility,
(47-48)


and further we know that he is "Free from our tyrant-passions, anger,

scorn and fear" (116). We know that because of his equanimity, his

"firm heavenly mind," Sancroft is unmoved by "Fortune in both







extremes," and that, therefore, Swift finds him worthy of com-

parison to the regular course of a star and, finally, to Christ

Himself.

But all this seems, while highly laudatory, yet very vague.

For, excepting only King William, of whom Swift tells us still less,

Sancroft is the only godly man presented in this ode--he is its

"brightest pattern." It is he who must be the


guide from Heav'n to show
the way which ev'ry wand'ring fool below
Pretends so perfectly to know.
(156-158)


In his portrait of Sancroft, if anywhere, Swift must depict the

means by which men can find their way to God.

In the two lines which immediately precede those describing

Sancroft's "fix'd mind" Swift begins, I think, to supply the back-

ground which ultimately illuminates the meaning implicit in San-

croft's character. The lines actually form a proposition.


If all that our weak knowledge titles virtue, be
(High Truth) the best resemblance of exalted Thee,
(45-46)


then, Swift continues, Sancroft's conduct--his combat of fate

through submission and humility--makes him


. .the brightest pattern Earth can shew
Of heav'n-born Truth below.
(52-53)


But this is not a proposition which every philosopher nor every

theologian would grant to Swift. Truth, it can properly be argued,

whether sacred or profane, is the concern of the intellective







faculty, while virtue falls within the domain of the will. True,

no reputable thinker has been willing to separate the realms of

intellect and will completely, but not all would willingly see

virtue made the human counter for truth.

Swift, however, in this ode, regularly connects virtue with

truth. Throughout the poem what truth man sees, or fails to see,

seems to depend upon his righteousness; knowledge is equated with

virtue, and ignorance with sin. We have already seen several

instances of this. Ptolemy's cosmology was a false picture of the

universe because, from Swift's point of view, it sprang from pride.

Much the same can be said of Descartes' cosmology.

So pervasive in this poem is Swift's insistence that man's

intellectual efforts must be conjoined with a will attuned to

virtuous actions that every instance which Swift presents of man's

confusion is but another example of man attempting to divorce the

goodness of one faculty from the goodness of the other. Thus

Descartes' cosmology, an attempted work of pure reason, undertaken

in great pride, ends in confusion and contradiction. Thus those

religious reformers who, Swift complains, practice their reforming

"arts" only to promote their own self-aggrandizement, end by kill-

ing the religion they promised to cure.

While this necessary conjunction of knowledge with virtue

is not, as already pointed out, an equally acceptable premise for

all thinkers; it is, to a greater or lesser degree, an earmark of

those thinkers whose thought begins in a heavily Platonistic back-
24
ground. "All sin is ignorance," Plato has Socrates comment, and

platonically orientated thought has regularly equated ignorance with

sin and truth with virtue. From this equation follows the ethical







concern inherent in all branches of platonic thought. Plotinus, in

a passage so beautiful that not even centuries of quotation have

worn it out, put the matter this way.


If the eye that adventures the vision be dimmed by vice,
impure, or weak, and unable in its cowardly blanching to
see the uttermost brightness, then it sees nothing even
though another point to what lies plain to sight before
it. To any vision must be brought an eye adapted to what
is to be seen, and having some likeness to it. Never
did eye see the sun unless it had first become unlike,
and never can the soul have vision of the First Beauty
unless itself be beautiful.25


This passage Swift echoes, though it may well be that he learned it

through an intermediate source:


The daz'ling glory dimms their prostituted sight,
No deflower'd eye can face the naked light.
(221-222)


It is presumably then, the import of Plotinus' passage in whatever

version of it that Swift knew, which informs the imagery of light

and dark that is so substantial a part of this poem. That is, in

the Ode to Sancroft man's world is dark to him because he does not

acknowledge that before he can see his eye must be cleared. In the

first lines of the ode, Swift asserts this need for divine illumina-

tion, and does so through Miltonic echo.

One possible echo from Milton's third book of Paradise Lost

has already been discussed above. Another has been noted by Joseph

Horrell, who observed that the second line of Swift's ode, "Bright

effluence of th' immortal ray," is apparently formed from the sixth

line of the invocation to light with which the third book of Para-

dise Lost begins. Milton's line runs, "Bright effluence of bright

essence increase," and Swift not only borrows the image "bright








effluence"--Milton's figure for light--to form one line but employs

the image "bright essence"--as a figure for truth--to form another:

"Since the bright essence fled, where haunts the reverend ghost'.'

(43). Nor is this all. The first line of Swift's ode announces

its subject with three heavily emphasized words, "Truth is Eternal,"

and then connects that subject obliquely to Christ, "and the Son of

Heav'n." The line seems, then, a conscious imitation of the first

line of Milton's invocation, "Hail, holy light, offspring of Heaven

first-born'" These are not all the echoes of the invocation to light

which occur in Swift's ode, but only a sufficient number to show us

that the invocation was in Swift's mind as he composed his ode.

That is, in Swift's mind, as he composed the'Ode to Sancroft,

is Milton's confession of blindness and supplication for that illumi-

nation without which neither Milton nor any man can truly see:


S. celestial light
Shine inward, and the mind through all her powers
Irradiate; there plant eyes; all mist from thence
Purge and disperse, that I may see and tell
Of things invisible to mortal sight.
(P.L. III, 51-55)


But in Swift's ode, it is not only "inward" sight, sight which sees

"things invisible," that requires an illuminated mind. The very

mechanics of "mortal sight," Swift reminds us, depend upon the eye

being made receptive to that which it would see. The eye must "catch

the living landscape in a scanty light" (30) Swift says, and his line

is reminiscent, I think, of the first half of St. Paul's dictum, "Now

we see as in a glass darkly, then we shall see as face to face,"

while it directly refers (as John Nichols, the poem's first publisher

pointed out) to "the experiment of the dark chamber, to demonstrate








26
light to be by reception of the object and not by emission." 26What

the experiment to which Nichols alludes demonstrated was that the

eye in seeing does not shoot out shafts of light, but receives them.

Sight, then, as the experiment showed, is the result of both the

activity and passivity of the eye, the task of which is to actively

make itself conformable to the essentially passive role of seeing.

And what Swift, then, might have gathered from the experiment is

that the role of the physical eye is, as Plotinus had intuitively

known, a perfect analogue for the role a man must undertake would

he approach God. As Plotinus puts it at the end of that passage

which Swift echoed:


Never did eye see the sun unless it had first become unlike,
and never can the soul have vision of the First Beauty
unless itself be beautiful. Therefore, first let each become
godlike and beautiful who cares to see God and Beauty.


This injunction to man to become godlike if he would see God, is,

I believe, the background for that comparison of Sancroft and Christ

which Irvin Ehrenpreis feels is an impossibly over-inflated praise of
27
Sancroft. But, rather chan being over-inflated praise, Swift's com-

parison is, I think, quite appropriate. For Swift's thought in this

poem, as we have already observed, often reflects both the cosmolo-

gical and ethical biases of Christian platonists; it is therefore

appropriate that Swift's model for human conduct should be the norma-

tive model of Christian platonism--the godlike man. Recognizing the

kind of model Sancroft is, we are, I think, in a position to suggest

the meaning of the portrait Swift draws.

Plotinus' injunction to man to become godlike must logically

be based on both the fact and the ideal of deiformation; that is,








if man is to become actually godlike he must be originally made in

theimage of God, must be, although only in potential, already

godlike. But, on the other hand, if man must become godlike, ob-

viously an effort of human will is called for. But towards what is

that effort to be directed? Plato, in the Theaetetus may have

supplied the answer:


The truth is that God is never in any way unrighteous-
He is perfect righteousness and he of us who is the most
righteous is most like him.28


This is no mere tautology. It does not say that to become

godlike man must become godlike; rather it says that to become god-

like man must will to participate in godliness. The first step

towards participating in the divine nature is to will to do so, and,

because it is the essence of divinity itself to choose righteousness

and goodness, to choose God is also the last step in imitating him.

A certain learned doctor, one whose conception of the cosmos and of

man begins in the fact and ideal of deiformity, puts a fine point

on all this; he is the famous Cambridge platonist, Henry More.29


This therefore is the supreme Law and Will of God touching
the Purity of his Worship, That we have no will nor end of
our own. For as we are to have but one God, "Hear, O
Israel, the Lord thy God is one God," so we are to have but
one Will, even the Will of the God Whom we worship. Which
we have not, if we have any Self-will or Self-ends un-
subordinate to the Will of God.


Here, finally, we can fully answer Ehreppreis' objection that

Swift's comparison of Sancroft to Christ undermines his praise of

Sancroft. Quite the opposite, the comparison is at the heart of

what the portrait of Sancroft conveys. Because Sancroft "combats

fate with those two Powr'ful swords, Submission and Humility" (47-48),







that is, because Sancroft actively wills God's Will, he becomes, in

Plato's words, "most like him." Sancroft's portrait provides

Swift's answer to the relationship of man and God because Sancroft,

in setting aside his own will to accept God's will, becomes himself

a type, an image of the hidden God.


Thus, primitive Sancroft moves too high
To be observed by vulgar eye,
And rolls the silent year
On his own secret regular sphere,
And sheds, tho' all unseen, his sacred influence here.
(149-153)


Sancroft's deprivation at the hands of prideful men seems


S. to discover what they would have done
(Were his humanity on earth once more)
To his undoubted Master, Heaven's Almighty Son,
(132-34)


because Sancroft lives, in the most literal sense, for Christ. This

portrait of a godlike Sancroft, then, whose will is so completely

attuned to God's that earthly "fortune in both extremes" is "but

one thing under two different names" is, when viewed against the

set of ideas which give it substance, both a model for human conduct

and Swift's assertion that man is, in fact, formed after the image

of God.

What then, finally, is Swift's view, in this ode, of the

relationship between heaven and earth, man and God? The imagery of

space and motion which was examined earlier in this chapter led us,

we remember, to something like Henry More's conception of the universe--

a conception in which God permeated, was hidden in, every particle of

matter. The portrait of Sancroft has also led us to something very

like More's conception of man, a conception in which man is imitatio







Dei, after the image of God. But neither Swift nor More are naive

in their employment of the ideal of deiformation. Both recognize

that though the world is an image of God, it is only an image.


For this inferior world is but Heaven's dusky shade,
By dark reverted rays from its reflection made.
(21-22)


Both recognize that although man is, in potential, godlike, he must

willfully accept his birthright. After all, it was the failure of

a group of men to acknowledge God's providence in the civil acts of

man which gave rise to this poem.

Thus the position of both men is the more or less orthodox

one that both this world and human nature are goods, but they are

goods dependent upon the God that created and sustains them and to

Whom they must ultimately return. That is why "apocalyptic

mutterings," to use Maynard Mack's phrase, can be heard in several

places in this ode--and most clearly in the following lines from the

seventh stanza. The lines describe the evanescent quality of the

enthusiast's zeal, but they do so in imagery drawn from the second

chapter of the Book of Daniel.


The crazy composition shews,
Like that fantastic medley in the idol's toes,
Made up of iron mix't with clay,
This crumbles into dust,
That, moulders into rust,
Or melts by the first show'r away.
(137-142)


In the dream from which Swift's imagery is drawn, King

Nebuchadnezzar sees an idol whose head is made of gold, the chest of

silver, the belly and thighs of brass, the legs of iron and the feet

of a composition of iron and potter's clay. As the dream continues,







Nebuchadnezzar sees a stone hewn from a mountain, though the hewing

is done by no hands. This stone crushes first the feet and then the

whole of the idol, and, when this is done, the stone itself grows

to assume the form of a mountain.

Nebuchadnezzar, upon awakening, forgets the contents of this

dream, but as he remains troubled by it, he calls upon first his

wise men and, seeing them fail, then upon Daniel to relate and ex-

plicate the dream. Daniel, having asserted that his knowledge

originates not with himself but with God, explains to Nebuchadnezzar

that he has dreamt a prophesy for the whole world. Four empires will

arise and then a fifth will be formed of the fragments of its pre-

decessors, but, at last, God will destroy all human kingdoms and

establish His own Empire on earth.

The echo implies, I believe, Swift's final answer to the

pride and folly, not only of the enthusiast's zeal, but of all the

men who are shown in this poem to have placed their will before

God's. They shall perish, and their works shall pass away, but the

Kingdom of God will be established on earth. In fact, in a sense,

that Kingdom has already been long established, linking all men

willing to participate in it to one another and to God.

In the final, and incomplete, twelfth stanza of the ode,

Swift refers to Sancroft, presumably after his death, as "happy

saint" and appeals to him to


Pity a miserable Church's tears,
That begs the powerful blessing of thy pray'rs.
(234-235)


The validity of this appeal to a saint to pray for the entire earthly

Church depends upon a Catholic doctrine which, though it was probably







not completely acceptable to Swift as an Anglican, still apparently

had for him a poetic validity--the doctrine of the Communion of

Saints.

According to the doctrine, the saints are able to entertain

prayers addressed to them and to intercede, in heaven, for those

who have prayed because the Church on Earth is but a part of the one

true Church, which encompasses also the Church in purgatory and the

Church in heaven. It is this total harmony and communion of God's

Kingdom which makes efficacious the appeal to the saints. But fur-

ther, according to Catholic doctrine, so far does this harmony extend

that even men living in the world can, in emulating Christ, dedicate

their suffering to atone for the sin of other men. We have already

noted that Sancroft, because he is a godly man, appears in this ode

as a type of the Deus Absconditus; what Swift's prayer to Sancroft

allows us to appreciate is the real quality of Sancroft's "influence."

Kathleen Williams remarked, we will remember, that the bishop's

"secret regular sphere" seemed overwhelmed by the calumny of the

world Swift describes. But that is to miss the point, for, it is

finally out of his very misfortune that Sancroft can fashion


.his own secret regular sphere,
And shed, tho' all unseen, his sacred influence here.
(152-153)


It is on the pervasiveness of God's spiritual kingdom that

this ode ends. Disregarding the "outcasts of this outcast age," its

final line asserts that "Heaven and Cato both are pleas'd." The line

refers, presumably, to Cato the younger, whose life, in its devo-

tion to virtue and truth, in its isolation and in the contempt and

ridicule it elicited from his own contemporaries, bears a curious




33


resemblance to Sancroft's own. Cato, had not, of course, the benefit

of revelation, but, Swift maintains, Cato and heaven are in accord.

In accord, Swift has maintained, are heaven and all men whose will,

in devotion to virtue and truth, is not "self will" and whose ends

are not "self ends" but who are "subordinate to the Will of God."

Brought together in one kingdom are the true men of all kingdoms and

all times, all within a Church which spans earth, purgatory and heaven.















NOTES


1. That is, these are the first poems we know definitely to be
Swift's. For references to possible earlier satiric verse
see Herbert Davis, Jonathan Swift: essays on his satire and
other studies (New York, 1964), p. 171.

2. At fourteen Swift was admitted to Trinity College, Dublin,
where, according to Swift himself, "he too much neglected
some parts of his academical studies, for which he had no
great relish by nature and turned himself to reading history
and poetry." The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, ed. Herbert
Davis et al., 13 vols. (Oxford, 1957), V, 162. All quota-
tions of Swift's prose in my text are to this edition.

3. "There is in some of Mr. Cowley's Love Verse," Swift com-
mented when he was forty-two, "a strain that I thought extra-
ordinary at fifteen." The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, II,
114. At forty-two, it hardly needs to be said, the Dean
was less fond of Cowley than he had been at fifteen.

4. The Correspondence of Jonathan Swift, ed. Sir Harold Williams,
5 vols. (Oxford, 1963), I, 9.

5. Swift: the man, his works, and the age, 2 vols. (Cambridge,
Mass., 1962-), I, 109.

6. Ibid. I, 112.

7. John H. Finley, Jr., Pindar and Aeschylus (Cambridge, Mass.,
1955), p. 54.

8. The English Writings of Abraham Cowley, ed. A. R. Waller,
2 vols. (Cambridge, Eng., 1905), I, 165. All quotations
of Cowley's verse in my text are to this edition.

9. The Collected Poems of Jonathan Swift, ed. Joseph Horrell,
2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1962), I, 378.

10. Swift: the man, his works, and the age, I, 126 and following.

11. Ronald Paulson, "Swift, Stella, and Permanence," ELH, XXVII
(1960), 298-314.

12. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, I, 189-90.

13. Kathleen Williams, Swift and the Age of Compromise (Lawrence,
Kansas, 1958), p. 147.










14. The Dictionary of National Biography, ed. Sir Leslie Stephen
and Sir Sidney Lee, 22 vols. (Oxford, 1937), XVII, 733-39.

15. G. M. Trevelyan, History of England, 2 vols. (New York, 1954),
II, 210.

16. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, IX, 238.

17. Let it here be noted that Swift, using Ptolemaic cosmology
as an emblem for human confusion was harder on that cosmology
than the facts actually warrant. See Thomas S. Kuhn, The
Copernican Revolution. . (New York, 1959).

18. See Phillip Harth, Swift and Anglican Rationalism. ..
(Chicago, 1961), pp. 92 and following.

19. For the following discussion of Descartes' cosmology and
Henry More's opposition to it I am indebted to Alexander
Koyre's From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe
(New York, 1957). See particularly chapters five and six.

20. While this summary is accurate, it is also, it should be unaer-
stood, very simplified. Descartes, for example, called his
cosmos "indefinite," not "infinite." But the cosmos Descartes
described is infinite.

21. Phillip Harth in Swift and Anglican Rationalism. . makes
a very convincing case for Swift's early acquaintance with
and admiration for the work of Henry More.

22. Ralph Cudworth, The True Intelleccual System of the Universe
(London, 1678), p. 175.

23. Henry More, Collection of Several Philosophical Writings
(London, 1662). Cited from Koyre, p. 111.

24. On this point see Aharon Lichtenstein, Henry More: The
Rational Theology of a Cambridge Platonist (Cambridge, Mass.,
1962), pp. 89-90.

25. Plotinus, The Enneads, trans. Stephen MacKenna (New York, 1957),
1.6.9.

26. Nichols' observation is cited from Sir Harold Williams' edition
of Swift's Poems, I, 35, n. 1.

27. Swift: the man, his works, and the age, I, 130.

28. Plato, Theaetetus, cited from The Dialogues of Plato, trans.
Benjamin Jowett (New York, 1937), 176a-b.

29. An Antidote against Idolatry (London, 1672-1673), cited from
Lichtenstein, p.59.















CHAPTER TWO
Cadenus and Vanessa

I


In 1767 Oliver Goldsmith touched on what is at once the most

obvious and the most remarkable aspect of Swift's Cadenus and Vanessa.

"This [poem] is thought," he commented,


. one of Dr. Swift's correctest pieces; its chief merit,
indeed, is the elegant easT with which a story, but ill con-
ceived in itself, is told.


To put Goldsmith's point less charitably, Swift seems certainly, in

this poem, to expend a prodigality of materials only to lead us

finally to an apparently lame conclusion. Something of the effect

may be gathered from the following synopsis.

The poem opens ambitiously, presenting to us the Court of

Venus met in full session. The reason for this session is, however,

a professed decline of love between the sexes, and a multitude of

shepherds and nymphs are joined in debate to fix on each other the

responsibility for this decline. The pleader for the nymphs opens

the debate by accusing both "that false creature, man," and Cupid him-

self of negligence in the pursuit of love. He cites as a sad result

of this negligence, a universal decline of both romantic and conju-

gal felicity,


Now love is dwindled to intrigue,
And marriage grown a money league.
(13-14)







The pleader for the shepherds next states his case. He

acknowledges that men have, indeed, grown indifferent to love but

he fixes the responsibility for this decline on the nymphs them-

selves. The nymphs, he maintains, have turned from that celestial

flame, chaste and pure, which characterized ancient love and which

alone can inspire love in virtuous men. Their fancies, instead, are

engrossed by the lowest trivia, and the nymphs are therefore not

worthy of love from a worthy man.

Venus, "much perplex'd in mind/To see her Empire thus de-

clin'd" (128-129), finds her references to legal texts no help in

settling this dispute. Therefore, she undertakes an experiment

which she hopes will at once restore her reign and settle the merits

of the case before her. Choosing out a particularly beautiful female

infant, she endows the child with all the graces at her command--out-

ward cleanliness, decency of mind, and a soft engaging air. Then,

in order to make the child completely worthy of a virtuous and

rational love, she deceives Pallas, goddess of wisdom, into believ-

ing the infant to be male. Thus deceived, Pallas grants the child

those gifts of knowledge, judgment, wit, justice, truth, fortitude

and honor which are traditionally the gifts of only the best of men.

Venus' task is thus complete and, she hopes, she has only to allow

the cause before her to spin itself out for sixteen years until a

mature Vanessa can, by providing a model for nymphs and an object

of adoration for shepherds, secure her reign.

The experiment, however, is not a success. Pallas is quickly

undeceived, and while she cannot resume the gifts she has given,

she correctly predicts that they will hinder, rather than further,

Venus' cause. And, in fact, Vanessa's very wisdom is Venus'







undoing; for Vanessa is so unlike the beaux and dames whom she is

to captivate that far from taking her as a model they unanimously

find her "the dullest soul."


Then tipt their Forehead in a jeer,
As who should say--she wants it here.
(360-61)


Indeed, from Venus' point of view the experiment turns into a total

disaster, since Vanessa herself has, apparently, too much sense to

fall in love.

At this point Cupid, longing to vindicate his mother's wrongs,

succeeds in causing Vanessa to become enamoured of a fortyish priest,

her tutor, Cadenus. And now the poem becomes, in some sense, bio-

graphical, the reflection of an actual relationship between Swift

himself and Esther Vanhomerigh. Vanessa, smitten, betrays all the

classic marks of love-sickness--she feels pain at heart, listens to

her tutor's voice but not his lectures, and contrives ways in which

to touch his hand. Cadenus, misunderstanding, concludes she has

grown tired of his lectures; he therefore offers to withdraw, and

thereby actually forces Vanessa to confess her love. Her confession

precipitates a debate between them in which Vanessa attempts to main-

tain the reasonableness of her love while Cadenus offers only the

unsatisfactory (to her) return of "Friendship in its greatest

height." (780).

At this point, with the outcome of the debate still undecided:


Whether the Nymph, to please her Swain,
Talks in a high romatick Strain;
Or whether he at last descends,
To act with less Seraphick ends,
Or, to compound the Business, whether
They temper love and books together,
(820-25)










Swift's muse, having already revealed so much, turns inexpicably

coy and refuses to reveal anything more. Instead, we are rather

lurchingly removed again to Venus' Court where she, having watched

Vanessa's whole career, decides the case rather arbitrarily against

the men and, leaving the world to Cupid's dubious discretion,


Left all below at Six and Sev'n,
Harness'd her Doves and flew to Heaven.
(888-889)


The lavish number of lines, nearly nine hundred, expended

to arrive at so halting a conclusion would be surprising even from

an author whose power of economy was less proverbial than Swift's.

Swift, however, in Cadenus and Vanessa, seems unable even to tell

his story without numerous inconsistencies. Thus, for example, we

are first told that Cupid, hoping to procure a lover for Vanessa,

shot numerous arrows "Pointed at Col'nels, Lords, and Beaux" (478).

Then we are told that Cadenus warded off these same arrows by placing

books in the hands of (presumably) Vanessa. What Swift is getting

at is clear enough; Cupid's efforts are in vain because Vanessa,

tutored by Cadenus, is both learned and aloof. But the path of

Swift's metaphorical arrows is impossible to trace.

Worse still than such missteps, however, is the poem's gene-

ral inconclusiveness, the air of indecision which hangs over the

entire production. First, the debate between the shepherds and nymphs

which opens the poem is never, by the parties themselves, brought

to issue. Second, the debate between Cadenus and Vanessa not only

is not concluded, it does not seem possible to conclude it since

the argument springs from fundamentally unarguable circumstances:







Vanessa is in love and Cadenus is not. Lastly, while a judgment

is finally rendered by Venus against the men, that judgment is not

very convincing, since, although it is true that the shepherds

have failed to adore Vanessa, it is equally true that the nymphs

have failed to model themselves after her. Therefore, despite

Venus' judgment, the end of the poem finds all things as they were

at its beginning, at a state of "six and seven."

To seek, then, in Cadenus and Vanessa for a consistent and

unified view of human love is to search for what, I suspect, does

not exist in the poem. But that is not to say that Cadenus and

Vanessa does not repay close study. On the contrary, the poem

provides, first I think, as much insight as we shall ever have

into what a more romantic age called "the mystery of Swift's life

and loves." And secondly, while the poem is hardly an "art of love"

it is, I think, taken as a whole, a single large metaphor for "the

difficulties which love attend." The poem has never been read this

way, but reading it so shows, I think, its apparent missteps and

its hopelessly futile debates as, not flaws, but as coherent parts

of Swift's precise illustration of love's difficulties.


II


Just because Cadenus and Vanessa, while full of debate,

apparently proceeds to no conclusion, it has proven a treasure trove

of sorts for generations of critics seeking to document one or

another attitude towards Swift or about his work. Most of the

speeches which in the poem are assigned to Venus, Pallas, Vanessa

and Cadenus have been, at some time, taken to represent Swift's

genuine view. This tendency to take a speech from Cadenus and







Vanessa and to assume, while disregarding the character to whom

Swift assigned it, that it represents Swift's real view, led to parti-

cularly amusing colloquies between Swift's earliest critics.

Thus, for example, Lord Orrery first isolated for commentary

the following passage.


Two maxims she could still produce,
And sad Experience taught their Use:
That Virtue, pleas'd by being shown,
knows nothing which it dare not own;
Can make us, without Fear disclose
Our inmost secrets to our Foes:
That common Forms were not designed
Directors to a noble mind.
(606-13)


In remarking on this passage, however, Orrery completely dis-

regarded the fact that the speech is only a recapitulation by the

character, Vanessa, of an opinion supposedly held by the character

Cadenus. Instead, Orrery used this speech to draw a very black

picture indeed of the Dean of St. Patricks.


He [Swift] taught her, that vice as soon as it defied
shame, was immediately changed into virtue. That vulgar
forms were not binding on certain choice spirits, to whom
either the writings or persons of men of wit were acceptable.


Then, a year after Lord Orrery's Remarks appeared, Patrick Delany,

Swift's long-time friend, took up the cudgels for Swift in Obser-

vations on Lord Orrery's Remarks. In the course of defending

Swift against Orrery's generally damning portrait Delany, too, falls

upon Vanessa's speech. But, instead of correcting Orrery's mistake,

Delany, like Orrery, assumes the passage must represent Swift's own

view.


Now, pray, my Lord, what is there in all this, which the
most virtuous man alive might not own with his last breath to








be his most sincere and genuine sentiments: For my own
part, I can see nothing in it, but a panygyric upon
purity and noble nature of virtue.3


All the difference which really exists between these two widely

divergent readings is, of course, that Delany is kindly disposed

towards Swift while Orrery is not.

What is surprising, though, is not that this highly subjec-

tive and personal form of criticism should have been written by men

who knew Swift well, but that it should still remain, as we shall

see, the dominant strain in modern criticism of Cadenus and

Vanessa. The antidote for it, after all, has existed for over two

hundred years. For Swift's nephew, Deane Swift, while animadverting

upon Orrery's Remarks a year after Delany, added to Delany's read-

ing of Cadenus and Vanessa the necessary fillip of critical insight.

To Orrery's assumption that Cadenus and Vanessa are the exact

counterparts to Swift and Esther Vanhomerigh, Deane Swift replied

that, for all we know, the poem might be purely a work of Swift's

imagination; and further, that even if we assume that Swift and

Esther are, in some sense, Cadenus and Vanessa, the degree to which

the poet's imagination has transformed them must remain hidden from

us.4 A clearsighted application, then, of Deane Swift's insight to

Cadenus and Vanessa should produce a reading of the poem which can

be validated from the text and ha's nothing to do with either a

critic's sympathy towards or dislike of'Jo'dathan Swift himself.

But nothing can more clearly' il'l'ustrate the difficulty of producing

such a reading than a review of"'the most intensive and cogent of

modern attempts on the poem.

Peter Ohlin, in his'articl', ""'"Ca'dehus'and Vanessa,' Reason


I I I i, I I







and Passion,"5 begins by attempting to open some aesthetic dis-

tance between the poem and the relationship between Swift and

Esther Vonhomerigh which inspired it. Rather than turning towards

what we know of that relationship in order to understand the poem,

Ohlin suggests we draw "some aid from other and less immediately

personal documents from Swift's hand." These sources, Ohlin

argues, "will reveal that Cadenus and Vanessa is a delicately exe-

cuted dialogue between reason and passion, utilizing the conflict

between these two principles as the controlling device."

The less immediately personal documents Ohlin uses are,

principally, A Letter to a Young Lady on her Marriage, Swift's

poems to Stella and Thoughts on Various Subjects. From these Ohlin

draws documentation for what he calls Swift's "orthodox christian"

view of love, a view which, though it does not find sexual passion

evil, insists that this passion must be constantly directed by

reason. This view of Swift's "orthodox christianity" forms the

background for Ohlin's reading of the poem.

The "two principles" of "reason" and "passion" are re-

presented, according to Ohlin, by two characters apiece. "Passion's"

prime representative is, of course, Venus, whom Ohlin characterizes

as "vain, sensuous and deceitful." Fearful of the loss of her em-

pire (and therefore vain), Venus deceives Pallas (whom Ohlin con-

siders "reason's" first representative) into helping her create

Vanessa. Vanessa, until her intellect is addled by the force of

Cupid's dart is, Ohlin argues, reasonable because she is a perfect

blend of reason and passion. When, however, she has once been

inflamed by love, her passions mount inappropriately astride her

reason and her mind is darkened by vain imaginings. Gazing at







Cadenus she now,


Imaginary Charms can find,
In eyes with Reading almost blind;
Cadenus now no more appears
Declin'd in Health, advan'd in years.
(526-29)


Cadenus' response to her, Ohlin therefore maintains, is a per-

fectly correct attempt to restore her to reason's control and, in

fact, represents Swift's own real views. Cadenus offers,


. .Friendship in its greatest Height,
A constant rational Delight,
(780-81)


and promises that


His want of Passion will redeem
With Gratitude, Respect, Esteem.
(786-87)


What Cadenus is finally offering, according to Ohlin, is Swift's

conception of the highest type of love, "that christian selfless

love which is a reflection of the divine love of God for mankind."

Unfortunately, however, Vanessa has meanwhile become so besotted

by passion as not to recognize the value of what Cadenus offers her,

and the debate is, therefore, as Ohlin argues, left at a standstill.

Meanwhile Venus, who, Ohlin now argues, had attempted to give men

a "reasonable passion," decides that "since they [men] cannot see

perfect beauty and virtue for what they are when they appear in

Vanessa, men do not deserve the ability to control their passions."

Therefore, Ohlin concludes, "Venus leaves all 'below at Six and

Sev'n' without the order she had planned to establish."

The strong point of Ohlin's argument is, it seems to me, his








appreciation of the effects on Vanessa of her impassioned state.

Swift makes it abundantly clear that, whatever our response to

Vanessa might be, we are to understand that her arguments are not

to be entirely trusted. She argues, Swift tells us,


. .as Philosophers, who find
Some Fav'rite System to their Mind:
In ev'ry Point to make it fit,
Will force all Nature to submit.
(722-25)


Despite the apparent obviousness of the point, however, Ohlin is

the first critic to notice it, and thus he frees himself, and us,

of the need--which Delany and many another critic since has felt--

to read Vanessa's lines as if they expressed Swift's own considered

opinions. Vanessa's lines can therefore be read, not with an eye

towards making them consistent with what we think is (or ought to

be) Swift's opinion, but by the portrait Swift provides us of the

character who speaks them.

But if Ohlin's strongest point is his treatment of Vanessa,

his weakest point is his treatment of Cadenus. For although Ohlin

treats Cadenus as the moral center of the poem and as Swift's own

spokesman, Swift has, I think, compromised Cadenus quite as much

as he has Vanessa. The speech, for example, in which Cadenus offers

Vanessa that "gratitude, respect, and esteem," which Ohlin claims

to be "christian selfless love," Swift, in fact, introduced with

the remark,


So when Cadenus could not hide,
He chose to justify his Pride.
(762-63)


Ohlin is forced, by his own thesis, to touch very lightly on such







embarrassing passages, and he therefore damages the complexity of

both Cadenus' character and of Cadenus' lines.

Indeed, because Ohlin takes Cadenus' point of view for

Swift's own, he misses much of the complexity of Cadenus and Vanessa.

He is forced to read the whole of Cadenus and Vanessa from what he

conceives to be Cadenus' preference for reason over passion, and

he must, therefore, rigorously pare the poem down to the scope of

Cadenus' vision. Ironically, the poem takes its revenge by in-

volving Ohlin in contradiction. Thus, for example, Ohlin begins by

describing Venus as Cadenus doubtless would have seen her--vain,

shamelessly sensuous, and deceitful. But by the end of his article

Ohlin is forced to admit that it is, indeed, "to the World's per-

petual Shame/ [that] The Queen of Beauty lost her aim." (432-33)

The moral of all this is, of course, only an extension of

the point Deane Swift made over two hundred years ago--that neither

Cadenus nor Vanessa nor any other of the poem's characters can

be taken for Swift's own authentic voice. But, on the other hand,

we ought not dismiss too quickly a critical error which has per-

sisted for over two hundred years; for the error, I think, con-

tains a germ of truth. For, although Orrery was certainly wrong

in attacking Swift through the lines of a character whose argu-

ments Swift himself has amply enough undermined, nevertheless, the

opinions which Vanessa espouses can, as we shall see, be found in

Swift's writings when he was speaking in his own person. Similarly,

although Ohlin erred in drawing too tightly together Swift and the

character whose flaws Swift clearly exposes, Ohlin has certainly

demonstrated that Swift, at times, did offer arguments very much

like those he provides Cadenus. Indeed, the complexity of the poem







lies precisely in this: although Swift exposes the flaws of each

of the characters in his poem, nevertheless, all of them argue in

ways which he has argued. It is small wonder, then, that critics

have so often seen, and felt forced to judge, Swift within his

lines; for Cadenus and Vanessa is almost a psychomachia. Almost,

I say, but not quite: for it is the nature of a psychomachia to

move towards a conclusion in which virtue which is clearly virtue

triumphs over vice which is clearly vice. But Cadenus and Vanessa

reaches no conclusion; rather, as I hope to show, it exposes and

judges the contrary opinions on love held by the Dean of St. Patricks

Cathedral. It is, to repeat myself, a single large metaphor for

"the difficulties which love attends."


III


On the basis of their surviving correspondence, the relation-

ship between Swift and Esther Vonhomerigh seems peculiarly tailored

to illuminate, for Swift, love's difficulties. Yet, for all that,

the relationship began normally enough. Swift first met Esther in

1708 and was doubtless taken by her combination of youth (she was not,

however, so young as Swift thought), good looks, good character and

good sense. Further, to all these qualities Esther apparently added

two more which Swift found certainly not charming but, nevertheless,

compelling: these were a streak of laziness and, subsequently, a

lady-like ignorance. These qualities were, for Swift, probably com-

pelling, since, as is well enough known, Swift's penchant for reform-

ing female manners amounted to something very like a life-long avoca-

tion. Therefore, as Irvin Ehrenpreis has put it, "We may assume that








he began the friendship as usual, by suggesting books for the young

6
woman to read and acquaintances for her to drop."

How long this relatively simple friendship continued and

when, and in what way, it deepened into both something more and

something different it is not possible to say. If we could fix a

date for the completion of Cadenus and Vanessa, we should know, at

least, the latest date by which Esther had declared her love to

Swift; but the date by which Swift completed that poem is as uncer-

tain as anything else in the history of Swift and Esther. What

we do know is that by 1711 Swift felt it necessary to suppress, in

his correspondence to Esther Johnson, his previously numerous refer-

ences to the Vonhomerigh establishment in general and Vanessa in

particular. And we know too, that about this same time Swift and

Esther held a series of secret meetings at the house of Swift's

entirely trustworthy friend though not entirely reputable printer,

John Barber. Clearly then, by the end of 1711 their friendship had

complicated, Swift was deeply involved, and Vanessa, presumably, had

conceived what she was later to call her "inexpressible passion" for

Swift. Because Cadenus and Vanessa is, in some way, Swift's response

to Esther's passion for him, it is worthwhile to see what her cor-

respondence tells us of her and her passion.

A surprising amount has been written about Esther, and most

of it portrays her as a poor, weak-willed girl overpowered by both

Swift and her own sentiments. This portrait is not confirmed, how-

ever, by either the quality of style or argumentation which one finds

in her correspondence with Swift. To be sure, Esther could, and

often did, address Swift in the most passionate of terms.







Put my passion under the utmost restraint, send me
as distant from you as the earth will allow, yet you
cannot banish those charming ideas, which will ever
stick by me whilst I have the use of memory. Nor is
the love I bear you only seated in my soul, for there
is not an atom of my frame that is not blended with it.
Therefore don't flatter yourself that separation will
ever change my sentiments, for I find myself unquiet in
the midst of silence, and my heart is at once pierced
with sorrow and love.9


But passion so well worded as this is argues for a cool head as well

as for a warm heart, and particularly the carefully constructed

final sentence of this passage persuades me that Esther understood

the use of the blunt as well as the sharp end of her stylus. Further,

passionate as she was, Esther could, on occasion, invert the whole

form of passionate address by the delicate application of satire--

and she could perform such mischief almost as well as Swift himself,

who was the master of it.


Now, because I love frankness extremely, I here tell you
that I have determined to try all manner of human arts
to reclaim you, and if all those fail I am resolved to
have recourse to the black one, which, it is said, never
does. Now see what inconveniences you will bring both me
and yourself into. Pray think calmly of it. Is it not
much better to come of yourself than to be brought by
force. . ?10


Indeed, so stylistically sophisticated are Esther's letters that,

it seems to me, they possess an interest even independent of their

biographical significance.1

If, however, the style of Esther's letters is consistently

good--and Swift thought it was--her mode of argumentation is often

positively striking. For Esther's arguments are founded on ele-

ments of Swift's own principles and use those principles in such

way that, as Esther might have put it, his thought "made for her."








The aim of all her letters is, of course, to draw Swift closer to

her, and her whole means for accomplishing this aim is her attractive-

ness to him. Her task, then, was to place Swift's emotional and sub-

jective responses to her, his pity, friendship, admiration and love,

within a frame of reference which would weigh those responses most

heavily. Her art, practiced over a period of nearly a dozen years,

consisted in the skill with which she culled, from Swift's own thought,

those elements which honor subjective and individualistic response.

Such elements really exist in Swift's thought, but because

critics have found more striking Swift's alternative view--his rigorous

demand for objective judgment--the subjective nature of many of Swift's

maxims and much of his advice has often been overlooked. Thus, for

example, the extreme objectivism of Swift's following advice to Stella

(Esther Johnson) has been often pointed out:


In Points of Honour to be try'd,
All Passions must be laid aside;
How shall I act? is not the Case;
But how would Brutus in my Place?
Drive all objections from your Mind,
Else you relapse to human Kind.
(To Stella, Visiting me in my Sickness)


But, on the other hand, Swift's recognition, in other poems to Stella,

that a subjective point of view is sometimes not only more chari-

table but, in some fundamental way, more true, has been rarely

mentioned.


But, Stella say, what evil Tongue
Reports you are no longer young?
That half your Locks are turned to grey:
I'll ne'er believe a Word they say.
Tis true, but let it not be known,
My Eyes are somewhat dimmish grown:
For Nature, always in the Right,
To your Decays adapts my Sight,








And till I see them with these Eyes,
Whoever says you have them, lyes.
(Stella's Birthday, 1724-25)


Similarly, numbers of critics have reminded us of the rigorously

objective viewpoint which Swift proposed to a young lady as a guide

for her married life. Often cited, for example, has been this advice.


I will add one Thing, although it be a little out of
Place, which is to desire that you will learn to value
and esteem your Husband, for those good Qualities which
he really possesseth; and not to fancy others in him,
which he certainly hath not. For, although this latter
be generally understood for a Mark of Love, yet it is
indeed nothing but affectation, or ill judgment.12


But rarely cited, though from the same letter, is that passage in

which Swift advised the young woman to pursue learning, not only

because it would increase her husband's regard for her judgment

and opinion, but also because, Swift tells her,


The Endowments of your Mind will even make your Person
more agreeable to him; and when you are alone, your
Time will not lie heavy upon your Hands, for want of
some trifling amusement.1


What I think is clear from these "matched sets" of examples--and

they might easily be multiplied--is that though Swift honored the

man who saw clearly and objectively, he also recognized the validity

of certain kinds of subjective truths. He knew, that is, that beauty

and, perhaps, truth is often in the eye of the beholder.

Indeed, even aspects of Swift's thought which do not im-

mediately appear subjective can often bear very subjective applica-

tions. Thus, as Orrery perceived, Swift's often repeated maxim,

"Act what is right and do not mind what the world says," might

itself be dangerously subjective, since it can make not only the









responsibility for individual conduct, but ultimately the actual

determination of values a matter of individual interpretation.

But Orrery perceived this possible application of Swift's maxim

much later than Esther, to whom Swift had taught it. "You had

once a maxim,"Esther remarked to Swift when she would encourage'

his attention and diminish his reticence, "to do what was right and

not mind what the world said. I wish you would stick to it now."14

It was, of course, Esther's misfortune to be unsuccessful,

and Swift proved reticent for a host of reasons, some of which we

know, some, probably, not. Yet there can be, I think, no doubt

that Swift loved her: indeed, he was even willing, on occasion, to

spin out love's logic for her; to evaluate her by the only standard

she wished to be judged by, the subjective truth of his affection

for her. "What beasts in pettycoats," he tells her in a famous

passage,


are the most excellent of these women whom I daily see
when I compare them to you. When I am in their company
I cannot but observe that they fall miserably short of you
in every way. Are they, I must ask myself, even of the same
sex or species as yourself.15


Presumably, when Swift wrote this passage, and others like it, he

felt he was telling the truth. But he knew, too, that he was tell-

ing only one kind of truth, and a very special kind at that. And

he knew that a coldly objective view of his relationship with

Esther must include the disparity of their ages, stations and tempera-

ments, just as coldly objective view of Vanessa herself must include

her impatient, splenetic temperament and her often total lack of

discretion.

Of course, there is something horribly unfair in first







telling a young woman to "do what was right and not mind what the

world said," and then to berate her with, "You once bragged you

were very discrete. Where is it gone?"16 But that is exactly

Swift's dilemma. On the one hand he found, and recorded, his

responsiveness to Esther; on the other hand he could not keep from

seeing, and recording, an exact state of her qualities. Because the

two accounts did not correspond, Swift's letters to Esther vary,

as has long been recognized, from warm affection and abundant

praise to something very like disdain and stern reprimand. Esther,

of course, had no such double account and was, therefore, the much

more perfect lover. Indeed, Esther seems in all her humors to

judge Swift in all of his by exactly that subjective standard by

which she passionately wished to be judged.


I firmly believe, could I know your thoughts, I should
find that you have often in a rage wished me religious,
hoping then I should have paid my devotions to Heaven.
But that would not spare you, for was I an enthusiast,
still you'd be the deity I should worship. What marks
are there of a deity but what you are to be known by?
You are present everywhere; your dear image is always
before [my] eyes; sometimes you strike me with that
prodigious awe, I tremble with fear; at other times a
charming compassion shines through your countenance,
which revives my soul.17


But though Esther's love for Swift is so perfect as to remind us

(and Esther, too, perhaps) of Heloise's love for Abalard, never-

theless, Swift, with his heats and chills, his double accounts, his

affections and reticence, seems the more human. That is why

Cadenus and Vanessa, in its painfully amusing account of the in-

compatibility of love with wisdom, has a universal validity.













IV


When Swift, in the opening lines of Candenus and Vanessa,

causes the nymphs' advocate to complain before Venus' court,


That, Cupid now has lost his Art,
Or blunts the point of every Dart:
His altar now no longer smokes,
His Mother's Aid no youth invokes,
(7-10)


he is simply recording the enfeebled condition of Venus' kingdom,

in England, after practically a century and a half of constant

attack. "Free thinkers," as the advocate goes on to charge, had

indeed been at work on the principles of love's religion, with the

result that, at the beginning of the eighteenth century, the most

prominent fact about Venus' kingdom, with its religion, laws, courts

and mythology, is that it no longer could provide a possible meta-

phor for the reality of human love. That is why, to stress the

obvious, we are amused by the high flying legalese which character-

izes the opening speech of the nymphs' advocate. It is not the com-

plaint he brings which is funny; "Now love," he tells us


. .is dwindled to Intrigue,
And Marriage grown a Money-league,
(13-14)


and that is serious enough; but it is rather the idea that such

a complaint is susceptible to the language of legal arbitration

which amuses us. Just because we find such a combination of law

and love amusingly irrelevant, Swift can count on our grinning








when he drops his advocate, with a bathetic plump, from the

heights of legal posturing.


Which Crimes aforesaid, (with her leave)
Were (as he humbly did conceive)
Against our Sov'reign Lady's Peace,
Against the Statute in that Case,
Against her Dignity and Crown:
Then Prayed an Answer and sat down.
(15-20)


There is, however, nothing inherently funny in the mixture

of law and love which characterizes the courts and kingdom of

Venus. A glance at the sixteenth century composition, The

Court of Venus, and at its sources, makes clear that men of the

sixteenth century and, of course, of earlier centuries, could

take very seriously exactly the mixture of law and love which

Swift, at the beginning of the eighteenth century, found a natural

target for parody. That Swift intended us to be amused and that

we are amused points rather to a radical shift of sensibility
18
which occurred in the seventeenth century.8 This shift, which is

first fully recorded in the lyric verse of the Stuart poets,

operated to dissolve any possible connection between law and love.

For the Stuart poets are the first to fully affirm that the phenome-

non of love has absolutely nothing to do with external reality but

rather is a function of only internal reality, of the highly sub-

jective needs of the lover himself. "Why slightest thou," asks

Henry King, in significantly legal language,


.what I approve?
Thou art no Peer to try my love,
Nor canst discern where her form lies,
Unless thou saw'st her with my eyes.19








And if this be true, all courts of love, even that court of Venus

herself, must be irrevocably useless.

Of course, this sort of observation was not unheard of be-

fore the seventeenth century. Presumably, so long as men have

loved at all they have noticed that sexual love does not often

smoothly follow the path of rational choice. Thus, for example,

Horace notes that Barine's patent unfaithfulness does not diminish

her attractiveness either for himself or for any man who desires

her.


Had ever any penalty for violated vows visited thee,
Barine; didst thou ever grow uglier by a single blackened
tooth or spotted nail, I'd trust thee now. But with
thee, no sooner hast thou bound thy perfidious head
by promises than thou shinest forth much fairer and art
the cynosure of all eyes when thou appearest.
(II, 8, 1-8, trans. C.E. Bennett)


Horace understands, then, something of the fundamental irration-

ality of love and desire, but he does not like it. He would much

rather that he might love the she whom he should, or better still,

that the she whom he loved would be as she ought. And it is this

perfectly human desire for a rational love, a love founded on

tested merit, which is given metaphoric form, in so many medieval

and renaissance poems, by the proofs, trials, laws, rules, in short,

by the whole framework of Venus' courts and kingdom.

In turn, it is the psychological validity of precisely

this sort of love which, in the late sixteenth century and through

the seventeenth century, came increasingly to be questioned. "Tell

me where the beauty lies," one anonymous poet, remembering Shake-

speare, asks,









In my mistress? Or in my eyes?
Is she fair, I made her so
Beauty doth from liking grow.20


And that this highly subjective point of view became a common place

of restoration lyricism can be confirmed by an examination of almost

any restoration song-book. Suckling, for example, not only observed

on one occasion that,


'Tis not the meat, but 'tis the appetite,
Makes eating a delight,
And If I like one dish
More than another, that a pheasant is,


but he was willing to extend his subjectivity far enough to set, in

truly amazing detail, the following dilemma:


Each man his humour hath, and, faith, 'tis mine,
To love that woman which I now define.
Her nose I'd have a foot long, not above,
With pimples embroider'd for those I love;
And at the end a comely pearl of snot,
Considering whether it should fall or not:

I have my utmost wish; and having so2
Judge whether I am happy, yea or no?2


And here, I think, Suckling sets for us, though in brutal terms, that

dilemma which, as we shall see, is also the central problem in Swift's

Cadenus and Vanessa. Our answer to the question posed by the final

line of Suckling's poem, "Judge whether I am happy, yea or no?" must

be "yea": the narrator of this poem has, after all, the woman he wants

(his "utmost wish") and therefore must be happy. Yet, even as we say

that the narrator is a happy man we cannot, I suspect, help thinking

that since the woman the narrator has is a perfect horror when judged

by any standard but his own, he ought not be happy. That is, we finally

don't want to think that love is so subjective, so arbitrary, that a








man might be happy with the awful hag described in Suckling's poem.

We want love to be more objective, more rational than Suckling's

lines suggest it is; and our own discomfort at love's arbitrariness

thus becomes Suckling's joke on us.

Swift, certainly, understood as well as Suckling that sexual

love is fundamentally unreasonable and has nothing to do with absolute

standards. "No wise man," Swift once noted, "ever married from the

dictates of reason,'23 and several of Swift's epigrams insist on this

same point.


The glass, by lovers nonsense blurr'd
Dims and obscures our sight:
So when our Passions Love hath stirr'd
It darkens Reason's light.


But Swift is no Suckling. Suckling, as we have seen above, cooly

forces us to see that, though we wish love were rational and objec-

tive, it is arbitrary, standardless and subjective. And having made

his point, Suckling leaves us with the discomforting dilemma that

love's arbitrariness raises in our own minds. Swift, on the other

hand, incorporating this same dilemma within Cadenus and Vanessa,

does not so much offer us a dilemma as struggle with one himself, and

it is Swift's own struggles which give an order and coherence to a

story which is otherwise, as Goldsmith remarked, apparently, "ill con-

ceived in itself."

Thus, although the debate between the shepherds and nymphs

arrives at no conclusion, it is not, therefore, barren of meaning.

Rather, it is an excellent demonstration that love is not susceptible

to rules, laws, and legal arbitration. Or again, although the debate

between Cadenus and Vanessa ends at stalemate, that is itself Swift's








best demonstration that love is intransigently subjective and com-

pletely unamenable to arbitration. What makes these demonstra-

tions so terribly convincing is precisely that they stem from fail-

ures, The narrative of the poem itself, that is, struggles to af-

fect a reconciliation between love and wisdom; and we cannot there-

fore help but feel Swift's sympathies are engaged on behalf of this

reconciliation. That it is not, therefore, effected, must impress

us far more deeply with love's subjective nature than does even

Suckling's poem The Deformed Mistress, examined briefly above. For

we cannot forget, I think, that Swift's desire to effect this recon-

ciliation, and his failure to do so, have a deeply personal aspect.

Finally, that is, Cadenus and Vanessa is Swift's very honest, yet

most tactful explanation to Esther Vonhomerigh that he fails to wholly

love her as she wished him to love her not because he does not de-

sire to do so, and not because she is unworthy of him, but because,

simply and sadly, he does not so love her, This failure, by the very

nature of love, he cannot help.


V


Something of Swift's struggle to establish a mean between,

on the one hand, Suckling's extreme statement of love's subjectivity

and, on the other hand, the highly idealistic, self-deceiving and

psychologically naive assumption that love ought follow absolute

and rational standards, can be seen in the shepherd's retort to the

nymphs' accusations.

To the nymphs' accusation that shepherds have ceased from

loving, the shepherds' advocate, we remember, replies by admitting









the charge but laying "all the fault on t'other sex." This strategy

is dictated by the shepherd's demand that their nymphs be goddess-

like, a demand which in turn is rooted in their highly idealistic

view of love--


A Fire celestial, chaste, refin'd,
Conceived and kindled in the Mind;
Which having found an equal flame,
Unites, and both become the same;
In different Breasts together burn,
Together both to ashes turn.
(29-34)

Swift is, of course, aware that the shepherds, by placing such

lofty requirements on the nature of love, imagine a passion which

has no existence. Therefore, their advocates' description of this

passion, as one which infallibly reduces its devotees to ashes, is

both apt and laughable. Such passion, as the shepherds' advocate

goes on to tell us, is nowhere discoverable in the world but was

once sung by ancient poets. And this description makes it a near

relative, I suspect, of what Swift, in his own person called, "that
S24
ridiculous passion which hath no being but in Play-books and romances,"24

and which he prudently advised a recently married young woman against

believing in.

But, although Swift holds up to ridicule the psychologi-

cally naive view of love presented in the shepherds' complaint, the

entire complaint is not made ridiculous. Rather, that part of the

complaint which is directed against the nymphs has a very convincing

ring since the frivolities which the shepherds accuse the nymphs of

following to the exclusion of everything else are exactly those for

which Swift, in his own person, often berated that "tribe of bold,








swaggering, rattling ladies"25 whom all his life he despised. Thus the

condemnation of women spoken by the shepherds' advocate:


Hence we conclude no women's Hearts
Are won by Virtue, Wits, and Parts:
Nor are the Men of Sense to blame,
For Breasts incapable of Flame:
The Fault must on the Nvmohs be placed,
Grown so corrupted in their Taste,
(61-67)


is sympathetically echoed by Swift himself in his epistle to Lord

Harlev on his Marriage:


For such is all the sex's flight,
They fly from learning, wit and light:
They fly, and none can overtake
But some gay coxcomb, or a rake.
(19-23)


What emerges, then, even in the opening speeches of Cadenus

and Vanessa, is Swift's attempt to honor two standards of love. On

the one hand Swift, in good restoration fashion, is parodying Venus'

Court and the high-handed methods with which both advocates apply

rules to love. On the other hand, Swift is in sympathy with the

shepherds' plea that love ought to respond only to an actual good

and that, therefore, women ought to be truly worthy of the love of

a good man. Indeed, Venus' experiment is nothing other than an at-

tempt to adjust these two standards to each other. For Venus, by

endowing Vanessa with the perfection of every virtue, creates a

woman whom, she hopes, all men needs must love,but whom it will be

perfectly reasonable to love.

Of course, Venus' experiment is, we remember, a total failure.

For, although Vanessa is endowed with every virtue which, if virtue








could command love, ought to have made her universally adored, still,

as Venus sadly complains, Vanessa, "Never could one lover find."

(867). And the moral of this is obvious: no matter what the shep-

herds claim, no matter how much men wish to love reasonably, sexual

love is not reasonable. Rather, love has nothing to do with the

true value of the one loved and everything to do with the values of

the lover. And, in fact, this outcome has been predictable from the

beginning of the poem, for, from the beginning of the poem, Venus and

Pallas are professed foes and no possible reconciliation is ever of-

fered between these goddesses of love and of wisdom.

But if this outcome is obvious, we must not therefore miss

its pathos in Cadenus and Vanessa. Raised on lyrics like, "I don't

know why I love you like I do, I don't know why, I just do," and

assuming naturally that love is subjective, it is possible, I suspect,

for us to miss Swift's implied regret in lines like, "thus, to the

world's eternal shame,/The Queen of Beauty lost her aim." (431-432).

But for us not to credit the regret in these lines would be a mis-

take, I think; for our understanding of the poem depends upon our

recognizing that Swift's sympathies are clearly engaged by Venus and

her experiment. For although only by deceit is Venus able to enlist

Wisdom's aid towards endowing Vanessa and although Pallas proves to be

perfectly right in asking her scornfully rhetorical question,


.. how can heav'nly wisdom prove
An instrument to earthly love,
(295-96)


nevertheless, Pallas' scorn only makes more affecting the truth she

tells. And we are, therefore, against all wisdom, made to partici-

pate in Venus' sorrow when,








Too late with grief she understood
Pallas had done more harm than good.

(435-436)


And indeed, in the defeat of Venus' experiment are involved

a goodly number of cherished assumptions. Thus, for example, while

it is true that Swift, by couching in trivial terms Venus' naive

assumption that Vanessa's virtue must inspire universal love and

imitation,made that assumption appear just as naive as it is;

nevertheless, for all its simple-mindedness, there is something

appealing about Venus' expectation that,


Offending Daughters oft would hear
Vanessa's Praise rung in their Ear:
Miss Betty, when she does a Fault,
Lets fall her knife, or spills the Salt,
Will thus be by her Mother chid;
'Tis what Vanessa never did.
(240-245)


Of course, love does not prove to be, in Cadenus and Vanessa, what

it is assumed to be in so many romances both past and present--an

instrument capable of reforming men's manners and morals. Those

degraded shepherds and nymphs whom Venus hoped to reform through

Vanessa's great example ironically find Vanessa lacking in knowledge,

wit and judgment.


Their judgment was, upon the Whole,
--That lady is the dullest Soul--
Then tipt their Forehead in a jeer,
As who should say--she wants it here.
(358-361)


And ;ai.n, the moral of this is perfectly clear. Love can-

not be an effective instrument of reformation because love has









nothing to do with a reasonable appreciation of actual value,but

is'dependent solely on the nature of the lover. "Great examples,"

as Swift observes, "are but vain,/Where ignorance begets disdain"'

(436-437). But, because Swift has put Venus' expectations in such a

homely and appealing strain, there is something distinctly disappoint-

ing in discovering that Venus has, as Pallas prophesied to her, de-

ceived herself, instead of Pallas. Pallas, is perfectly right, of

course, and as she goes on to claim, "love" and "sense" have never

had anything to do with one another; but there is, nevertheless, a

pathos in that truth which Pallas seems incapable of appreciating but

which Swift, I think, has made perfectly plain.

The source of this pathos, is, of course, most fully explored

in the relationship of Vanessa and Cadenus. To be sure, everywhere

in the narration of their relationship love's subjectivity and funda-

mental irrationality are insisted on. Vanessa, for example, falls in

love not because of the reasonable appreciation which she might have

for Cadenus' gifts but rather through the violent and distressing

efforts of Cupid. And once she is in love, Vanessa's reason is pal-

pably affected, for, as we have already noted above, she comes badly

to overestimate Cadenus' gifts while unmistakably blurring his failings.


Cadenus now no more appears
Declin'd in Health, advanced in Years
She fancies Musick in his Tongue,
Nor further looks, but thinks him young.
(527-530)


Now, plainly, to fancy thus is not reasonable: it is to make of

Cadenus what Vanessa wants him to be, and even Vanessa herself must

admit that the real cause of her love is not, ultimately, Cadenus,








but herself. "Self love," she says,


. .in Nature rooted fast,
Attends us first, and leaves us last:
Whny she likes him, admire not at her,
She loves herself, and that's the matter.
(684-687)


Yet, Vanessa's attempts to reconcile her love for Cadenus

with reason are enormously appealing. Because, she argues, those

virtues which Cadenus taught and she, by the dictates of reason,

accepted, have now become her character, she, in loving herself,

must infallibly love him. Reason is thus, she may conclude, "her

guide in love." Vanessa's arguments are as ingenious as they are

attractive, and certainly we must admit about them what even Cadenus

admits, that we "at least could hardly wish them wrong." And yet

they are wrong, and Vanessa herself indicates the point at which

they err. For, seeking to turn everything to her argument, Vanessa

compares her love for Cadenus to his reverence for the authors of

"ancient days,"


(Those authors he so oft' had nam'd
For learning, wit and wisdom famed.)
(690-691)


But not even Vanessa can completely equate her passion for Cadenus

to his for ancient authors. A scholar's feelings for such authors

were, she knew, esteem, respect, devotion, and that sort of love

which she rightly characterizes in remarking that were such an author

now alive, "How all would for his friendship strive." (701)

These are indeed the marks of esteem which reason can grant

to apparent virtue, and were these love, love were reasonable. But








this, it is made ironically clear, is neither love nor what Vanessa

wants. For Cadenus offers her precisely


Friendship at its greatest Height,
A constant rational delight,
On Virtue's Basis fixed to last
When Love's Allurements long are past,
(780-783)


and promises further that he


His want of passion will redeem
With gratitude, respect, esteem.
(786-787)


And this offer Vanessa rejects out of hand. Her love for Cadenus

springs from her own self-love and, finally, has nought to do with

Cadenus' real qualities: no less passionate a commitment from Cadenus

will satisfy her.

Yet it is Vanessa, I think, rather than Cadenus, whom Swift

has created to most engage our sympathies. True, Vanessa was able

no more than Venus to reconcile love and reason, and Vanessa, in her

subjective and passionate commitment to Cadenus shows herself willing

to badly distort logic, and indeed, "all nature" in order to effect

her ends. Yet, if the basis of Vanessa's love is irrational self-

love, it is self-love more generously employed, one feels, than that

love of self which guides Cadenus' actions. For both Cadenus' fear

of gossip, "of what the world will say," and his susceptibility to

flattery are aspects of his own most unhappy variant of self-love--

pride. And as Vanessa has mistaken reason as her "guide in love" so

Cadenus subverts reason to be his guide in pride, and the result is

clearly much less admirable as he,








Const'ring the Passion she had shown,
Much to her praise, more to his own,
(764-765)


concludes that,


Nature in him had merit placed,
In her, a most judicious taste.
(766-767)


But neither must we judge Cadenus more harshly than does the

poem itself. True, the mask of reason with which Cadenus attempts

to cover his own self-interest is somehow always awry. Thus he,

having offered to a woman whom he does not love what he claims is

a higher good, "friendship. .a constant rational delight," con-

tinues on, with splendid inconsistency to offer her,


S. .that Devotion we bestow,
When Goddesses appear below.
(788-789)


But, even though this offer is both inconsistent and just what

Vanessa does not want, there is something touching and generously

redeeming in it. For finally, Cadenus is really not much different

from anyone else in the cast of this poem: all the cast are engaged

in the same funny, pitiable and human attempt to make truth submit

to their own subjective needs and views. The shepherds and nymphs,

reasonably blaming each other while holding themselves utterly

blameless; Venus, by reason, defending her kingdom; Pallas, un-

charitably but by reason defending hers; Vanessa reasonably defend-

ing her love and Cadenus reasonably defending his failure to love:

each is a miniature proof that man is, at best, but dimly conscious

of, and capable of controlling, his own nature. And yet they all,




68




somehow, demand compassion from us because we are all, I suspect,

a good deal like them. And so, apparently was Swift, who compassion-

ately made them and thus formed this, the gentlest of satires.














NOTES


1. The Collected Works of Oliver Goldsmith, ed. Arthur
Friedman, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1966), V, 329.

2. John Boyle, Earl of Corke and Orrery, Remarks on the Life
and Writings of Dr. Jonathan Swift (London, 1752), p. 73.

3. Patrick Delany (London, 1754), p. 113.


4. Deane Swift, An Essay Upon the Life, Writings and
Character of Dr. Jonathan Swift (London, 1755), p. 244.

5. SEL, IV (1964), 485-496.

6. Irvin Ehrenpreis, Swift: the man, his works,and the age,
2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1662-), II, 312.

7. Dates from 1713 to 1719 have been proposed for the comple-
tion of Cadenus and Vanessa. For a recent review of the
problems involved see The Collected Poems of Jonathan Swift,
ed. Joseph Horrell, 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1958), I,
388.

8. Swift: the man, his works, and the age, II, 641-644.

9. Vanessa and her correspondence with Jonathan Swift, ed.
A. Martin Freeman (Boston and New York, 1921), p. 128.

10. Ibid., p. 110-111.


11. For an example of just how sophisticated a writer Esther
was, one might note that in the quotation just cited in
my text Esther, probably consciously, is echoing Theocritus'
Second Idyl. That is pretty good for "a brat who," Swift
said, "never read."

12. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, ed. Herbert Davis
et al., 13 vols. (Oxford, 1957), IX, 94.

13. Ibid., p. 90.

14. Vanessa and her correspondence with Jonathan Swift, p. 103.

15. Ibid., p. 109.








16. Ibid., p. 99.

17. Ibid., pp. 139-140.

18. I am here and through the remainder of my chapter deeply
indebted to H. M. Richmond's The School of Love: The
Evolution of the Stuart Love Lyric (Princeton, New Jersey,
1964).

19. Cited from Richmond, p. 185.

20. Cited from Richmond, p. 189.

21. The Works of Sir John Suckling, ed. A. Hamilton Thomson,
M. A. (London, 1910), p. 15.

22. Ibid., pp. 59-60.

23. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, IX, 263.

24. Ibid., p. 89.

25. Ibid., p. 93.















CHAPTER THREE
On Poetry: A Rapsody
I


None of Swift's poems has been so consistently praised as

has On Poetry: A Rapsody. Certain sections, at least, of the

poem have been abundantly anthologized, and the poem has been tra-

ditionally characterized as "one of Swift's chief claims to che

title of poet."' Indeed, one passage from the poem has been so

often cited as to have transcended both Swift and his Rapsody; the

passage, Swift's famous comparison of fleas and poets, has achieved

through frequent quotation an independent state of famous anonymity

as an example of eighteenth century verse.


The vermin only teaze and pinch
Their Foes superior by an Inch.
So, Nat'ralists observe, a Flea
Hath smaller Fleas that on him prey,
And these have smaller yet to bite'em,
And so proceed ad infinitum:
Thus ev'ry poet in his Kind,
Is bit by him that comes behind.
(335-42)


Curiously enough, however, although the poem has remained

popular since the time of Goldsmith's praise of it as "one of the

best versified poems in our language and the most masterly pro-

duction of its author,"2 it has not, to the best of my knowledge,

ever been made the subject of much close study. Rather, the

observations which critics have usually flung in passing praise

of the Rapsody are at once impressionistic and in surprising con-








tradition with each other. Thus, to choose two fairly recent

examples, Ricardo Quintana has praised the poem by claiming that

"of such high voltage is the satire, that the level of intensity,

instead of declining as the piece continues, rises steadily from

couplet to couplet,"3 while on the other hand, Maurice Johnson has

maintained of the same poem that its "tone is so constantly level

and chilly that it seemed unbearably insulting to Walpole and the

others it named."4

Such vague and confused contrariness in praise of Swift's

Rapsody has served only, I suspect, to blunt the force, subtlety

and point of the poem, just as frequent quotation, in usually

insipid contexts, of the famous lines cited above has elevated

them to a bad, because vacuous, eminence. What has been missed in

such criticism can be indicated by simply noting that these famous

lines, though almost tamed by mere quotation, are really the center

of Swift's description of a society so vicious that in it each

man's hand is lifted against each man's hand, that in it


Each Poet of inferiour Size
On you shall rail and criticize;
And try to tear you Limb from Limb,
While others do as much for him.
(331-34)


This vicious society, I will argue, is the subject of the Rapsody

and is one of Swift's most powerful depictions of the catastrophic

results he thought to be implicit in the style of life he saw

about him, a style he thought corruptive enough to reduce human

life, as he tells us (beginning at line 319), to Hobbes' state of

nature--to a situation where the life of man is but one long combat.








Perhaps the most obvious characteristic of this combative

world is that in it all notion of vocation has apparently been

lost. Swift begins the Rapsody with the observation that all men

have run mad after the office of poet,


All Human Race would fain be Wits,
And Millions miss, for one that hits,
(1-2)


and he goes on to depict a world in which all other offices as

well have fallen into either abuse or desuetude. It is a world

where prelates thrive "who no God believe," public ministers min-

ister not, and no king rules. And because it is a world where all

sense of office has been lost it is also a world where the very

order of society, degree itself, has disappeared. Thus, "statesmen"

grow indistinguishable from "south sea jobbers," "pick-purses"

from judges, and "duchesses" from common whores. Ultimately, it is

a world where even the most fundamental of all human distinctions

and degrees, those which spring from family, from the relationship

of parent to child and husband to wife, are perverted and over-

whelmed.

A vivid insight into the subject and method of the Rapsody

can be gleaned by simply watching Swift build into the poem, by

allusion to familial relationship, a sense of the way the society

he depicts has grown corrupt. For in the world which Swift por-

trays in the Rapsody, neither a loving relationship of husband to

wife, nor legitimate parentage and the ties implied by it, are to

be found. Promiscuity and bastardy, rather, introduced very early








. .dropt, the spurious Pledges,
Of Gipsies litt'ring under hedges,
(37-38)


provide the defining metaphors for most of the relationships and

activities described in the Rapsody. Like the actual hordes of

beggars and gypsies who are so often anxiously mentioned by seven-

teenth and early eighteenth century preachers and whose masterless

and wandering condition was thought to be an evil portent for society

and a corruptive example to responsible men,5 the metaphor of

familial disintegration infects every strata of society and level

of endeavor described in this poem. Yet, always in this background

of bastardy and disinheritance there are reminders, in the very

terms Swift uses to create this background, that in well ordered

societies it is the family, in its naturalness and mutual loving

responsibilities, which has always been the supreme example for

the conduct of even the highest offices of society.

Thus, to cite the most obvious example of the use of this

metaphor, the writing of bad poetry is repeatedly imaged in the

Rapsodv as a type of misbegetting and unnatural parentage. And

the perversions implicit in this comparison are especially pointed

since, in the eighteenth century the writing of not bad, but good,

poetry was often described in terms which suggest procreation.

Thus, for example, Pope defines the operation of true wit as "a

justness of thought and a faculty of expression; or (in the mid-

wife's phrase) a perfect conception with an easy delivery."6 In

the Rapsody, Pope's basic comparison of writing to begetting is

maintained but, since Swift is describing the generation of false








wit, the terms are changed, and thus the import of the comparison

is reversed. The poets Swift describes "prostitute" their muses

and the result, of course, is bastardy.


The Product of your Toil and Sweating;
A Bastard of your own begetting.
(115-16)


As Swift developed this metaphoric comparison of bad poets

and bad poetry with promiscuity, bastardy, and parental and filial

ungratefulness, the moral ugliness which he thought was involved in

writing bad poetry becomes increasingly clear. Thus, he points

out through this metaphor that the writer of bad verses not only

commits an unnatural act in first writing but is then, all too

often, forced to compound his first sin with another act even more

unnatural: he is forced, in order to prevent discovery, to commit

the metaphorical equivalent of child abandonment. "If you find,"

the bad poet is warned,


. the general Vogue
Pronounces you a stupid Rogue;
. .praise the Judgment of the Town,
And help your self to run it [your poem] down.
Give up your fond paternal pride,
Nor argue on the weaker side. . .
(121,122,126-29)


Thus, the writing of bad poetry comes, in the Rapsody, to involve

more than just writing bad poetry, it becomes a way of prostitu-

ting one's moral sense as well. As Swift indicates early in the

poem, maintaining still a metaphor based upon a perversion of

familial relationship, the condition of poetry in the England this

poem describes is like the condition of a disinherited family line,








and a line not only disinherited but whose portion has bcc.

attainted--lost through the sin of its progenitors. The poet's

"portion," that is, inheritance, was never more than "one annual

hundred pounds" (the laureate's grant) and now, Swift remarks,

there is


. .not so much as in Remainder,
Since Cibber brought in an Attainder;
Forever fixt by Right Divine
(A Monarch's Right) on Grubstreet Line.
(56-59)


Swift's point, of course, is that the unhappy appointment of so

unworthy a man as Cibber to the laureatship, though the appointment

is approved by royalty, disaccredits the whole race of poets.

But promiscuity, bastardy and disinheritance are not, as

I have already indicated, reserved in this poem to the office of

poetry. Rather, Swift insists, these perversions reach to the

highest of England's political offices, and much of the irony

which permeates that praise of George II and his family, with which

Swift concludes the Rapsody, turns upon the contrast between the

familial harmony which ought to characterize England's ruling

family and the scandalously public disharmony which actually

characterized both that family and its rule. For Swift's first

readers, then, much of Swift's mock praise of George II served

only as a reminder that George was as corrupt a natural husband

and father as he was a kingly father. Thus, for example, the

praise of Queen Caroline as


The Consort of his Throne and Bed
A perfect Goddess born and bred,
(425-426)







must have reminded those readers only that George was often un-

faithful to that bed. And the praise of George's eldest son,

Fredrick Louis, Prince of Wales, as manly,


What Early Manhood has he shown,
Before his downy Beard was grown,


must have seemed a very thinly veiled allusion to that prince's un-

distinguished and undistinguishing promiscuity. Thus, much of the

irony of this whole closing passage works to locate in the royal

family that corruption of familial harmony which was first intro-

duced into the poem through society's pariahs. Swift, in so

closing the poem, completes a metaphor of disorder which runs

from alien gypsies to England's sovereign power.

But even as it minutely records this disorder, the Rapsody

itself is a poem of affirmation. For, as I shall argue throughout

this essay, the perversely inharmonious world of foolish men which

the Rapsody describes is judged in the very terms of its descrip-

tion. Thus, to cite an example we have already seen, the whole

efficaciousness of Swift's description of the Rapsody's world in

terms of promiscuity, bastardy and disinheritance depends upon our

seeing, in the midst of Swift's irony, his insistence that the

great pattern of well ordered states has traditionally been proper

familial relationship. Our mode of reading the Rapsody, then,

must be something like the method Edward Young commended in reading

Scripture; it must be read by measuring its descriptions of men

against what is requires of man in order that its "Satire on the

weakness and iniquity of man"7may be of profit.














II


Like Pope's Dunciad, which Swift conspicuously footnotes

(at line 393) in his poem, the Ransody was written in an age when

"Paper. .became so cheap and printers so numerous, that a deluge

of authors cover'd the land."8 As "for poets," as Swift puts it,


. (you can never want them,
Spread thro' Augusta Trinobantumn)
Computing by their Pecks of Coals,
Amount to just Nine Thousand Souls.
(279-282)


And like the very beggars and gypsies, to whose fortunes Swift

unfavorably compares the face of poets, the ever-swelling hordes

of bad rhymers emblemized, to Augustans like Swift and Pope, an

entire society strayed loose from its traditional moorings, a

race of men wandered from their simplest self-interest.

Indeed, the first seventy lines of the Rapsody are per-

meated with Swift's astonishment at such men as have run mad

after the name of poet, since, as Swift assures us, the office of

poet has never worked to the apparent worldly good of any man so

unfortunate to be called to serve in it. Not beggars' brats, nor

shoe blacks, nor sons of whores, Swift insists, are


.so disqualify'd by Fate
To Rise in Church, or Law, or State,
As he, whom Phoebus in his Ire
Hath blasted with Poetic Fire.
(39-42)








Swift demonstrates this thesis throughout the poem by

listing a multitude of misfortunes which attend upon the poet's

station. Of these miseries the most probable, of course, was the

brand of blockhead--but it was not, by far, the worst. For, as

Swift's mock lament should remind us,


Poor Starviing Bard, how small thy Gains,
How unproportion'd to thy Pains,
(59-60)


grinding poverty was often enough in eighteenth century London

the lot of those who pretended to letters. Indeed, even prominence

in the world of letters, Swift makes clear, was no assurance of

either political or financial security. Pope, Swift notes, being

Catholic, could not approach the court from which Gay was ul-

timately banished and in which Edward Young could eke out a living

only so long as he could continue to


. .torture his Invention,
To flatter Knaves or lose his Pension.
(309-310)


Given, then, these conditions we must share Swift's puzzle-

ment when, in the Rapsody's first stanza, he wonders why men, even

against the grain of their abilities, attempt to be poets and asks,


What Reason can there be assigned,
For this Perverseness in the Mind?
(11-12)


Curiously, however, Swift has already formally answered this

question within the first four lines of the Rapsodv. "Pride,"

he has remarked, "was never known to spread so wide." And it is








indicative of how far removed is the conduct of the race of would-

be wits from Swift's own vision of man's proper role that, having

once answered it, he raises the same question all over again.

Here, that is, as throughout the Rapsody, we can sense not only

Swift's anger, but also his astonishment, at that man who, having

a choice, would


. .where his Genious least inclines,
Absurdly bend his whole designs.
(23-24)


Thus, although it has been lamented that in the Rapsody

there are no clear norms to judge those men whom Swift satirizes,

in fact, Swift's own conviction that each man is so peculiarly

endowed for his proper role that it takes an astoundingly energetic

act of willful perversity to avoid that role is made clear enough

even in the first paragraph of the poem. In that paragraph Swift

compares man's chronic failure to follow his own natural bent with

the ease with which "Brutes find out where their talents lie."

The comparison was a popular one through the sixteenth and seven-

teenth centuries;10 Swift might have found it in several places

in both Montaigne and Pascal and, of course, he uses it in several

places himself. But in the Rapsody Swift works an illuminating

variation on the standard use of this comparison. Customarily, in

both Montaigne and Pascal, for example, the comparison is used to

remind proud man that in some ways, at least, the condition of

brutes is preferable to the condition of man, to remind men that,

though they consider themselves lords of the universe, in some

ways nature has been a kinder mother to brutes (by making them








instinctively aware of their abilities) than to mankind. Swift's

use of this comparison is, of course, like those of Montaigne and

Pascal, directed against man's pride,but his emphasis is different

from theirs; for Swift's point is not that nature has been a

kinder mother to brutes than to man but that man is simply the most

perverse of nature's children, the only creature, as Swift ob-

serves,


Who, led by Folly, combats Nature;
Who, when She loudly cries Forbear,
With Obstinacy fixes there.
(20-22)


Fully informed by nature, man,in Swift's view, insists on going

wrong. And therefore, unlike the dog which, Swift tells us, knows

to "turn aside" when it "sees the ditch too deep and wide," man

not only leaps into the ditch, but, as we shall see later in the

poem, even attempts to invert the whole world in order to make a

ridiculous virtue out of his bemiring failure,


With Heads to Points the Gulph they enter,
Link't perpendic'lar to the Centre:
And as their Heels elated rise,
Their Heads attempt the nether Skies.
(401-404)


There is, however, both in Swift's certainty that each

man has a particular role to play and in his condemnation of those

would-be poets who undertake a vocation to which they are not

called, something quite alien to a culture which, like ours, is

secular. Generally, in twentieth century European and American

literature, a choice of careers has been considered as a very

complex process, since it has been understood to depend upon a








large number of personal variables--what will make a particular

man happiest, most intellectually stimulated or most prosperous.

One must simply observe that Swift had not this way of thinking;

rather, as he makes abundantly clear in several of his sermons,

and particularly in that sermon titled, The Duty of Mutual

Subjection, a man's personal happiness was not and, from his

view of the matter, simply could not be the primary consideration

in the finding of a vocation. For Swift, a man's personal happi-

ness was itself dependent upon another consideration, how useful

a man might make his own advantages of wisdom, power or wealth to

his neighbor. "If a man doth not use those advantages to the Good

of the Publick," Swift observed,


or to the Benefit of his Neighbour, it is certain he
doth not deserve them; and consequently, that God never
intended them for a Blessing to him; and on the other
side, whoever doth employ his Talents as he ought, will
find by his own Experience, that they were chiefly lent
him for the Service of others: for to the Service of
others he will certainly employ them.11


Indeed, Swift is willing to argue the proposition that each

man's talent is a blessing to him only insofar as he is willing

to devote it to the service of others even with respect to the

gift of wisdom--a talent so often considered a good of itself.

For Swift comments,


Even great Wisdom is in the opinion of Solomon not a
Blessing in itself: for in much Wisdom is much Sorrow;
and Men of common understandings, if they serve God and
mind their Callings, make fewer mistakes in che Conduct
of Life than those who have better Heads. And yet,
Wisdom is a mighty Blessing when it is applied to good
Purposes, to instruct the Ignorant, to be a faithful
Counsellor either in Publick or Private, to be a
Director to Youth, and to many other Ends needless here
to mention.12









By his potential usefulness, then, not by a vision of his poten-

tial happiness, must a man find his proper calling. As Swift

argues, this world is providentially so ordered that the good of

each particular man, and of society as a whole, is dependent upon

the willingness of each particular man to serve his neighbor; as

each man is dependent upon his neighbor's skills, so each man must

bend his talents in subjection to his neighbor's good. Thus,

Swift sums the matter up,


As God hath contrived all the works of Nature to be
useful, and in some manner a support to each other, by
which the whole frame of the World under his Providence
is preserved and kept up: so among Mankind, our par-
ticular Stations are appointed to each of us by God
Almighty, wherein we are obliged to act, as far as our
Power reacheth, towards the Good of the whole community.
And he who doth not perform that Part Assigned to him
towards advancing the Benefit of the Whole, in propor-
tion to his Opportunities and Abilities, is not only a
useless, but a very mischievous Member of the Publick;
Because he taketh his Share of the Profit, and yet leaveth
his Share of the Burden to be borne by others, which
is the true principal cause of most Miseries and Mis-
fortunes in Life.


Measured, then, against Swift's view of a man's social

responsibility, it should be obvious that the man who "absurdly

bends his whole designs" against the inclinations of his own

genius errs profoundly against both himself and his fellow man.

He errs against himself because his own happiness, whether he

acknowledges it or not, depends upon the serviceable utilization

of his talents. And he errs against others since each abuse of

one's own talents represents a choice, no matter how mistaken, of

one's own good before the good of one's neighbor, and each such

choice must weaken those bonds of mutual responsibility which are

the very makings of a society. Thus, the "uncalled" poets Swift








describes in the Rapsody are capable of working far worse than

their own individual ill; they are, rather, at once active in and

emblematic of a general social disaster. And their culpability

extends beyond their having abandoned those offices and responsi-

bilities to which their God-given talents gave them a natural and

legitimate claim; for the office which they subsequently overrun

simply by force of their numbers is exactly that office which

traditionally has been considered primarily responsible for

teaching what they, in even attempting poetry, have forgotten--

the art, as Horace put it, to "bring all things to their proper

native use."14


III


For Swift, then, what made doubly dangerous this headlong

rush of men from their proper spheres to a vocation for which they

had no calling is that it involved not only the abandonment of

their several stations, but it meant also the adulteration by un-

fit men of an office of particular significance; an office for

which, Swift assures us early in the Rapsody, many may feel called,

but few are chosen.


Not Empire to the Rising-Sun,
By Valour, Conduct, Fortune won;
Nor highest Wisdom in Debates
For framing Laws to govern States;
Nor Skill in Sciences profound,
So large to graspe the Circle round;
Such Heav'nly Influence require,
As how to strike the Muses Lyre.
(25-32)


Unfortunately, critics seeing the scorn which Swift later in the

Rapsody pours down upon the pretentions and pretentiousness of a








city-full of bad poets, have been generally inclined to read that

scorn back into the lines just cited; that is, Swift's critics

have understood these lines to signify just the opposite of what

they say.15 There is, however, no real reason to so interpret

these lines, and there are good reasons, I think, why one should

not do so.

To begin with, Swift, in claiming that the office of poet

required a special grace and therefore, implicitly, served a

special function, does no more than state an intellectual common-

place which presumably he, as well as his contemporaries, in-

herited from the ages which preceded his. Horace had claimed that

the particular function of poetry was Aut prodesse volunt, aut de-

lectare and, as Thomas Maresca has recently argued,16 Horace's

maxim was repeated, with special emphasis on and expansion of its

first alternative, throughout the seventeenth century. "I could

never," Ben Jonson asserted at the beginning of the century,


. .think the study of wisdom confined only to the
philosopher or of piety to the divine, or of state
to the politicke. But he that can fain a Common-
Wealth (which is the poet) can gowne it with counsels,
strengthen it with laws, correct it with judgments,
inform it with religion and morals, is all of these.
Wee do not require in him mere elocution, or an ex-
cellent faculty in verse, but the exact knowledge of
all virtues, and their contraries, with the ability to
render one Love'd and the other hated. 17


At the end of the century, Dryden, speaking of tragedy, makes

for it exactly the same claim which Jonson had made more generally

for all poetry--and does so almost in Jonson's words. The work of

tragedy, Dryden claims, is to "reform manners by the delightful

representation of human life," and it can only do this by teaching







"love to virtue and hatred to vice; by shewing the rewards of one,

and punishments of the other. .. [or, at least by] rendering vir-

tue always amiable and vice detestable."18

This vision of poetry, as at once the repository of the

particular truths of divinity, philosophy and politics and the

ideal fountainhead for these truths is, in fact, the common denomi-

nator not only of one, but of more than two centuries of English

critical thought and unifies tracts so disparate in time and diverse

in spirit as Sidney's joyous Defense of Poesy and Sir William

Temple's almost phlegmatic Of Poetry. As long as Horace's state-

ment of the efficacy of poetry in teaching virtues and civility

continued to command respect, it provided a common basis for cri-

tical thought. It was, therefore, as true for Dryden as for Sid-

ney, for Pope as for Jonson, that poetry, because it illuminates

the universal through the particular by teaching morality through

clearly praiseworthy and blameworthy examples, is the ideal vehicle

to render virtues love and their contraries hated. Indeed, just

because poetry was considered to be at once so efficacious and so

necessary in "insensibly influencing" a people to virtuous action,

many a seventeenth century critic, like Sir William Davenant,

felt he could confidently maintain that without the "help of the

muses" no Divine or Leader of Armies, no Statesman or Judge could

reasonably expect "a long or quiet satisfaction in government."19

This whole background of ideas defining the nature of

poetry and, more importantly, the ends poetry is to serve is, both

by the title Swift chose to give his poem and by the way he chose

to narrate most of it, made almost constantly available as a

standard of judgment against which the activities imaged in the









poem can be measured. The significance of the first half of the

title is rather obvious; "On Poetry" refers back to that group of

similarly titled works which, as they reflected Horace's moral

view of poetry's function, reflected also the popular title of

his fullest exposition of his view, the Ars Poetica. The signifi-

cance of the second half of the title, however, may be somewhat

obscured for a twentieth century reader since both the connota-

tion and denotation of the word "rhapsody" have changed consider-

ably since Swift used it. To the twentieth century reader the

word normally denotes a specific type of music which is agreeable

because of its charming lyrical freedom. In the eighteenth cen-

tury, however, the word was often used to refer co any work which

was distinguished by an unhappy disorder. Thus Pope, writing to

Swift in 1729, defined by the word "rhapsody" the opposite of true

wit's creative and orderly process: "This letter. .will by a

rhapsody, it is many years since I wrote as a wit."20 As Swift,

then, would have understood the words of his title, that title

delineates the process his poem describes; a debasing and dis-

ordering of that very art which traditionally taught "the proper

native use" of things and men."

In the Rapsody, in fact, this disordering process is not

only described, its very workings are, as we shall see, demon-

strated. Up to line seventy, as we have already noted, the as-

tonished narrator of the Rapsody seems to be Swift himself, and

the mode of narration is a reasonably straight-forward description

of disorder. After line seventy, however, the narration of the

Rapsody becomes a subtler matter. We are introduced to a narrator

who himself illustrates the actual force of disorder as it corrupts









now poetry and now mankind, and the narration of the poem becomes,

in fact, a perverse Ars Poetica, echoing, in its variegated sub-

jects, oscillating style and in the very wording of its advice,

that Horatian collection of practical advice, historical review,

and social commentary which served as the foundation of that

traditional view of poetry which we have discussed above.

"How shall a new Attempter learn,' Swift asks, moving into

this new section,


Of different Spirits to discern,
And how distinguish, which is which,
The Poet's Vein, or scribling Itch?
Then hear an old experienced Sinner
Instructing thus a young Beginner.
(72-76)


Thus Swift introduces what is probably some of the subtlest and

most compact poetry he ever wrote by prefacing it with lines which

are themselves perplexing. The narrator of the coming lines, Swift

tells us here, is an "old experienced sinner." But, although Swift

calls this narrator a sinner, it is not very clear why he does so,

since he also tells us that the instructions which this sinner

will offer are instructions in that art which is most necessary

to all potential poets--and generalized, to all good men--the art

of distinguishing between true poetic calling and a mere scribbling

itch, between true vocation and mere whimsy.

But, despite the initially confusing character of this

introduction, it does provide us with at least one very strong

indication of our new narrator's sinful and corruptive nature.

In telling us that this old sinner will teach the skill, precisely,

"of different Spirits to discern," Swift echoes a text, I Corinthians 12,




Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
fcla fda yes
dl
!-- echoic poetry of Jonathan Swift ( Book ) --
METS:mets OBJID UF00097795_00001
xmlns:METS http:www.loc.govMETS
xmlns:mods http:www.loc.govmodsv3
xmlns:xlink http:www.w3.org1999xlink
xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance
xmlns:daitss http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss
xmlns:sobekcm http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcm
xsi:schemaLocation
http:www.loc.govstandardsmetsmets.xsd
http:www.loc.govmodsv3mods-3-3.xsd
http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitss.xsd
http:digital.uflib.ufl.edumetadatasobekcmsobekcm.xsd
METS:metsHdr CREATEDATE 2010-09-20T08:54:29Z ID LASTMODDATE 2010-02-04T00:00:00Z RECORDSTATUS NEW
METS:agent ROLE CREATOR TYPE ORGANIZATION
METS:name UF
METS:note server=TC
projects=
OTHERTYPE SOFTWARE OTHER
Go UFDC - FDA Preparation Tool
INDIVIDUAL
UFAD\mariner1
METS:dmdSec DMD1
METS:mdWrap MDTYPE MODS MIMETYPE textxml LABEL Metadata
METS:xmlData
mods:mods
mods:genre authority marcgt bibliography
non-fiction
mods:identifier type AlephBibNum 000561419
OCLC 13528862
NOTIS ACY7352
mods:language
mods:languageTerm text English
code iso639-2b eng
mods:location
mods:physicalLocation University of Florida
UF
mods:name personal
mods:namePart Fischer, John Irwin
given John Irwin
family Fischer
date 1940-
mods:role
mods:roleTerm Main Entity
mods:note thesis Thesis - University of Florida.
bibliography Bibliography: leaves 141-144.
additional physical form Also available on World Wide Web
Manuscript copy.
Vita.
mods:originInfo
mods:place
mods:placeTerm marccountry xx
mods:dateIssued marc 1968
point start 1968
mods:copyrightDate 1968
mods:recordInfo
mods:recordIdentifier source ufdc UF00097795_00001
mods:recordCreationDate 860505
mods:recordOrigin Imported from (ALEPH)000561419
mods:recordContentSource University of Florida
marcorg fug
FUG
mods:languageOfCataloging
English
eng
mods:relatedItem original
mods:physicalDescription
mods:extent xi, 144 leaves : ; 28 cm.
mods:subject SUBJ690_1
mods:topic English thesis Ph. D
SUBJ690_2
Dissertations, Academic
English
mods:geographic UF
mods:titleInfo
mods:nonSort The
mods:title echoic poetry of Jonathan Swift
mods:subTitle studies in its meaning
mods:typeOfResource text
DMD2
OTHERMDTYPE SobekCM Custom
sobekcm:procParam
sobekcm:Collection.Primary UFIR
sobekcm:Collection.Alternate VENDORIA
sobekcm:SubCollection UFETD
sobekcm:MainThumbnail echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_001thm.jpg
sobekcm:Download
sobekcm:fptr FILEID UR2
sobekcm:EncodingLevel I
sobekcm:bibDesc
sobekcm:BibID UF00097795
sobekcm:VID 00001
sobekcm:Source
sobekcm:statement UF University of Florida
sobekcm:Type Book
sobekcm:SortDate -1
METS:amdSec
METS:digiprovMD AMD_DAITSS
DAITSS
daitss:daitss
daitss:AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT PROJECT UFDC
METS:fileSec
METS:fileGrp USE reference
METS:file GROUPID G1 J1 imagejpeg SIZE 123811
METS:FLocat LOCTYPE OTHERLOCTYPE SYSTEM xlink:href echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_001.jpg
G2 J2 109403
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_002.jpg
G3 J3 69203
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_003.jpg
G4 J4 71036
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_004.jpg
G5 J5 271969
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_005.jpg
G6 J6 333028
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_006.jpg
G7 J7 260050
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_007.jpg
G8 J8 316054
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_008.jpg
G9 J9 296742
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_009.jpg
G10 J10 177781
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_010.jpg
G11 J11 202520
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_011.jpg
G12 J12 105884
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_012.jpg
G13 J13 274331
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_013.jpg
G14 J14 304595
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_014.jpg
G15 J15 275555
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_015.jpg
G16 J16 283406
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_016.jpg
G17 J17 261136
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_017.jpg
G18 J18 297427
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_018.jpg
G19 J19 284405
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_019.jpg
G20 J20 350907
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_020.jpg
G21 J21 273706
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_021.jpg
G22 J22 338362
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_022.jpg
G23 J23 318718
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_023.jpg
G24 J24 308984
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_024.jpg
G25 J25 300060
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_025.jpg
G26 J26 305378
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_026.jpg
G27 J27 287370
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_027.jpg
G28 J28 327348
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_028.jpg
G29 J29 315486
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_029.jpg
G30 J30 304192
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_030.jpg
G31 J31 277644
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_031.jpg
G32 J32 300799
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_032.jpg
G33 J33 250719
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_033.jpg
G34 J34 266567
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_034.jpg
G35 J35 235569
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_035.jpg
G36 J36 307571
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_036.jpg
G37 J37 289662
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_037.jpg
G38 J38 317337
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_038.jpg
G39 J39 306507
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_039.jpg
G40 J40 320783
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_040.jpg
G41 J41 265296
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_041.jpg
G42 J42 278296
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_042.jpg
G43 J43 267374
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_043.jpg
G44 J44 305540
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_044.jpg
G45 J45 128749
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_045.jpg
G46 J46 318318
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_046.jpg
G47 J47 329328
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_047.jpg
G48 J48 248214
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_048.jpg
G49 J49 300114
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_049.jpg
G50 J50 286405
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_050.jpg
G51 J51 284673
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_051.jpg
G52 J52 302489
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_052.jpg
G53 J53 286081
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_053.jpg
G54 J54 317181
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_054.jpg
G55 J55 299081
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_055.jpg
G56 J56 264976
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_056.jpg
G57 J57 257883
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_057.jpg
G58 J58 320569
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_058.jpg
G59 J59 280442
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_059.jpg
G60 J60 310930
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_060.jpg
G61 J61 304389
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_061.jpg
G62 J62 295714
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_062.jpg
G63 J63 294664
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_063.jpg
G64 J64 307927
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_064.jpg
G65 J65 293354
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_065.jpg
G66 J66 258566
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_066.jpg
G67 J67 262551
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_067.jpg
G68 J68 297763
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_068.jpg
G69 J69 283455
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_069.jpg
G70 J70 291518
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_070.jpg
G71 J71 268874
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_071.jpg
G72 J72 281752
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_072.jpg
G73 J73 251695
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_073.jpg
G74 J74 305684
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_074.jpg
G75 J75 237441
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_075.jpg
G76 J76 309552
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_076.jpg
G77 J77 251764
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_077.jpg
G78 J78 260910
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_078.jpg
G79 J79 249111
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_079.jpg
G80 J80 101836
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_080.jpg
G81 J81 262622
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_081.jpg
G82 J82 144007
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_082.jpg
G83 J83 243230
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_083.jpg
G84 J84 285860
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_084.jpg
G85 J85 256564
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_085.jpg
G86 J86 289702
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_086.jpg
G87 J87 244193
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_087.jpg
G88 J88 264936
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_088.jpg
G89 J89 267341
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_089.jpg
G90 J90 229318
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_090.jpg
G91 J91 232245
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_091.jpg
G92 J92 280227
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_092.jpg
G93 J93 251721
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_093.jpg
G94 J94 316886
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_094.jpg
G95 J95 324811
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_095.jpg
G96 J96 270066
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_096.jpg
G97 J97 291151
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_097.jpg
G98 J98 308113
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_098.jpg
G99 J99 303248
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_099.jpg
G100 J100 296048
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_100.jpg
G101 J101 256945
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_101.jpg
G102 J102 273109
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_102.jpg
G103 J103 267133
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_103.jpg
G104 J104 306979
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_104.jpg
G105 J105 274950
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_105.jpg
G106 J106 301554
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_106.jpg
G107 J107 271454
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_107.jpg
G108 J108 290808
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_108.jpg
G109 J109 269855
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_109.jpg
G110 J110 262796
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_110.jpg
G111 J111 275975
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_111.jpg
G112 J112 202155
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_112.jpg
G113 J113 269615
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_113.jpg
G114 J114 318855
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_114.jpg
G115 J115 271237
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_115.jpg
G116 J116 292768
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_116.jpg
G117 J117 292324
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_117.jpg
G118 J118 286784
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_118.jpg
G119 J119 302655
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_119.jpg
G120 J120 279740
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_120.jpg
G121 J121 277402
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_121.jpg
G122 J122 290114
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_122.jpg
G123 J123 276739
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_123.jpg
G124 J124 305982
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_124.jpg
G125 J125 279343
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_125.jpg
G126 J126 283731
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_126.jpg
G127 J127 259156
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_127.jpg
G128 J128 319160
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_128.jpg
G129 J129 263088
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_129.jpg
G130 J130 327638
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_130.jpg
G131 J131 293368
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_131.jpg
G132 J132 300452
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_132.jpg
G133 J133 252191
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_133.jpg
G134 J134 294986
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_134.jpg
G135 J135 259669
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_135.jpg
G136 J136 315481
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_136.jpg
G137 J137 262589
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_137.jpg
G138 J138 267505
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_138.jpg
G139 J139 278546
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_139.jpg
G140 J140 295976
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_140.jpg
G141 J141 278000
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_141.jpg
G142 J142 298786
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_142.jpg
G143 J143 256087
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_143.jpg
G144 J144 269524
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_144.jpg
G145 J145 231622
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_145.jpg
G146 J146 246828
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_146.jpg
G147 J147 234650
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_147.jpg
G148 J148 275433
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_148.jpg
G149 J149 213883
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_149.jpg
G150 J150 323568
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_150.jpg
G151 J151 253380
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_151.jpg
G152 J152 89341
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_152.jpg
G153 J153 272487
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_153.jpg
G154 J154 316019
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_154.jpg
G155 J155 302862
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_155.jpg
G156 J156 214263
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_156.jpg
G157 J157 185169
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_157.jpg
G158 J158 74417
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_158.jpg
E1 imagejp2 315299
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_001.jp2
E2 235889
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_002.jp2
E3 100243
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_003.jp2
E4 94050
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_004.jp2
E5 850217
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_005.jp2
E6 828892
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_006.jp2
E7 850206
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_007.jp2
E8 828917
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_008.jp2
E9 850119
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_009.jp2
E10 514382
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_010.jp2
E11 657120
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_011.jp2
E12 229056
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_012.jp2
E13 862629
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_013.jp2
E14 853123
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_014.jp2
E15 889813
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_015.jp2
E16 878281
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_016.jp2
E17 889815
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_017.jp2
E18 853129
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_018.jp2
E19 872616
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_019.jp2
E20 853157
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_020.jp2
E21 880511
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_021.jp2
E22 853166
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_022.jp2
E23 880531
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_023.jp2
E24 853169
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_024.jp2
E25 880530
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_025.jp2
E26 853146
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_026.jp2
E27 880494
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_027.jp2
E28 853141
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_028.jp2
E29
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_029.jp2
E30
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_030.jp2
E31 880529
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_031.jp2
E32
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_032.jp2
E33 880532
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_033.jp2
E34 853160
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_034.jp2
E35 825984
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_035.jp2
E36 853158
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_036.jp2
E37 880525
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_037.jp2
E38 853163
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_038.jp2
E39 880509
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_039.jp2
E40
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_040.jp2
E41 880475
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_041.jp2
E42 860920
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_042.jp2
E43 880459
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_043.jp2
E44 864388
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_044.jp2
E45 352396
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_045.jp2
E46 868365
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_046.jp2
E47 880519
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_047.jp2
E48 835010
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_048.jp2
E49 880479
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_049.jp2
E50 881805
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_050.jp2
E51 880483
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_051.jp2
E52 878903
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_052.jp2
E53
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_053.jp2
E54 881775
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_054.jp2
E55
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_055.jp2
E56 881784
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_056.jp2
E57 880521
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_057.jp2
E58 881800
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_058.jp2
E59 880515
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_059.jp2
E60 881773
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_060.jp2
E61 880499
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_061.jp2
E62 881789
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_062.jp2
E63 880518
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_063.jp2
E64 876092
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_064.jp2
E65 880488
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_065.jp2
E66 872731
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_066.jp2
E67 880527
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_067.jp2
E68 881798
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_068.jp2
E69 880513
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_069.jp2
E70 881758
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_070.jp2
E71 880526
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_071.jp2
E72 881808
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_072.jp2
E73 880534
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_073.jp2
E74
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_074.jp2
E75 851699
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_075.jp2
E76 881802
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_076.jp2
E77 880517
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_077.jp2
E78 881803
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_078.jp2
E79
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_079.jp2
E80 207011
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_080.jp2
E81 880522
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_081.jp2
E82 384622
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_082.jp2
E83 871799
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_083.jp2
E84 876783
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_084.jp2
E85 864190
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_085.jp2
E86 881792
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_086.jp2
E87
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_087.jp2
E88
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_088.jp2
E89
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_089.jp2
E90 785531
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_090.jp2
E91 832189
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_091.jp2
E92 881804
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_092.jp2
E93 880500
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_093.jp2
E94 881777
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_094.jp2
E95 880533
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_095.jp2
E96 881793
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_096.jp2
E97
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_097.jp2
E98 881809
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_098.jp2
E99 880514
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_099.jp2
E100 881721
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_100.jp2
E101 880485
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_101.jp2
E102 881767
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_102.jp2
E103 880516
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_103.jp2
E104 881786
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_104.jp2
E105 880528
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_105.jp2
E106
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_106.jp2
E107
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_107.jp2
E108
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_108.jp2
E109 880464
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_109.jp2
E110 881807
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_110.jp2
E111
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_111.jp2
E112 646566
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_112.jp2
E113
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_113.jp2
E114
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_114.jp2
E115 880535
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_115.jp2
E116
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_116.jp2
E117
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_117.jp2
E118 881799
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_118.jp2
E119
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_119.jp2
E120 881791
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_120.jp2
E121
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_121.jp2
E122
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_122.jp2
E123
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_123.jp2
E124 881776
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_124.jp2
E125 880512
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_125.jp2
E126
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_126.jp2
E127 880506
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_127.jp2
E128
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_128.jp2
E129 880510
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_129.jp2
E130
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_130.jp2
E131
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_131.jp2
E132 881750
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_132.jp2
E133
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_133.jp2
E134 881806
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_134.jp2
E135 880469
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_135.jp2
E136
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_136.jp2
E137
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_137.jp2
E138
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_138.jp2
E139
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_139.jp2
E140 881788
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_140.jp2
E141
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_141.jp2
E142
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_142.jp2
E143
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_143.jp2
E144 881757
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_144.jp2
E145 846522
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_145.jp2
E146 854030
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_146.jp2
E147 836762
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_147.jp2
E148
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_148.jp2
E149 745517
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_149.jp2
E150 870403
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_150.jp2
E151
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_151.jp2
E152 159251
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_152.jp2
E153
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_153.jp2
E154 881801
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_154.jp2
E155
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_155.jp2
E156 721355
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_156.jp2
E157 581567
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_157.jp2
E158 113134
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_158.jp2
archive
F1 imagetiff 6.0 20427954
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_001.tif
F2 19917090
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_002.tif
F3
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_003.tif
F4
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_004.tif
F5
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_005.tif
F6
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_006.tif
F7
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_007.tif
F8
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_008.tif
F9
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_009.tif
F10 20604018
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_010.tif
F11 20726264
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_011.tif
F12
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_012.tif
F13
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_013.tif
F14 20499228
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_014.tif
F15 21379244
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_015.tif
F16 21102382
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_016.tif
F17
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_017.tif
F18
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_018.tif
F19 20965964
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_019.tif
F20
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_020.tif
F21 21156204
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_021.tif
F22
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_022.tif
F23
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_023.tif
F24
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_024.tif
F25
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_025.tif
F26
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_026.tif
F27
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_027.tif
F28
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_028.tif
F29
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_029.tif
F30
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_030.tif
F31
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_031.tif
F32
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_032.tif
F33
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_033.tif
F34
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_034.tif
F35
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_035.tif
F36
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_036.tif
F37
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_037.tif
F38
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_038.tif
F39
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_039.tif
F40
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_040.tif
F41
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_041.tif
F42 20685466
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_042.tif
F43
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_043.tif
F44 20768952
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_044.tif
F45
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_045.tif
F46 20864754
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_046.tif
F47
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_047.tif
F48 21187000
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_048.tif
F49
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_049.tif
F50
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_050.tif
F51
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_051.tif
F52 21117504
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_052.tif
F53
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_053.tif
F54
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_054.tif
F55
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_055.tif
F56
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_056.tif
F57
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_057.tif
F58
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_058.tif
F59
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_059.tif
F60
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_060.tif
F61
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_061.tif
F62
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_062.tif
F63
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_063.tif
F64 21050310
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_064.tif
F65
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_065.tif
F66
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_066.tif
F67
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_067.tif
F68
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_068.tif
F69
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_069.tif
F70
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_070.tif
F71
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_071.tif
F72
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_072.tif
F73
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_073.tif
F74
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_074.tif
F75
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_075.tif
F76
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_076.tif
F77
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_077.tif
F78
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_078.tif
F79
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_079.tif
F80
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_080.tif
F81
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_081.tif
F82
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_082.tif
F83
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_083.tif
F84 21066632
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_084.tif
F85 20763912
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_085.tif
F86
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_086.tif
F87
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_087.tif
F88
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_088.tif
F89
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_089.tif
F90
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_090.tif
F91
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_091.tif
F92
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_092.tif
F93
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_093.tif
F94
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_094.tif
F95
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_095.tif
F96
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_096.tif
F97
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_097.tif
F98
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_098.tif
F99
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_099.tif
F100
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_100.tif
F101
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_101.tif
F102
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_102.tif
F103
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_103.tif
F104
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_104.tif
F105
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_105.tif
F106
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_106.tif
F107
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_107.tif
F108
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_108.tif
F109
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_109.tif
F110
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_110.tif
F111
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_111.tif
F112
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_112.tif
F113
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_113.tif
F114
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_114.tif
F115
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_115.tif
F116
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_116.tif
F117
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_117.tif
F118
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_118.tif
F119
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_119.tif
F120
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_120.tif
F121
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_121.tif
F122
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_122.tif
F123
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_123.tif
F124
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_124.tif
F125
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_125.tif
F126
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_126.tif
F127
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_127.tif
F128
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_128.tif
F129
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_129.tif
F130
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_130.tif
F131
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_131.tif
F132
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_132.tif
F133
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_133.tif
F134
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_134.tif
F135
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_135.tif
F136
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_136.tif
F137
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_137.tif
F138
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_138.tif
F139
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_139.tif
F140
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_140.tif
F141
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_141.tif
F142
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_142.tif
F143
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_143.tif
F144
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_144.tif
F145
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_145.tif
F146
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_146.tif
F147
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_147.tif
F148
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_148.tif
F149
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_149.tif
F150 20913622
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_150.tif
F151
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_151.tif
F152
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_152.tif
F153
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_153.tif
F154
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_154.tif
F155
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_155.tif
F156
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_156.tif
F157
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_157.tif
F158
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_158.tif
R1 textx-pro 7390
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_001.pro
R3 1114
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_003.pro
R4 564
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_004.pro
R5 39937
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_005.pro
R6 47311
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_006.pro
R7 37805
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_007.pro
R8 45502
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_008.pro
R9 45004
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_009.pro
R10 18439
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_010.pro
R11 26022
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_011.pro
R12 4560
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_012.pro
R13 40157
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_013.pro
R14 42741
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_014.pro
R15 39761
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_015.pro
R16 40231
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_016.pro
R17 38957
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_017.pro
R18 43061
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_018.pro
R19 43720
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_019.pro
R20 53085
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_020.pro
R21 43205
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_021.pro
R22 50298
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_022.pro
R23 49009
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_023.pro
R24 44381
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_024.pro
R25 47863
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_025.pro
R26 42506
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_026.pro
R27 42288
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_027.pro
R28 46887
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_028.pro
R29 48632
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_029.pro
R30 42838
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_030.pro
R31 44013
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_031.pro
R32 44476
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_032.pro
R33 37490
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_033.pro
R34 37377
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_034.pro
R35 35395
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_035.pro
R36 46528
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_036.pro
R37 46604
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_037.pro
R38 46878
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_038.pro
R39 47098
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_039.pro
R40 47511
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_040.pro
R41 40493
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_041.pro
R42 41364
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_042.pro
R43 42833
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_043.pro
R44 44994
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_044.pro
R45 12686
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_045.pro
R46 48168
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_046.pro
R47 52434
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_047.pro
R48 32685
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_048.pro
R49 47198
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_049.pro
R50 41509
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_050.pro
R51 43870
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_051.pro
R52 43904
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_052.pro
R53 41658
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_053.pro
R54 46188
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_054.pro
R55 47039
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_055.pro
R56 36385
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_056.pro
R57 39272
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_057.pro
R58 47977
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_058.pro
R59 41978
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_059.pro
R60 46151
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_060.pro
R61 50325
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_061.pro
R62 42872
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_062.pro
R63 45016
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_063.pro
R64 45558
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_064.pro
R65 46791
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_065.pro
R66 35157
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_066.pro
R67 38370
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_067.pro
R68 42926
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_068.pro
R69 42632
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_069.pro
R70 42866
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_070.pro
R71 41922
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_071.pro
R72 42186
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_072.pro
R73 39129
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_073.pro
R74 45125
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_074.pro
R75 36050
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_075.pro
R76 44912
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_076.pro
R77 37712
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_077.pro
R78 37933
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_078.pro
R79 37831
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_079.pro
R80 5508
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_080.pro
R81 38313
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_081.pro
R82 13671
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_082.pro
R83 35359
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_083.pro
R84 42020
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_084.pro
R85 39360
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_085.pro
R86 42983
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_086.pro
R87 39352
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_087.pro
R88 38892
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_088.pro
R89 41380
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_089.pro
R90 32509
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_090.pro
R91 34177
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_091.pro
R92 42138
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_092.pro
R93 37860
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_093.pro
R94 50295
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_094.pro
R95 52212
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_095.pro
R96 39004
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_096.pro
R97 48105
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_097.pro
R98 47429
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_098.pro
R99 47124
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_099.pro
R100
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_100.pro
R101 40697
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_101.pro
R102 41831
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_102.pro
R103 44377
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_103.pro
R104 46456
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_104.pro
R105 41123
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_105.pro
R106 43792
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_106.pro
R107 39799
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_107.pro
R108 41596
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_108.pro
R109 42474
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_109.pro
R110 37202
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_110.pro
R111 42311
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_111.pro
R112 25268
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_112.pro
R113 39695
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_113.pro
R114 46752
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_114.pro
R115 40877
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_115.pro
R116 41800
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_116.pro
R117 42937
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_117.pro
R118 41763
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_118.pro
R119 47300
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_119.pro
R120 40546
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_120.pro
R121 40336
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_121.pro
R122 43457
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_122.pro
R123 45796
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_123.pro
R124 45199
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_124.pro
R125 41162
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_125.pro
R126 40186
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_126.pro
R127 41386
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_127.pro
R128 47847
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_128.pro
R129 38678
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_129.pro
R130 46995
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_130.pro
R131 42382
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_131.pro
R132 45029
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_132.pro
R133 39925
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_133.pro
R134 44614
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_134.pro
R135 41414
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_135.pro
R136 49274
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_136.pro
R137 40870
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_137.pro
R138 36809
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_138.pro
R139 46039
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_139.pro
R140 44768
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_140.pro
R141 49465
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_141.pro
R142 45204
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_142.pro
R143 41851
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_143.pro
R144 40503
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_144.pro
R145 36990
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_145.pro
R146 37221
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_146.pro
R147 35599
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_147.pro
R148 40774
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_148.pro
R149 31928
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_149.pro
R150 48714
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_150.pro
R151 34815
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_151.pro
R152 3037
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_152.pro
R153 37943
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_153.pro
R154 43147
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_154.pro
R155 44004
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_155.pro
R156 24480
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_156.pro
R157 21975
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_157.pro
T1 textplain 463
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_001.txt
T3 101
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_003.txt
T4 75
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_004.txt
T5 1604
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_005.txt
T6 1891
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_006.txt
T7 1602
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_007.txt
T8 1836
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_008.txt
T9 1813
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_009.txt
T10 763
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_010.txt
T11 1140
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_011.txt
T12 242
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_012.txt
T13 1801
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_013.txt
T14 1776
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_014.txt
T15 1752
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_015.txt
T16 1732
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_016.txt
T17
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_017.txt
T18 1767
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_018.txt
T19 1818
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_019.txt
T20 2210
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_020.txt
T21 1778
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_021.txt
T22 1997
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_022.txt
T23 1954
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_023.txt
T24 1807
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_024.txt
T25 1915
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_025.txt
T26 1820
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_026.txt
T27
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_027.txt
T28 1961
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_028.txt
T29 2038
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_029.txt
T30 1870
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_030.txt
T31 1825
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_031.txt
T32 1850
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_032.txt
T33 1662
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_033.txt
T34 1614
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_034.txt
T35 1613
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_035.txt
T36 1883
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_036.txt
T37 1982
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_037.txt
T38 1939
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_038.txt
T39 1984
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_039.txt
T40 1973
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_040.txt
T41 1827
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_041.txt
T42 1815
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_042.txt
T43 1789
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_043.txt
T44
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_044.txt
T45 575
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_045.txt
T46 2085
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_046.txt
T47 2255
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_047.txt
T48 1490
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_048.txt
T49 1896
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_049.txt
T50 1782
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_050.txt
T51
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_051.txt
T52 1797
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_052.txt
T53 1862
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_053.txt
T54 1905
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_054.txt
T55 1881
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_055.txt
T56 1631
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_056.txt
T57 1693
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_057.txt
T58 1916
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_058.txt
T59 1774
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_059.txt
T60 1899
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_060.txt
T61 2128
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_061.txt
T62 1909
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_062.txt
T63 1994
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_063.txt
T64 1859
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_064.txt
T65 1941
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_065.txt
T66 1562
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_066.txt
T67 1758
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_067.txt
T68
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_068.txt
T69 1800
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_069.txt
T70 1753
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_070.txt
T71 1725
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_071.txt
T72
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_072.txt
T73 1737
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_073.txt
T74 1858
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_074.txt
T75 1669
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_075.txt
T76
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_076.txt
T77 1707
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_077.txt
T78 1642
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_078.txt
T79 1659
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_079.txt
T80 286
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_080.txt
T81 1665
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_081.txt
T82 622
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_082.txt
T83 1610
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_083.txt
T84 1748
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_084.txt
T85 1660
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_085.txt
T86 1808
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_086.txt
T87 1710
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_087.txt
T88 1715
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_088.txt
T89 1700
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_089.txt
T90 1496
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_090.txt
T91 1597
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_091.txt
T92
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_092.txt
T93 1698
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_093.txt
T94 2108
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_094.txt
T95 2183
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_095.txt
T96
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_096.txt
T97 1991
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_097.txt
T98 1913
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_098.txt
T99 1871
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_099.txt
T100
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_100.txt
T101 1723
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_101.txt
T102 1853
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_102.txt
T103 1794
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_103.txt
T104 1884
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_104.txt
T105 1705
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_105.txt
T106 1747
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_106.txt
T107 1687
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_107.txt
T108 1677
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_108.txt
T109 1764
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_109.txt
T110 1501
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_110.txt
T111 1833
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_111.txt
T112 1095
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_112.txt
T113
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_113.txt
T114 1957
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_114.txt
T115 1690
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_115.txt
T116 1762
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_116.txt
T117 1742
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_117.txt
T118 1793
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_118.txt
T119 1873
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_119.txt
T120 1688
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_120.txt
T121 1766
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_121.txt
T122 1745
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_122.txt
T123 1868
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_123.txt
T124 1819
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_124.txt
T125 1809
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_125.txt
T126 1739
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_126.txt
T127
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_127.txt
T128 2008
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_128.txt
T129 1650
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_129.txt
T130 1917
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_130.txt
T131 1757
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_131.txt
T132 1860
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_132.txt
T133 1751
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_133.txt
T134 1834
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_134.txt
T135 1701
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_135.txt
T136 2021
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_136.txt
T137 1761
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_137.txt
T138 1574
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_138.txt
T139
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_139.txt
T140 1848
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_140.txt
T141 1977
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_141.txt
T142
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_142.txt
T143 1741
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_143.txt
T144 1678
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_144.txt
T145
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_145.txt
T146 1714
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_146.txt
T147 1542
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_147.txt
T148 1682
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_148.txt
T149 1410
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_149.txt
T150 2135
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_150.txt
T151 1516
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_151.txt
T152 190
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_152.txt
T153 1647
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_153.txt
T154 1838
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_154.txt
T155 1950
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_155.txt
T156 1172
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_156.txt
T157 910
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_157.txt
applicationpdf 6262464
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich.pdf
UR1 38649
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_001thm.jpg
AR1 62813
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_001.QC.jpg
AR2 57007
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_002.QC.jpg
AR3 36611
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_002thm.jpg
AR4 42710
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_003.QC.jpg
AR5 32332
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_003thm.jpg
AR6 44297
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_004.QC.jpg
AR7
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_004thm.jpg
AR8 117783
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_005.QC.jpg
AR9 54136
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_005thm.jpg
AR10 142032
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_006.QC.jpg
AR11 60749
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_006thm.jpg
AR12 114394
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_007.QC.jpg
AR13 52715
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_007thm.jpg
AR14 135436
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_008.QC.jpg
AR15 58686
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_008thm.jpg
AR16 128098
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_009.QC.jpg
AR17 57083
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_009thm.jpg
AR18 84127
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_010.QC.jpg
AR19 45873
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_010thm.jpg
AR20 90583
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_011.QC.jpg
AR21 45465
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_011thm.jpg
AR22 56439
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_012.QC.jpg
AR23 37891
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_012thm.jpg
AR24 122063
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_013.QC.jpg
AR25 54710
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_013thm.jpg
AR26 130830
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_014.QC.jpg
AR27 58338
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_014thm.jpg
AR28 119065
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_015.QC.jpg
AR29 53027
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_015thm.jpg
AR30 120791
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_016.QC.jpg
AR31 54802
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_016thm.jpg
AR32 115989
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_017.QC.jpg
AR33 53472
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_017thm.jpg
AR34 122857
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_018.QC.jpg
AR35 57406
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_018thm.jpg
AR36 123708
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_019.QC.jpg
AR37 57094
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_019thm.jpg
AR38 140422
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_020.QC.jpg
AR39 58092
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_020thm.jpg
AR40 122673
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_021.QC.jpg
AR41 55061
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_021thm.jpg
AR42 142097
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_022.QC.jpg
AR43 61281
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_022thm.jpg
AR44 135965
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_023.QC.jpg
AR45 58817
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_023thm.jpg
AR46 136460
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_024.QC.jpg
AR47 59340
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_024thm.jpg
AR48 130265
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_025.QC.jpg
AR49 57528
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_025thm.jpg
AR50 135019
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_026.QC.jpg
AR51 58802
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_026thm.jpg
AR52 125352
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_027.QC.jpg
AR53 55804
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_027thm.jpg
AR54 137895
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_028.QC.jpg
AR55 59492
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_028thm.jpg
AR56 135547
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_029.QC.jpg
AR57 58746
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_029thm.jpg
AR58 128251
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_030.QC.jpg
AR59 57765
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_030thm.jpg
AR60 118423
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_031.QC.jpg
AR61 54979
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_031thm.jpg
AR62 124604
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_032.QC.jpg
AR63 56776
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_032thm.jpg
AR64 110648
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_033.QC.jpg
AR65 50550
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_033thm.jpg
AR66 116712
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_034.QC.jpg
AR67 53361
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_034thm.jpg
AR68 101997
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_035.QC.jpg
AR69 50534
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_035thm.jpg
AR70 133600
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_036.QC.jpg
AR71 58494
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_036thm.jpg
AR72 118340
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_037.QC.jpg
AR73 54897
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_037thm.jpg
AR74 140628
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_038.QC.jpg
AR75 58558
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_038thm.jpg
AR76 128743
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_039.QC.jpg
AR77 57340
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_039thm.jpg
AR78 129322
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_040.QC.jpg
AR79 57817
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_040thm.jpg
AR80 111441
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_041.QC.jpg
AR81 52159
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_041thm.jpg
AR82 124107
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_042.QC.jpg
AR83 55607
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_042thm.jpg
AR84 113807
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_043.QC.jpg
AR85 52358
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_043thm.jpg
AR86 130948
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_044.QC.jpg
AR87 56548
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_044thm.jpg
AR88 66275
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_045.QC.jpg
AR89 39392
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_045thm.jpg
AR90 127257
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_046.QC.jpg
AR91 55936
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_046thm.jpg
AR92 130518
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_047.QC.jpg
AR93 56761
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_047thm.jpg
AR94 109446
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_048.QC.jpg
AR95 53871
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_048thm.jpg
AR96 129694
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_049.QC.jpg
AR97 58096
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_049thm.jpg
AR98 119532
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_050.QC.jpg
AR99 55467
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_050thm.jpg
AR100 126491
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_051.QC.jpg
AR101 56813
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_051thm.jpg
AR102 131281
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_052.QC.jpg
AR103 56695
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_052thm.jpg
AR104 122124
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_053.QC.jpg
AR105 53654
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_053thm.jpg
AR106 135099
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_054.QC.jpg
AR107 58360
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_054thm.jpg
AR108
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_055.QC.jpg
AR109 57747
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_055thm.jpg
AR110 115562
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_056.QC.jpg
AR111 53880
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_056thm.jpg
AR112 116196
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_057.QC.jpg
AR113 53344
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_057thm.jpg
AR114 136334
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_058.QC.jpg
AR115 59750
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_058thm.jpg
AR116 122098
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_059.QC.jpg
AR117 55457
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_059thm.jpg
AR118 136416
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_060.QC.jpg
AR119 59400
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_060thm.jpg
AR120 127334
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_061.QC.jpg
AR121 54290
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_061thm.jpg
AR122 126744
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_062.QC.jpg
AR123 56016
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_062thm.jpg
AR124 119339
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_063.QC.jpg
AR125 53524
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_063thm.jpg
AR126 131358
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_064.QC.jpg
AR127 58470
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_064thm.jpg
AR128 121848
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_065.QC.jpg
AR129 52593
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_065thm.jpg
AR130 111243
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_066.QC.jpg
AR131 53012
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_066thm.jpg
AR132 113883
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_067.QC.jpg
AR133 50941
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_067thm.jpg
AR134 124482
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_068.QC.jpg
AR135 56522
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_068thm.jpg
AR136 115781
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_069.QC.jpg
AR137 54487
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_069thm.jpg
AR138 126191
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_070.QC.jpg
AR139 55721
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_070thm.jpg
AR140 115938
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_071.QC.jpg
AR141 54787
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_071thm.jpg
AR142 125042
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_072.QC.jpg
AR143 55849
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_072thm.jpg
AR144 111125
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_073.QC.jpg
AR145 50791
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_073thm.jpg
AR146 130824
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_074.QC.jpg
AR147 59174
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_074thm.jpg
AR148 102460
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_075.QC.jpg
AR149 48355
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_075thm.jpg
AR150 130444
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_076.QC.jpg
AR151 58743
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_076thm.jpg
AR152 111910
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_077.QC.jpg
AR153 52438
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_077thm.jpg
AR154 114367
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_078.QC.jpg
AR155 54053
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_078thm.jpg
AR156 108501
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_079.QC.jpg
AR157 50895
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_079thm.jpg
AR158 57994
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_080.QC.jpg
AR159 36895
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_080thm.jpg
AR160 106770
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_081.QC.jpg
AR161 50218
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_081thm.jpg
AR162 69774
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_082.QC.jpg
AR163 41031
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_082thm.jpg
AR164 107412
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_083.QC.jpg
AR165 50837
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_083thm.jpg
AR166 125725
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_084.QC.jpg
AR167 55818
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_084thm.jpg
AR168 113370
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_085.QC.jpg
AR169 51744
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_085thm.jpg
AR170 124659
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_086.QC.jpg
AR171 56422
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_086thm.jpg
AR172 108289
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_087.QC.jpg
AR173 51671
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_087thm.jpg
AR174 114676
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_088.QC.jpg
AR175 52981
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_088thm.jpg
AR176 117964
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_089.QC.jpg
AR177 53767
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_089thm.jpg
AR178 103103
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_090.QC.jpg
AR179 49838
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_090thm.jpg
AR180 107861
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_091.QC.jpg
AR181 49610
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_091thm.jpg
AR182 119615
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_092.QC.jpg
AR183 54283
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_092thm.jpg
AR184 108537
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_093.QC.jpg
AR185 52346
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_093thm.jpg
AR186 128891
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_094.QC.jpg
AR187 54118
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_094thm.jpg
AR188 134538
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_095.QC.jpg
AR189 56036
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_095thm.jpg
AR190 115771
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_096.QC.jpg
AR191 54205
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_096thm.jpg
AR192 124682
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_097.QC.jpg
AR193 54334
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_097thm.jpg
AR194 132856
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_098.QC.jpg
AR195 58890
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_098thm.jpg
AR196 134368
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_099.QC.jpg
AR197 58379
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_099thm.jpg
AR198 127204
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_100.QC.jpg
AR199 57322
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_100thm.jpg
AR200 114005
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_101.QC.jpg
AR201 53945
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_101thm.jpg
AR202 115849
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_102.QC.jpg
AR203 51912
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_102thm.jpg
AR204 117026
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_103.QC.jpg
AR205 53626
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_103thm.jpg
AR206 133806
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_104.QC.jpg
AR207 58610
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_104thm.jpg
AR208 118139
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_105.QC.jpg
AR209 54635
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_105thm.jpg
AR210 128339
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_106.QC.jpg
AR211 57409
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_106thm.jpg
AR212 117495
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_107.QC.jpg
AR213 54012
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_107thm.jpg
AR214 127175
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_108.QC.jpg
AR215 58789
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_108thm.jpg
AR216 116563
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_109.QC.jpg
AR217 52035
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_109thm.jpg
AR218 117133
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_110.QC.jpg
AR219 54032
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_110thm.jpg
AR220 112931
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_111.QC.jpg
AR221 51151
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_111thm.jpg
AR222 87341
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_112.QC.jpg
AR223 46016
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_112thm.jpg
AR224 117966
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_113.QC.jpg
AR225 53307
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_113thm.jpg
AR226 137011
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_114.QC.jpg
AR227 57659
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_114thm.jpg
AR228 120764
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_115.QC.jpg
AR229
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_115thm.jpg
AR230 126475
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_116.QC.jpg
AR231 56280
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_116thm.jpg
AR232 125330
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_117.QC.jpg
AR233 55561
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_117thm.jpg
AR234 125150
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_118.QC.jpg
AR235 56715
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_118thm.jpg
AR236 129446
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_119.QC.jpg
AR237 56437
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_119thm.jpg
AR238 124162
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_120.QC.jpg
AR239 55705
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_120thm.jpg
AR240 115031
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_121.QC.jpg
AR241 53910
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_121thm.jpg
AR242 127053
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_122.QC.jpg
AR243 55886
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_122thm.jpg
AR244 116381
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_123.QC.jpg
AR245 53040
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_123thm.jpg
AR246 129823
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_124.QC.jpg
AR247 57184
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_124thm.jpg
AR248 115323
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_125.QC.jpg
AR249 53387
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_125thm.jpg
AR250 120863
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_126.QC.jpg
AR251 55207
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_126thm.jpg
AR252 111138
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_127.QC.jpg
AR253 51742
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_127thm.jpg
AR254 129592
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_128.QC.jpg
AR255 56865
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_128thm.jpg
AR256 116558
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_129.QC.jpg
AR257 54296
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_129thm.jpg
AR258 134699
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_130.QC.jpg
AR259 58801
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_130thm.jpg
AR260 125341
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_131.QC.jpg
AR261 56112
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_131thm.jpg
AR262 126082
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_132.QC.jpg
AR263 56158
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_132thm.jpg
AR264 113567
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_133.QC.jpg
AR265 52091
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_133thm.jpg
AR266 125215
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_134.QC.jpg
AR267 57888
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_134thm.jpg
AR268 115959
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_135.QC.jpg
AR269 54090
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_135thm.jpg
AR270 132582
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_136.QC.jpg
AR271 57323
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_136thm.jpg
AR272 113391
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_137.QC.jpg
AR273 51578
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_137thm.jpg
AR274 116749
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_138.QC.jpg
AR275 55018
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_138thm.jpg
AR276 118093
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_139.QC.jpg
AR277 53799
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_139thm.jpg
AR278 125470
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_140.QC.jpg
AR279 55389
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_140thm.jpg
AR280 121086
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_141.QC.jpg
AR281 55439
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_141thm.jpg
AR282 129731
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_142.QC.jpg
AR283 56762
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_142thm.jpg
AR284 111306
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_143.QC.jpg
AR285 51589
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_143thm.jpg
AR286 118581
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_144.QC.jpg
AR287 54293
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_144thm.jpg
AR288 102769
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_145.QC.jpg
AR289 50318
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_145thm.jpg
AR290 110021
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_146.QC.jpg
AR291 51180
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_146thm.jpg
AR292 101157
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_147.QC.jpg
AR293 49263
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_147thm.jpg
AR294 116147
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_148.QC.jpg
AR295 53033
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_148thm.jpg
AR296 95308
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_149.QC.jpg
AR297 49316
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_149thm.jpg
AR298 127964
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_150.QC.jpg
AR299 55593
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_150thm.jpg
AR300 109693
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_151.QC.jpg
AR301 51813
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_151thm.jpg
AR302 50341
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_152.QC.jpg
AR303 35855
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_152thm.jpg
AR304 113278
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_153.QC.jpg
AR305 52584
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_153thm.jpg
AR306 130224
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_154.QC.jpg
AR307 58384
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_154thm.jpg
AR308 123956
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_155.QC.jpg
AR309 57040
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_155thm.jpg
AR310 93992
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_156.QC.jpg
AR311 47660
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_156thm.jpg
AR312 86823
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_157.QC.jpg
AR313 45328
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_157thm.jpg
AR314 45695
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_158.QC.jpg
AR315 33873
echoicpoetryofjo00fiscrich_Page_158thm.jpg
AR316 76
processing.instr
AR317 198044
UF00097795_00001.mets
METS:structMap STRUCT1 mixed
METS:div DMDID ORDER 0 main
D1 1 Main
P1 Page i
METS:fptr
P2 i-a 2
P3 ii 3
P4 iii 4
P5 iv 5
P6 v 6
P7 vi 7
P8 vii 8
P9 viii 9
P10 ix 10
P11 x 11
P12 xi 12
P13 13
P14 14
P15 15
P16 16
P17 17
P18 18
P19 19
P20 20
P21 21
P22 22
P23 23
P24 24
P25 25
P26 26
P27 27
P28 28
P29 29
P30 30
P31 31
P32 32
P33 33
P34 34
P35 35
P36 36
P37 37
P38 38
P39 39
P40 40
P41 41
P42 42
P43 43
P44 44
P45 45
P46 46
P47 47
P48 48
P49 49
P50 50
P51 51
P52 52
P53 53
P54 54
P55 55
P56 56
P57 57
P58 58
P59 59
P60 60
P61 61
P62 62
P63 63
P64 64
P65 65
P66 66
P67 67
P68 68
P69 69
P70 70
P71 71
P72 72
P73 73
P74 74
P75
P76
P77 77
P78 78
P79 79
P80 80
P81 81
P82 82
P83 83
P84 84
P85 85
P86 86
P87 87
P88 88
P89 89
P90 90
P91 91
P92 92
P93 93
P94 94
P95 95
P96 96
P97 97
P98 98
P99 99
P100 100
P101
P102 102
P103 103
P104 104
P105 105
P106 106
P107 107
P108 108
P109 109
P110 110
P111 111
P112 112
P113 113
P114 114
P115 115
P116 116
P117 117
P118 118
P119 119
P120 120
P121 121
P122 122
P123 123
P124 124
P125 125
P126 126
P127 127
P128 128
P129 129
P130 130
P131 131
P132 132
P133 133
P134 134
P135 135
P136 136
P137 137
P138 138
P139 139
P140 140
P141 141
P142 142
P143 143
P144 144
P145 145
P146 146
P147 147
P148 148
P149 149
P150 150
P151 151
P152 152
P153 153
P154 154
P155 155
P156 156
P157 157
P158 158
METS:behaviorSec VIEWS Options available to the user for viewing this item
METS:behavior VIEW1 STRUCTID Default View
METS:mechanism Viewer JPEGs Procedure xlink:type simple xlink:title JPEG_Viewer()
VIEW2 Alternate
zoomable JPEG2000s JP2_Viewer()
VIEW3
Related image viewer shows thumbnails each Related_Image_Viewer()
INTERFACES Banners or interfaces which resource can appear under
INT1 Interface
UFDC_Interface_Loader



PAGE 1

THE ECHOIC POETRY OF JONATHAN SWIFT: STUDIES IN ITS MEANING By JOHN IRWIN FISCHER A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE tTNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1968

PAGE 2

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 08552 5532

PAGE 3

COPYRIGHT BY JOffiJ FISCHER 1968

PAGE 4

FOR JUDITH

PAGE 5

PREFACE Even today there probably are more students of literature who know that apocryphal story according to which Dryden is supposed once to have told his young relative, "Cousin Swift, you will never be a poet,' than there are students who can correctly quote one line of Swift's poetry. But this almost traditional neglect of Swift's poetry is giving way to a new interest and even as I write this preface there are other students in other places and in increasing numbers who are reading, and writing about Swift's verse. Happily, this dissertation is only a small part of a much larger reexamination of Swift's poetry which, begun in the early 1950' s, has each year since then precipitated more--and more careful--essays that examine the force and value of Swift's poetry. Therefore, although I increasingly feel my own inadequacy as an explicator of Swift's poetry, I also grow increasingly sure that the attempt itself no longer requires any special justification. Of the kinds of essays on Swift's verse which have been recently written, the most valuable, it has seemed to me, have been those which have been confined to the explication of particular poems. Of course, we will ultimately need to make general statements about Swift's poetic achievement and to place his work in some just context. But many students must walk before one student can run, and general statements on the nature of Swift's verse, when such statements come to be made, will necessarily depend upon iv

PAGE 6

a backlog of poems understood. In the meantime, careful and thoughtful essays, such as Peter Ohlin's examination of Cadenus and Vanessa '^ or Marshall Waingrow's subtle reading of Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D. -^ have done more both to illuminate the actual nature of Swift's poetry and to dispel the charges of misanthropy and obscenity which have darkened our view of that poetry than have those more general overviews of Swift's poetry which have recently appeared. Feeling this way, I have, of course, written the four chapters of this dissertation as individual examinations of four particular poems. Each chapter is written to stand by itself and, indeed, the four poems considered in these chapters have been chosen specifically to illustrate the variousness of Swift's poetic achievement. But, though these four poems, written at three distinct periods in Swift's life and on four quite different subjects, were chosen for their variety of manner and matter, they somehow are all tenaciously characteristic of Swift, and share some things unmistakably in common. Therefore, although there are enough unhappy examples to make one very aware of the danger in freely generalizing about Swift's verse, I offer the following very brief and very broad remarks about his verse, not, certainly, as a positive thesis, but only as tentative landmarks in a country not yet very well known. To observe that Swift was, all of his life, an omnivorous reader is to begin with what is well enough known. ^ What is not nearly as well known, however, is how much of what Swift read he re-directed back into his own verse. For, although too many of Swift's readers have apparently agreed with Samuel Johnson's opinion that, "the peruser of Swift wants little previous knowledge; it

PAGE 7

will be sufficient that he is acquainted with common words and common things,"^ Dr. Johnson was never more wrong in his life. Often enough, however, the almost traditional failure to see how much borrowed material Swift has reincorporated into his own poetry is more than understandable, for Swift was frequently coy about this technique. There are many borrowed lines in Swift's verse which are so skillfully fitted to their new text that only a very strong memory or a lucky hit is likely to detect them. Thus, for example, it is not at all surprising that for years it went unnoticed that Swift's proclamation of his own originality in Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift. D.S.P.D. ,-To steal a Hint was never known. But what he writ was all his own,-(317-318) was itself a stolen and slightly altered version of Denham's elegiac /I praise of Cowley. To him no author was unknown, But what he writ was all his own. Knowing that these lines are borrowed must make a very great difference in the way we understand them. Appearing at first to be only a piece of pointless boasting, these lines prove, once their source is known, to be a subtle comment on the nature of originality by being themselves an illustration of the paradox that Denham describes. Here, then, as so often in Swift's poems, meaning resides precisely in the conflation of two or more texts: Swift's new one and the borrowed materials which inform it. VI

PAGE 8

No technique, I think, is either more common or more crucial to Swift's poetry than is this penchant of his to pour old wine into new bottles. For Swift did not confine this technique to simply borrowing whole lines and placing them within his poems. Rather, Swift could, as we shall see, borrow only a few scattered words from Milton's Paradise Lost and yet make them suggest, in his Ode to Sancroft . the relevance of Milton's theodicy to his own ode. Or, on the other hand. Swift could borrow the entire form of the seventeenth century meditatio mortis and then build his own Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D. within that form. But in either case what we ultimately see is Swift forming through allusici, imitation and direct quotation, the very meaning of his poetry from the contrast between the materials he borrows and the uses ne makes of it. Finally, that is. Swift's poetic genius-the peculiar originality he imparted to his poetry--was best defined by Swift himself when he, ingeniously re-working Denham's lines, made them "all his own." Given, then, the subtlety of Swift's borrowing, it: is unfortunate that there has been a tendency on the part of Swift's critics to huddle all the instances of Swift's borrowings that they have noticed under the simplistic title of parody. For to label Swift's poetry as parody does not explain it; it is only to assume that Swift had no better use for any of the materials he reincorporates in his own verse than to make them look silly. The result of such criticism has been that even when Swift's borrowing has been detected it has usually been badly misunderstood. Thus, for example, generations of critics have understood Swift's On Poetry: vii

PAGE 9

A Rapsody as being an attack upon the "cant" of "poetic inspiration." Or again, Cadenus and Vanessa has been understood--apart from its biographical interest--as being only another variant of Swift's lifelong attack on romantic love and on all the silly forms of verse fools stricken with such love have begotten. But both these poems, I hope to show, mean more richly than this. For, just because these poems--like most of Swift's poetryare written within earshot of other men's verses and thus reflect a wide range of human values, they must mean complexly. Indeed, even when Swift's poetry comes closest to being what Swift's critics have pretty generally said it is--a kind of anti-poetry' that savagely parodies the "softer" or "finer" feelings which are usually thought of as poetic--even then, I think there is embedded in Swift's very parody not only Swift's willingness to tell a harsh truth when it is needed but also his recognition, sometimes almost wistful, that the truth he is telling is harsh. Thus, even when Swift parodies the material which he borrows, the material continues to ramify and complicate his meaning. For, ultimately. Swift's parody only suggests what all the other effects of Swift's collagelike poetry suggests; that the world with which Swift's poetry grapples is not a simple one. It is, rather, a world of gain and loss, of constant and necessary adjustments, a world where quotations must be measured by other quotations, men by other men, and values by other values, in order that so much of the truth as men do know may be evoked . In the preparation of this dissertation I have been so fortunate as to contract more debts than my work can repay and vxii

PAGE 10

more kindness than I can acknowledge. My fellow students, Mr. J. Douglas Canfield, Miss Gail H. Compton, Mr. Michael J. Conlon, Mr. James G. Richardson III and Mr. Lawrence P. Vonalt have all been both helpful and patient. My seniors, Mr. J. David Walker and Mr. C. Earl Ramsey have taught me much by precept ana more by example. Mr. Robert H. Bowers and Mr. Ashby E. Hammond have graciously served on my doctoral committee. Mr. Aubrey L. Williams has guided this cissercation and saved it from as many blunders as he could. He is the besc Loacl-er I know, the best I have ever heard of. Judith always thought I was right. She has beer* r.;v '.-orsi: critic, and this dissertation is dedicated to her. XX

PAGE 11

NOTES All quotations of Swift's poetry in my text are to The Poerr.s of Jonathan Swift , ed. Sir Harold Williams, 3 vols. .;;Oxford, 19i3). 1. There is simply no evidence that this line W£.s evei: spoken. Therefore, Swift's most recent biographer, Irvin Ehreapreis, lists it as one of a "long train of legendary Swiftiana." Swift: the man, his works, and the a.:;e , 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1962-). 2. " 'Cadenus and Vanessa:' Reason and Passion," SSL, IV (IS64) 485-496. 3. "Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift, " SEL , V (i9&5), 513-518. 4. See, for example. Swift's reading list of I697-9S in Joacthen Swift: A Tale of a Tub , ed. A. C. Guthkeich and D. Nichol Smith (Oxford, 1958), pp. Ivi-lvii. 5. Samuel Johnson, Lives of the English x^oets . ed. George Birkbeck Hill, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1905), III, 52. 6. First noticed by Hill in the edition of Johnson cited above, III, 66, n. 3. 7. See E. San Juan, Jr., "The Anti-Poetry of Jonathan Swift," P2, XLIV (1965), 387-396.

PAGE 12

CONTENTS Preface iv One Ode to Dr. William Sancroft 1 Two Cadenus and Vanessa 36 Three On Poetry: A Rapsody 71 '^^^^ Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D. iQl Works Cited 2_4]_ XI

PAGE 13

CHAPTER ONE Ode to Dr. William Sancroft I In 1689 Jonathan Swift, then twenty-one, began to compose that series of poems, usually called the "early odes," which are che first of his known literary productions. The scyle of criese odes has usually been condemned and, indeed, their cra.-.,jea and sometir.;es cryptic manner does often obscure their sense, ^ut cramped and cryptic though these early odes are, they have, I thi.ik, a wider scope and demonstrate a deeper understanding than has so far beea recognizea. They are the poems of a very young man, it is true, but a young mc.n who had been cultivating, as Swift later recorded, his instincts for 2 literature by vigorous reading. Early onward in Swift's youthful and apparently highly varie3 gated course of reading he came to admire the poetry of Abraham Cowley and, as Swift matured into his twenties and composed his "early odes," Cowley remained his dominant model. So great, in fact, was Swift's youthful admiration for Cowley that, in a letter written to Thomas Swift in 1692, Jonathan, rather ingenuously, commented that though he could not easily please himself, yet "when I write what pleases me I 4 am Cowley to myself and can read it an hundred times over." Whether or not the young Swift was often quite so pleased with his performances one cannot say, but modern critical estimates of the poems have certainly been far from enthusiastic. Even Irvin Ehrenpreis, whose study of the odes is both the most thorough and sympathetic so

PAGE 14

far undertaken, nevertheless slights them with conscious generosity. "Since," Ehrenpreis comments. Swift's . • .themes and values are blamelessly conventional, he is, in his search for freshness of effect, flung upon ingenious hyperbole; and since his language is too weak for the extravagance of his feelings, the outcome is bathos. Many another critic has rendered the same judgment ia cerms which are both less graceful and less precise, and most, I suppose, would agree with Ehrenpreis' final judgment that Swift, already in nis middle twenties, was rather too old to attribute to mere mortals "such incandescent perfections as Swift lent to nis subjects."^ But, although Swift's apparently over-inflated celebrations of his subject's virtue have irritated almost every reader of his early odes, these celebrations are, I believe, the most significant element of those odes. To understand these celebrations, however, we will have to briefly examine first a characteristic of Pindar's odes, and then the development of that characteristic in the pindarique odes of Swift's model, Abraham Cowley. Pindar's odes, written in celebration of specific victors in the Greek games, portray two related but partly opposed views of the human situation. On the one hand the odes were composed to celebrate a victor at the height of his success, at a moment when he is a type--indeed, seems almost the equal of--the gods and heroes for whose honor the Greek games existed. Cowley's translation of the first four lines of Pindar's Second Olympiad makes Pindar's celebration of the god-like potentialities of man perfectly clear.

PAGE 15

Queen of all Harmonious things. Dancing Words , and Speaking Strings , \-Jhat God , what Hero wilt thou sing? ^-Jhat happy Man to equal glories bring? (1-4). On the other hand, just at this nost triumphant moment Pindar's typical subject faces his greatest danger, and so Pindar must warn his subject against the deadly sin of pride. That is why, in Pindar's odes, "however great men's golden triumphs may seem, thoughts of the gods' dazzling eminence intervene to put them in their place." Of this second aspect of Pindar, Coxvley himself, apparently, was not always quite conscious. Thus when Pindar, in the Second Olympiad , warns its subject, Theron, against pride by reminding him of the fate of his great ancestor, Oedipus, Cowley, in the notes which he supplied to his translation, somewhat obtusely comments: One may ask, why he [Pindar] makes mention of these tragical accidents and action of Oedipus and his Sons in an Ode dedicated to the praise of Theron and his ancestors? I answer, that they were so notorious that it v/as better to excuse than conceal them. ...° But, if Cowley occasionally missed the point of Pindar's warnings he did not entirely miss seeing Pindar the moralist. Thus, when Pindar admonishes at the end of the Eighth Pythian , Ue are things of a day. What are we? What are we not? the shadow of a dream is man, no more, Cowley both hears and repeats, in a poem of his own, Pindar's warning against pride. What's Some Body , or No Body ? Dream of a Shadov/! A Reflection made

PAGE 16

From the false glories of the gay reflected Bow, Is a more solid thing than Thou . (Life and Fame , 3,6,7,8) Andbecause Cowley did respond, to a degree, to both aspects of Pindar, and because, as a Christian, Cowley had at least as profound a sense as Pindar himself both that man was formed in the image of God and yet that man was capable of falling away from God, he was able, in the last of his pindarique odes, to work an interesting and impressive variation on Pindar. What he did was to versify, in the form of the pindarique ode, sections from the Old Testament which emphasize both the potential glory and the present ruin of mankind. Is this thy Brav'ry Man , is this thy Pride Rebel to God , and slave to all beside! Captive'd by everything! and only Free To fly from thine own Liberty ! All Creatures the Creator said Were Thine : No Creature but might since, say, Man is Mine . (The Plagues of Egypt , 1-6) This contrast between man's present ruin and his possible glory was hardly a new poetic theme when Cowley employed it, of course. Cowley's contribution was simply that he recognized the theme as the natural link between Pindar's odes and the interests of his own age, thus teaching many. Swift among them, the use of a genre new to them. Swift's odes all, following Cowley's, are made to focus on the contrast between man's potential glory, emblemized by the heroes of Swift's odes, and man's usual degradation. Therefore, while it is no doubt true that none of Swift's subjects was really

PAGE 17

so heroic as the models Swift constructed, one might as easily make that charge against Pindar as against Swift--and it would be equally meaningless in both cases. Rather than make such charges we ought, I think, examine these odes for what they are, since in them the young Swift portrays his models of what man ought be. For this purpose Swift's Ode to Dr. William Bancroft serves better, for two reasons, than any of the other odes. First, it alone among the odes seems to have been in a state of composition and revision from 1689 to 1593, that is, during the entire time Swift was busying himself about these odes. Second, perhaps because this ode apparently cost him more trouble than any of the others, the theological assumptions from which Swift constructed all his models of perfection and all his pictures of ruin are closer to the surface in the Ode to Sancroft than in any other of the six early odes. II A few years ago Joseph Horrell commented, in his edition of Swift's poems, that the entire theme of the Ode to Sancroft "is truth," and thus Horrell joined that small group of critics who have hazarded, in print, a guess at the ode's meaning which was not intended to bludgeon Swift with his own ode. True, the remark seems rather oracular, coming as it does with no further explication or justification, but it is, nevertheless, among the first which indicate that the ode may be something more than a badly overinflated praise of Sancroft.

PAGE 18

Irvin Ehrenpreis, despite his evident annoyance with much of the poem, carried analysis of it a step further by observing that the poem's nominal subject, Bancroft, is meant by Swift to emblemize "Truth.' But Ehrenpreis feels that the Bancroft of the poem, laboring as the earthly, "image of eternal truth," often sunk under that unnatural load. Consequently he did not pursue further the grounds which the poem might provide for the connection of Bancroft and "Truth." Nor are the grounds of this connection explored in either of the only two other recent considerations of the ode. Both of these remaining considerations, however, make interesting, although perhaps too constricted, observations on the poem. Ronald Paulson examined the ode in an essay which analyzed Swift's position in a classic debate: the relationship of spirit to matter. His intent is to demonstrate that Swift was, at heart, a dualist, that Swift felt that everything of true worth was "other-worldly," hence divorced from this world of matter and change. The Ode to Sancrof t , Paulson argues, helps confirm this thesis, since in that ode we actually see the "good" becoming "other-worldly." . . .Bancroft puts down the symbols of worldly power rather than compromise his ideals; and in Bancroft, who is compared to a star and to Christ, the "Good" has become other-worldly. '-•^ There is much in the poem which seemingly recommends Paulson's position. For example. Swift describes this world first as ". . .this inferior world. . .but heaven's dusky shade"(21), and later, even more forcefully as "that worthless clod" (64). Further, whether

PAGE 19

one agrees with Paulson's particular position or not, his consideration of this poem in an essay devoted to the problem of matter and spirit in Swift's work points out a dimension of che ode which had not been noted in previous discussions. It may be felt, however, that Paulson's own position is too daring: to suggest that Swift, even at age twenty-six, is a dualist, is perhaps to take too lightly Swifc's later comment respecting a philosopher who, because he stared too constantly at the scars, 'found himself seduced by his lower Pares into a Ditch."* Further, there is much in the ode icself which suggests that Paulsor.'s emphasis, at least, is in error. The truth which, afcer all. Swift bluntly states is available and appropriate to man is "That Heaven's high Son was in a village born" (172), fully God and fully man, che spirit incarnated in the flesh. Kathleen Williams' comments on tne Ode to Sancroft are closer than any other criuicism I have seen to my own view of che poem. She argues cr.ac, in Swift's view, the foolishness and knavery of which men are guilty, and which serve to make a world of "gidcy circuivistances ," all derive from man's desire to be that which he is not. A creature of but feeble understanding and feebler will, man insists on spinning out the guts of his own authority presumptuously rigid systems: this poor creature, man, would, if he could, make himself the measure of all truth. That such presumption is one of the dominant themes of the Ode to Sancroft ^ Swift himself makes perfectly clear: Thus fools, for being strong and num'rous known. Suppose the truth, like all the world, their own. (79-80)

PAGE 20

But the way in which Kathleen Williams applies this theme to che Ode to Sancroft is, perhaps, open to objection: Even in the early odes, where the old-fashioned form and the "sublime" style imply a more ambitious attempt to organize experience in the shape of eternal truth than is to be found elsewhere. Swift's real theme is the impossibility of succeeding in such an attempt. ...In the Ode to Sancroft the bishop's "secret regular sphere" is misunderstood and appears of irregular motion co che "strong and num'rous" fools, and its effect [oa ci., the poem's readers] is secondary to that made by such phrases as "our weak kaowiddge," "opinion dark and blind," "contradiction's vorcex, " "crazy composition," and the recurring "giddy" and "gic^^ily." In this poem Swift makes overt use of religion comparisons, and hi; sense oi xan's intellectual, moral, and spiritual confuoion is mosc vividly expressed. •'•^ As there was much m the ode wh^cn supported Paulson's viexv of it, so there is much which justifies Kathleen Wi^liar.iS' cbse-vations. But, as Paulson's argument that, in Swire's view^ cha "Gocc is ultimately "otlier-worldly" seemed shaky when posed against Swif c insistence "Tht.Haaven's high Son was in a village born" (172), so ^williiias' view tnac the ode's real theme, is the impossibility of organizing experience in the shape of eternal truth seems co falter at the satr.i point. For, as we have noted, Swift insists that man misses the way to truth not because truth is completely unavailable to him nor because man is altogether too weak for it, but oecause man is perverse. Both Williams and Paulson, then, have isolated real chemes in the poem; ic is concerned with both man's struggle with mind and body and wich man's tendency to over-reach and thus weaken himself. But both these critics have pushed these themes to the exclusion of everything else in the poem--and thus pushed the poem into a dualism which, I hope to demonstrate. Swift was specifically refuting.

PAGE 21

To recapitulate: the poem's most recent critics have established firmly at least some of the terms in which it must be discussed. They have isolated, as its central theme, man's struggle to achieve some vision of the truth. But they have also, perhaps, shown the poem to be more complex than they themselves realized. Swift's view of man's relation to eternal truth was, I think, more sophisticated than their views of the poem. That is likely, of course, to be the fate of any reading of so complex a poem, but perhaps we can proceed more prudently, at least, by anchoring our discussion of the poem in the question, what was there in Bancroft's life and circumstances which called forth this poem from Swift? Ill William Sancroft was born on January 30, 1616-1617, the second son of Francis Sandcroft (William dropped the "d" from the name). He attended grammar school at Bury St. Edmunds where, on the evidence of his own manuscripts dating from that time, he demonstrated an early aptitude for learning. He went up to Emmanuel College, Cambridge in 1633, received his B.A. in 1637, his M.A. in 1641 and his B.D. in 1648. He retained a fellowship there until 1651 and then, in 1657, went abroad where he remained until the restoration. On his return he received, in rapid succession, the Mastership of Emmanuel College, the Deanery of York and the Deanery of St. Paul's. The latter post he retained until 1678, during which time he was instrumental in the rebuilding of St. Paul's Cathedral. In 1678 he was elevated to the Archbishopric of Canterbury where he, whose life had been both quiet and fruitful, was to have

PAGE 22

10 but little of either peace of joy in his eminence. His attempt to avoid a direct confrontation with James II over James' interference with ecclesiastical policy was shattered in 1688 when he, along with six other bishops, refused to order his clergy to read James' Declaration of Liberty of Conscience . In a petition to the king, Bancroft defended his refusal as arising not from "any want of tenderness to dissenters," but from his own conviction that James' Declaration , being founded on nothing more than James' assumed kingly prerogative to govern as he wished, usurped such power as might "at pleasure put aside all laws ecclesiastical and civil." Therefore, Bancroft concluded, the Declaration "appeared to be illegal." The seven bishops were placed in the tower in May of that year and brought to trial at the end of June. Their defense was conducted along the lines of the petition, and it was successful. But despite the general jubilation in London at the freeing of the seven, the die for Bancroft himself was cast. For, if he was unwilling to grant the king "such dispensing power as may at pleasure put aside all laws ecclesiastical and civil," he was yet less willing to grant it to the convention which, in 1689, bestowed the throne on William of Orange. Bancroft did not see how the convention's decision released him, who had himself annointed James II, from his oath of loyalty to that king. Consequently, in February 1690-1691, Bancroft was deprived of his position, and, because he chose to bring it to that point, was ejected by law in late June from Lambeth Castle. The remaining two years of his life were spent in seclusion but not in quiet, for he dedicated himself to securing the succession of what he considered to be England's true church, a church comprised of men who, like himself, did not swear their allegiance to William III. He was, of course, almost as

PAGE 23

11 universally despised for this activity as he had been praised for his stand against James, and he was generally regarded as a turncoat. This sketch, brief as it is, serves to point out how very little of Bancroft's actual life and character Swift chose to include in his ode. Indeed, even the very circumstances of Sancroft's deprivation, which are the occasion of the ode, are referred to only obliquely. Irvin Ehrenpreis has objected to the ode on the grounds chat Swi-was unreasonably attempting to praise Sancroft, who refused co acknowledge William III, while simultaneously praising William IIj.. But, this is an objection which Ehrenpreis has had to bring from outside the poem, for there is nothing in the poem which implies chat the two r:.eri were at odds. Swift has stripped Bancroft's deprivation of all the historical circumstances reviewed above in order th^^t what Swifc felt to be its real significance might appear more clearly. For us txi u.nderstand that significance, however, we shall have to exauiine a crucial part of the circumstances of Sancroft's conduct more carefully. The revolutionary settlement of 1689, to which Sancroft was asked to put his hand, in effect rendered the doctrine of the divine hereditary right of kings a dead letter as English political theory. •' Of course, the divine right of kinys to reign, if it really exists, cannot be circumvented--it rests upon a principle which Swift himself stated years later in his sermon. Doing Good , "It is apparent from Scripture, and most agreeable to reason, that the safety and welfare of nations are under the most peculiar care of God's providence."'^ Since, that is, there is either such a thing as God's providence, or there is not, and if there is, and if William is king, it must follow that he is king through God's will, no matter by what means. This,

PAGE 24

12 since he held that William was king, and that providence was operative, was presumably Swift's own view. It may well have been Bancroft's view too; at least, Bancroft did nothing to actually oppose William, But that did not mean that Bancroft would second the action of a convention which had claimed-first by voting the English throne vacant, and then voting to fill it-that the power to make and unmake kings did not operate through them, but originated with them. To Bancroft, setting his hand to this work of the convention was striking at the very life of the church. For, from his point of view, the convention, in seeking to limit the authority of the king, had actually presumed to eliminate the authority of God from the civil acts of man. In the Ode to Bancroft , Bwift traces, in a multitude of instances, such foolish, prideful, dangerous and yet ludicrously pitiable attempts of man to reach truth after having removed himself from ^ the eye and will of God. In each of these instances Swift illuminates the contradictory and impossible nature of such an attempt. Bancroft, for having resisted such attempts in a crucial instance, for his insistence that a just and true government cannot be achieved by attempting to reject the source of all truth, is the ode's image of the truth which men may know. IV When its connectionawith the rest of the poem are understood, and its allusions outside of the poem are clarified, the first stanza of the Ode to Bancroft is seen to reflect in small the entire meaning of the poem. But the stanza is best examined in stages, and initially it appears to suggest that neither truth nor any other heavenly virtue

PAGE 25

13 can penetrate the darkness of sublunary climes, to suggest, that is, the position which Bancroft himself had found untenable--that a complete separation exists between things heavenly and things mundane. The very structure of the stanza seems to reflect this kind of dualism. The first six lines of the stanza salute "Truth" in a glorious heaven; lines seven and eight contrast truth's fixity with the "giddy circumstances" of "time" and "place"; the final seven lines darkly image this world and man's estate. By the interposition, then, of time and place, the realms of heaven and earth are apparently rendered entirely separate. Further, the two dominant image patterns of the stanza, light versus dark and fixity versus motion, seem to affirm this separation between heaven and earth. The description of heaven is filled with an imagery of light (bright effluence, chief lamp, light seest), while in the lines devoted to this world we meet only darkness (dark disputes, weak arguments and doubt). Similarly, while heaven is described in the first stanza as constant and fixed, the world of men which Swift pictures is rocked by random and destructive motion. Thus man, simply by being born a sublunary creature, subject to night, time, place and motion seems (though only seems, I think) condemned, in this first stanza, to a life of constant disorder. Apparently, it was just such an initial bleakly hopeless view of man's condition as pictured in this ode that lead Paulson and Williams to develop their particular readings of it. Ultimately, however, I think we shall see that the separation of heaven and earth which seems so striking in this stanza is not nearly as absolute as it first appears. For while Swift does, in this stanza, portray man as a profoundly limited creature, nevertheless.

PAGE 26

14 the evils which Swift describes as attendant on the human condition do not seem to derive directly from either man's limitations or from his sublunary status. Rather, the nature of these evils (dark disputes, dagger contests, and battles) seems to type them as being evils of man's own making. Thus, even as Swift powerfully depicts the wide disparity between heaven and earth, he suggests that this disparity is caused not by man's sublunary estate, but rather by his response to that estate. It is precisely from man's response to his sublunary environment, from the cosmologies man has developed to understand and explain that environment, that Swift draws much of the imagery he uses to describe man's usual befuddlement . Characteristically, in this ode, human error is imaged as random and eccentric motion. Men expand their minds through infinity of space in stanza four; grow in rank profusion and disorder in stanza five; run pell mell into heresy in stanza eight. And this confused motion is reminiscent. Swift notes in the fourth stanza, of the completely inaccurate but wildly complicated startracks of such astronomers as Ptolemy and his disciples "who" . . .like hard masters, taught the sun Through many a needless sphere to run. (67-68) Cosmological confusion, that is, and particularly, as we shall see, the giddy eccentricities of the Ptolemaic and Cartesian systems, becomes, in this ode, a "type" of all human error. And what Swift's imagistic equation of human error with confused cosmologies suggests is that the giddy circumstances of time and place which, in the first stanza, seem to separate man from heaven and truth and to foredoom

PAGE 27

15 him to constant error are themselves the product of human error. ?uc as simply as possible, I think we shall see that in this ode it is man himself who is responsible for his own benighted and giddy circumstances . Let us take, for example, Swift's poetic explanation for the animosity with which most men regarded Bancroft's actions. It will be remembered chat Bancroft was generally regarded in his own age as a turncoat, one who, having staunchly defied Jamea II, iucongrously refused to support William III. In our examination Bancroft's ra^-sons for acting as he did seemed to be consistent, but. Swift explains, -o Elost of his contemporaries. . . .Koly Bancroft's motion quite irregular appears Because 'tis opposite to theirs. (80-81) This (apparently obscure) explanation of the reason Sancxofc's contemporaries mistakenly thought his course "irregular" follows immediately after Swift's discussion of the PtoIeiViic system; and it depends upon that discussion. As we have seen above. Swift knew that the Ptolemaic system both inaccurately described the actual course of heavenly bodies and was enormously, needlessly cor.".p Heated. Of course, both the inaccuracies of the Ptolemaic system and its endless complications are caused by one, single, fundamental error. "Led on" as Swift puts it, "by gross philosophy and pride"; Ptolemy, and those who followed him, assumed that the earth--their observatory--was still. From this proud error--the assumption that the earth was still while all else moved--springs all the "unthrifty motion" and "incoherent journeys" of the system.

PAGE 28

16 Among the other needless complexities of this system is the elaborate mathematical schema Ptolemy and his successors devised in order to account for the apparently irregular motion of the stars. Of course, this apparent irregularity of starpath (technically called retrograde and as observable today as it was to Ptolemy) results simply from watching one moving body from another moving body. But if, like Ptolemy, one assumes one's own position to be a still point, one will assume the observed irregularity of starpaths to be a phenomenon of the stars themselves. The point of Swift's lines on Bancroft's critics then is that those critics, like P::olemy, erroneously assume their position to be stable and therefore wrongly attribute an irregularity to Sancroft's accions. Like Ptolemy, Bancroft's critics fall into giddy errors not because the phenomenon they are observing is either giddy or incomprehensible, but because triey are proud and unstable. Successful as the lines discussed above are in illustrating man's propensity to stumble over his own pride ii\to giddy circumstances, nevertheless, to most of Swift's contemporaries the system which ideally illustrated that propensity was not the Ptolemaic but rather the Cartesian system. '^ And it is to Descar.tes' vortex cosmology that Swift refers in the following lines. And some, to be large ciphers in a state. Pleas 'd with an empty swelling to be counted great; Make their minds travel o'er infinity of space, Rapp'd through the wide expanse of thought And oft in contradiction's vortex caught. To keep that worthless clod, the body, in one place, (59-64) These lines make, I think, an observation about the results of human pride which is of considerable importance to Swift's entire

PAGE 29

17 ode, but the lines are also, unfortunately, more than a little cryptic. To understand what Swift is saying here we will have to briefly glance both at Descartes' cosmology and at the criticism 19 leveled at that cosmology by Descartes' critics. The primary characteristics of the universe postulated in Descartes' cosmology are three; first, the universe is a plenum, it is absolutely full of matter; second, the universe is infinite; third, the universe is arranged in a series of circular corpuscular 20 streams, called vortices. The mathematical basis on which Descartes raised this system is, to say the least, extremely rickety. But it was not for the flaws of its mathematical foundations that Descartes" system became an anathema to many in the seventeenth century; rather, the system was reviled for its theological implications. As was recognized by men like the very famous Cambridge platonist, Henry ^ More (whose objections to Descartes' system were almost certainly 21 known to Swift), to postulate a universe which was absolutely matter, absolutely full, and absolutely infinite was to effectively banish God from the universe for simple lack of room. As one of Henry Kore's contemporaries commented, Descartes, in this system, has outdone "even 22 the very Atheists themselves"; for while Descartes does not deny God's existence, he reasons Him both homeless and irrelevant. Descartes' system, that is, portrays cosmologically that separation of man's estate from God's influence which, from Sancroft's point of view, the V convention that deposed James II attempted to make a political reality. That the effect of such presumptuous politics is to turn states and statesmanship into something very like the whirling, Godless, Cartesian cosmos is, I think, the point of Swift's description of such politicians

PAGE 30

18 as would be "large ciphers in a state," in terms of the Cartesian system. It should by now be rather obvious that those giddy circumstances which Swift portrays in the first stanza and throughout the poem as darkening the human estate are not the necessary effects of man's sublunary condition, but are, rather, the results of man's pre"^ sumption. In fact, so far is the universe which Swift himself postulates in this poem from being the giddy, dark and Godless cosmos Descartes' describes, that Swift's universe resembles instead that universe which Henry More proposed in opposition to Descartes' system. In More's cosmology, the most important fact of the physical universe is that God "is omnipresent and occupies intimately the whole machine. , as well as its singular particles." -* And that God is actively present (though hidden) in His universe is exactly the point which Swift himself suggests through the two biblical echoes which, as we shall see, he has incorporated in the first four lines of the Ode to Bancroft . Truth is eternal, and the Son of Heav'n, Bright effluence of th' immortal ray. Chief cherub, and chief lamp of that high sacred Seven, Which guard the throne by night, and are its light by day. (1-4) The third line of the ode describes truth as the "Chief cherub, and chief lamp of that high sacred Seven" which surround the throne of God. The phrase "chief lamp of that high sacred seven" may very well refer to a historical event we have already mentioned. Bancroft, as the Archbishop of Canterbury, was the leading prelate among the seven brought to trial by James II. But the origin of the image itself is, probably, the Book of Zechariah .

PAGE 31

19 The whole of the vision which is the fourth chapter of Zechariah is of relevance to this ode. It was composed in post-exilic Jerusalem when the Jews, returned from Babylonia and under King Zerubbabel, v/ere reconstructing the Temple. The reconstruction, and all else, went slowly, and the vision of Zechariah is calculated to encourage a flagging people by assuring them that God is intimately concerned in the work undertaken. The vision begins by Zechariah being waked by an angel, "as a nan that is wakened out of his sleep," and being shovm ... a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and seven lamps thereon , and seven pipes to the seven lamps, which are upon the top thereof. . . . Upon his inquiring after the meaning of all this, Zechariah is told, This is the word of the LORD unto Zerubbabel, saying. Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD. Few chapters from Scripture might better refute the work of the 1689 convention, which seemed to exclude God from the civil acts of men, than this from Zechariah . For it not only states that kings are kings by the will of God, its whole import is that God is always present and actively concerned in the affairs of men. Indeed, God's active involvement with mankind is stressed most emphatically in this chapter at that point when Zechariah, inquiring about the significance of those seven lamps which are the source of Swift's image, is told that those lamps are "the eyes of the LORD, which run to and fro through the whole earth." The third line of the ode, then, is quite complex. It occurs in a stanza which describes that separation of heaven and earth which

PAGE 32

20 men, in their presumption, apparently create. But the line affirms, both through its echo of Zechariah and, perhaps , in its reference to Bancroft's successful trial, that not by might, nor by power, but by God's spirit turn the affairs of men. Nor have we done with the line yet, for it reads in full, "Chief cherub, and chief lamp of that high sacred Seven." The vision of Zechariah does not, in fact, mention a cherub; but Milton, remembering that vision, describes the Archangel Uriel as One of the Seven Who in God's presence, nearest to his throne Stand ready at command, and are his eyes That run through all the Heavens, or down to the Earth Bear his swift errands over moist and dry O'er sea and land. . . . (P.L. Ill, 648-53) While Milton does not actually mention the seven lamps of Zechariah 's vision and therefore could not have been the only source for Swift's third line, from Milton's imaginative yoking of Uriel with Zechariah's vision comes, probably. Swift's "chief cherub." Swift, then, draws in this single line on both the Book of Zechariah and on Milton's theodicy and thereby suggests that there are "ways of God to man." Indeed, images which suggest that God actively participates in this world are finally so pervasive in Swift's ode that the world he describes seems, like More's universe, permeated with God. But, often, even as these images suggest God's activity in the world, they also suggest that this divine activity is somehow hidden. One of the most striking of such images occurs in the ode's fourth line. In that line Swift describes the "high sacred Seven" as being those cherubs who "guard the throne by night and are its light by day."

PAGE 33

21 The echo in this line is no longer, I chink, from Zechariah . Rather, one hears in this line an echo from the Book of Exodus . And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night. (13:21) If this text is, indeed, what Swift is echoing, then he has touched on one of the scriptural passages which are central to the Christian conception of the hidden God, the Deus Absconditus Whom even Moses could not view face to face, Who, though hidden from men, guides; but, though guiding, remains forever hidden. It is this very traditional conception of God, I think, which permeates Swift's ode and which raises in the ode its most crucial problem. Christ himself, as Swift implies in the eighth stanza, though He was God come among men, remained still God hidden: Wn.at could the sages gain but unbelieving scorn; Their faith was so uncourtly when they said That Heaven's high Son was in a village born; That the world's Savior had been In a vile manger laid. And foster 'd in a wretched inn. (170-175) And the idea of God, hidden away in a "vile manger," is hard to answer with anything but "unbelieving scorn." It is, as Paul observed, a folly to the Greeks and a stumbling block to the Jews. But to fail to accept it, as Swift's imagery of space and motion have shown us, is to pay for deposing God by crowning Whirl.

PAGE 34

22 Swift's Ode to Sancroft , then, is concerned with the most basic of human questions^ what relationship is possible between man and God, how can man approach a hidden God? This question is made particularly difficult in this ode by Swift's constant reminders of how limited, indeed, how untrustworthy, man's faculties really are. Human reason, as we have already seen by the varieties of cosmological confusion it can engender, is subject to all the errors of pride. Human senses, too, Swift tells us in the second stanza, are weak and distorting. But if man can trust neither his mind nor his senses, then it seems that whirl alone is man's inheritance. Only Sancroft, in his "secret regular sphere," has succeeded in surmounting that inheritance; and Sancroft, in his isolated retreat, seems both unapproachable and inexplicable. Of Sancroft 's life, as we have already noted, and of the specific details of his deprivation and conduct. Swift's ode tells us very little. Further, we are seemingly told almost as little of his virtues. We are told that Sancroft possesses a mind which is, paradoxically. . . .fix'd to combat fate With those two pow'rful swords. Submission and Humility, (47-48) and further we know that he is "Free from our tyrant-passions, anger, scorn and fear" (116). We know that because of his equanimity, his "firm heavenly mind," Sancroft is unmoved by "Fortune in both

PAGE 35

23 extre~es," and that, therefore. Swift finds him worthy of comparison to the regular course of a star and, finally, to Christ Himself. But all this seems, while highly laudatory, yet very vague. For, excepting only King William, of whom Swift tells us still less, Sancroft is the only godly man presented in this ode--he is its "brightest pattern." It is he who must be the . . .guide from Heav'n to show the way which ev ' ry wand 'ring fool below Pretends so perfectly to know. (156-158) In his portrait of Sancroft, if any^'/here. Swift must depict the means by which men can find their way to God. In the two lines which immediately precede those describing Sancroft 's "fix'd mind" Swift begins, I think, to supply the background which ultimately illuminates the meaning implicit in Sancroft 's character. The lines actually form a proposition. If all that our weak knowledge titles virtue, be (High Truth) the best resemblance of exalted Thee, (45-46) then. Swift continues, Sancroft 's conduct--his combat of fate through submission and humility--makes him . . .the brightest pattern Earth can shew Of heav'n-born Truth below. (52-53) But this is not a proposition which every philosopher nor every theologian would grant to Swift. Truth, it can properly be argued, whether sacred or profane, is the concern of the intellective

PAGE 36

24 faculty, while virtue falls within the domain of the will. True, no reputable thinker has been willing to separate the realms of intellect and will completely, but not all would willingly see virtue made the human counter for truth. Swift, however, in this ode, regularly connects virtue with truth. Throughout the poem what truth man sees, or fails to see, seems to depend upon his righteousness; knowledge is equated with virtue, and ignorance with sin. We have already seen several instances of this. Ptolemy's cosmology was a false picture of the universe because, from Swift's point of view, it sprang from pride. Much the same can be said of Descartes' cosmology. So pervasive in this poem is Swift's insistence that man's intellectual efforts must be conjoined with a will attuned to virtuous actions that every instance which Swift presents of man's confusion is but another example of man attempting to divorce the goodness of one faculty from the goodness of the other. Thus Descartes' cosmology, an attempted work of pure reason, undertaken in great pride, ends in confusion and contradiction. Thus those religious reformers who, Swift complains, practice their reforming "arts" only to promote their own self-aggrandizement, end by killing the religion they promised to cure. While this necessary conjunction of knowledge with virtue is not, as already pointed out, an equally acceptable premise for all thinkers-, it is, to a greater or lesser degree, an earmark of those thinkers whose thought begins in a heavily Platonistic back24 ground. "All sin is ignorance," Plato has Socrates comment, and platonically orientated thought has regularly equated ignorance with sin and truth with virtue. From this equation follows the ethical

PAGE 37

25 concern inherent in all branches of platonic thought. Plotinus, in a passage so beautiful that not even centuries of quotation have worn it out, put the matter this way. If the eye that adventures the vision be dimmed by vice, impure, or weak, and unable in its cowardly blanching to see the uttermost brightness, then it sees nothing even though another point to what lies plain to sight before it. To any vision must be brought an eye adapted to what is to be seen, and having some likeness to it. Never did eye see the sun unless it had first become sunlike, and never can the soul have vision of the First Beauty unless itself be beautiful . '^^ This passage Swift echoes, though it may well be that he learned it through an intermediate source: The daz'ling glory dimms their prostituted sight. No deflower 'd eye can face the naked light. (221-222) It is presumably then, the import of Plotinus' passage in whatever version of it that Swift knew, which informs the imagery of light and dark that is so substantial a part of this poem. That is, in the Ode to Sancroft man's world is dark to him because he does not acknowledge that before he can see his eye must be cleared. In the first lines of the ode. Swift asserts this need for divine illumination, and does so through Miltonic echo. One possible echo from Milton's third book of Paradise Lost has already been discussed above. Another has been noted by Joseph Horrell, who observed that the second line of Swift's ode, "Bright effluence of th' immortal ray," is apparently formed from the sixth line of the invocation to light with which the third book of Paradise Lost begins. Milton's line runs, "Bright effluence of bright essence increate," and Swift not only borrows the image "bright

PAGE 38

26 ef f luence"--Milton' s figure for iight--to form one line but employs the image "bright essence"--as a figure for truth — to form anotner: "Since the bright essence fled, where haunts tne reverend ghost'.' (43). Nor is this all. The first line of Swift's ode announces its subject with three heavily emphasized words, "Truth is Eternal," and then connects that subject obliquely to Christ, "and the Son of Heav'n." The line seems, then, a conscious imitation of tne first line of Milton's invocation, "Hail, holy light, offspring of Heaven first-born.'" These are not all the echoes of the invocation to light which occur in Swift's ode, but only a sufficient number to show us that the invocation was in Swift's mind as he composed his ode. That is, in Swift's mind, as he composed the Ode to Sar.crcft , is Milton's confession of blindness and supplication for that illumination without which neither Milton nor any man can truly see: . . .celestial light Shine inward, and the mind through all her powers Irradiate; there plant eyes; all mist from thence Purge and disperse, that I may see and tell Of things invisible to mortal sight. (P.L. Ill, 51-55) But in Swift's ode, it is not only "inward" sight, sight which sees "things invisible," that requires an illuminated mind. The very mechanics of "mortal sight," Swift reminds us, depend upon the eye being made receptive to that which it would see. The eye must "catch the living landscape in a scanty light" (30) Swift says, and his line is reminiscent, I think, of the first half of St. Paul's dictum, "Now we see as in a glass darkly, then we shall see as face to face," while it directly refers (as John Nichols, the poem's first publisher pointed out) to "the experiment of the dark chamber, to demonstrate

PAGE 39

27 light to be by reception of the object and not by emission." What the experiment to which Nichols alludes demonstrated was that the eye in seeing does not shoot out shafts of light, but receives them. Sight, then, as the experiment showed, is the result of both the activity and passivity of the eye, the task of which is to actively make itself conformable to the essentially passive role of seeing. And what Swift, then, might have gathered from the experiment is that the role of the physical eye is, as Plotinus had intuitively known, a perfect analogue for the role a man must undertake would he approach God. As Plotinus puts it at the end of that passage which Swift echoed: Never did eye see the sun unless it had first become sunlike, and never can the soul have vision of the First Beauty unless itself be beautiful. Therefore, first let each becorae godlike and beautiful wino cares to see God and Beauty, This injunction co r.ian to become godlike if he would see God, is, I believe, che background for that comparison of Sancroft and Christ which Irvin Ehrenpreis feels is an impossibly over-inflated praise of 2 7 Sancroft. But, rather than being over-inflated praise. Swift's comparison is, I think, quite appropriate. For Swift's thought in this poem, as we have already observed, often reflects both the cosmological and ethical biases of Christian platonists; it is therefore appropriate that Swift's model for human conduct should be the normative model of Christian platonism--the godlike man. Recognizing the kind of model Sancroft is, we are, I think, in a position to suggest the meaning of the portrait Swift draws. Plotinus' injunction to man to become godlike must logically be based on both the fact and the ideal of deiformation; that is,

PAGE 40

28 if man is to become actually godlike he must be originally made in theimage of God, must be, although only in potentia , already godlike. But, on the other hand, if man must become godlike, obviously an effort of human will is called for. But towards what is that effort to be directed? Plato, in the Theaetetus may have supplied the answer: The truth is that God is never in any way unrighteousHe is perfect righteousness and he of us who is the most righteous is most like him. 28 This is no mere tautology. It does not say thac to become godlike man must become godlike; rather it says that to become godlike man must will to participate in godliness. The first step towards participating in the divine nature is to will to do so, and, because it is the essence of divinity itself to choose righteousness and goodness, to choose God is also the last step in imitating him. A certain learned doctor, one whose conception of the cosmos and of man begins in the fact and ideal of deiformity, puts a fine point 29 on all this; he is the famous Cambridge platonist, Henry More. This therefore is the supreme Law and Will of God touching the Purity of his Worship, That we have no will nor end of our own. For as we are to have but one God, "Hear, Israel, the Lord thy God is one God," so we are to have but one Will, even the Will of the God Whom we worship. Which we have not, if we have any Self-will or Self-ends unsubordinate to the Will of God. Here, finally, we can fully answer Ehreppreis ' objection that Swift's comparison of Sancroft to Christ undermines his praise of Bancroft. Quite the opposite, the comparison is at the heart of what the portrait of Sancroft conveys. Because Sancroft "combats fate with those two Powr'ful swords, Submission and Humility" (47-48),

PAGE 41

29 that is, because Sancroft actively wills God's Will, he becomes, in Plato's words, "most like him." Bancroft's portrait provides Swift's answer to the relationship of man and God because Sancroft, in setting aside his own will to accept God's will, becomes himself a type, an image of the hidden God. Thus, primitive Sancroft moves too high To be observ'd by vulgar eye. And rolls the silent year On his own secret regular sphere. And sheds, tho' all unseen, his sacred influence here, (149-153) Bancroft's deprivation at the hands of prideful men seems . . .to discover x;7hat they would have done (Were his humanity on earth once more) To his undoubted Master, Heaven's Almighty Son, (132-34) because Sancroft lives, in the most literal sense, for Christ. This portrait of a godlike Sancroft, then, whose will is so completely attuned to God's that earthly "fortune in both extremes" is "but one thing under two different names" is, when viewed against the set of ideas which give it substance, both a model for human conduct and Swift's assertion that man is, in fact, formed after the image of God. What then, finally, is Swift's view, in this ode, of the relationship between heaven and earth, man and God? The im.agery of space and motion which was examined earlier in this chapter led us, we remember, to something like Henry More's conception of the universea conception in which God permeated, was hidden in, every particle of matter. The portrait of Sancroft has also led us to something very like More's conception of man, a conception in which man is imitatio

PAGE 42

30 Dei , after the image of God. But neither Swift nor More are naive in their employment of the ideal of deiformation. Both recognize that though the world is an image of God, it is only an image. For this inferior world is but Heaven's dusky shade, By dark reverted rays from its reflection made. (21-22) Both recognize that although man is, in potentia , godlike, he must willfully accept his birthright. After all, it was the failure of a group of men to acknowledge God's providence in the civil acts of man which gave rise to this poem. Thus the position of both men is the more or less orthodox one that both this world and human nature are goods, but they are goods dependent upon the God that created and sustains them and to Whom they must ultimately return. That is why "apocalyptic mutterings," to use Maynard Mack's phrase, can be heard in several places in this ode--and most clearly in the following lines from the seventh stanza. The lines describe the evanescent quality of the enthusiast's zeal, but they do so in imagery drawn from the second chapter of the Book of Daniel . The crazy composition shews. Like that fantastic medley in the idol's toes, Made up of iron mix't with clay. This crumbles into dust. That, moulders into rust, Or melts by the first show ' r away. (137-142) In the dream from which Swift's imagery is drawn, King Nebuchadnezzar sees an idol whose head is made of gold, the chest of silver, the belly and thighs of brass, the legs of iron and the feet of a composition of iron and potter's clay. As the dream continues.

PAGE 43

31 Nebuchadnezzar sees a stone hewn from a mouncain, though the hewing is done by no hands. This stone crushes first the feet and then the whole of the idol, and, when this is done, the stone itself grows to assume the form of a mountain. Nebuchadnezzar, upon awakening, forgets the contents of this dream, but as he remains troubled by it, he calls upon first his wise men and, seeing them fail, then upon Daniel to relate and explicate the dream. Daniel, having asserted that his knowledge originates not with himself but with God, explains to Nebuchadnezzar that he has dreamt a prophesy for the whole world. Four empires will arise and then a fifth will be formed of the fragments of its predecessors, but, at last, God will destroy all human kingdoms and establish His ov7n Empire on earth. The echo implies, I believe. Swift's final answer to the pride and folly, not only of the enthusiast's zeal, but of all the men who are shown in this poem to have placed their will before God's. They shall perish, and their works shall pass away, but the Kingdom of God will be established on earth. In fact, in a sense, that Kingdom has already been long established, linking all men willing to participate in it to one another and to God. In the final, and incomplete, twelfth stanza of the ode. Swift refers to Sancroft, presumably after his death, as "happy saint" and appeals to him to Pity a miserable Church's tears. That begs the pow'rful blessing of thy pray'rs. (234-235) The validity of this appeal to a saint to pray for the entire earthly Church depends upon a Catholic doctrine which, though it was probably

PAGE 44

32 not completely acceptable to Swift as an Anglican, still apparently had for him a poetic validity--the doctrine of the Communion of Saints . According to the doctrine, the saints are able to entertain prayers addressed to them and to intercede, in heaven, for those who have prayed because the Church on Earth is but a part of the one true Church, which encompasses also the Church in purgatory and the Church in heaven. It is this total harmony and communion of God's Kingdom which makes efficacious the appeal to the saints. But further, according to Catholic doctrine, so far does this harmony extend that even men living in the world can, in emulating Christ, dedicate their suffering to atone for the sin of other men. We have already noted that Sancroft, because he is a godly man, appears in this ode as a type of the Deus Absconditus ; what Swift's prayer to Sancroft allows us to appreciate is the real quality of Sancroft 's "influence." Kathleen Williams remarked, we will remember, that the bishop's "secret regular sphere" seemed overwhelmed by the calumny of the world Swift describes. But that is to miss the point, for, it is finally out of his very misfortune that Sancroft can fashion . . .his own secret regular sphere. And shed, tho' all unseen, his sacred influence here. (152-153) It is on the pervasiveness of God's spiritual kingdom that this ode ends. Disregarding the "outcasts of this outcast age," its final line asserts that "Heaven and Cato both are pleas 'd." The line refers, presumably, to Cato the younger, whose life, in its devotion to virtue and truth, in its isolation and in the contempt and ridicule it elicited from his own contemporaries, bears a curious

PAGE 45

33 resemblance to Sancroft's own. Cato, had not, of course, the benefit of revelation, but. Swift maintains, Cato and heaven are in accord. In accord, Swift has maintained, are heaven and all men whose will, in devotion to virtue and truth, is not "self will" and whose ends are not "self ends" but who are "subordinate to the Will of God." Brought together in one kingdom are the true men of all kingdoms and all times, all within a Church which spans earth, purgatory and heaven.

PAGE 46

NOTES 1. That is, these are the first poems we know definitely to be Swift's. For references to possible earlier satiric verse see Herbert Davis, Jonathan Swift: essays on nis satire ar.d other s tudies (New York, 1964), p. 171. 2. At fourteen Swift was admitted to Trinity College, Dublin, where, according to Swift himself, "he too much neglected some parts of his academical studies, for which he had no great relish by nature and turned himself to reading history and poetry." The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift , ed. Herbert Davis et_al. , 13 vols. (Oxford, 1957), V, 162. All quotations of Swift's prose in my text are to chis edition. 3. "There is in some of Mr. Cowley's Love Verse," Sw^fc commented when he was forty-two, "a strain that I thought extraordinary at fifteen." I'ne Prose Works of Jonathan Swift , II, 114. At forty-two, it hardly needs to be said, the Dean was less fond of Cowley than he had been at fifteen. 4. The Correspondence of Jonathan Swift , ed. Sir Harold Williams, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1963), I, 9. 5. Swift: the man, his works, and the age , 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1S62-), I, 109. 6. Ibid . I, 112. 7. John H. Finley, Jr., Pindar and Aeschylus (Cambridge, Mass., 1955), p. 54. 8. The English Writings of Abraham Cowley , ed. A. R. Waller, 2 vols. (Cambridge, Eng., 1905), I, 165. All quotations of Cowley's verse in my text are to this edition. 9. The Collected Poems of Jonathan Swift , ed. Joseph Horrell, 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1962), I, 378. 10. Swift: the man, his works, and the age , I, 126 and following. 11. Ronald Paulson, "Swift, Stella, and Permanence," ELH, XXVII (1960), 298-314. 12. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift , I, 189-90. 13. Kathleen Williams, Swift and the Age of Compromise (Lawrence, Kansas, 1958), p. 147. 34

PAGE 47

35 14. The Dictionary of National Biography , ed . Sir Leslie Stephen and Sir Sidney Lee, 22 vols. (Oxford, 1937), XVII, 733-39. 15. G. M. Trevelyan, History of England . 2 vols. (New York, 1954), II, 210. 16. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift . IX, 238. 17. Let it here be noted that Swift, using Ptolemaic cosmology as an emblem for human confusion was harder on that cosmology than the facts actually warrant. See Thomas S. Kuhn, The Copernican Revolution. . . (New York, 1959). 18. See Phillip Harth, Swift and Anglican Rationalism. . . (Chicago, 1961), pp. 92 and following. 19. For the following discussion of Descartes' cosmology and Henry More's opposition to it I arc indebted to Alexander Koyre's From the Closed World to the Iniinite Universe (New York, 1957). See particularly chapters five and six. 20. While this summary is accurate, it is also, it should be unaerstood, very simplified. Descartes, for example, called his cosmos "indefinite," not "infinite." But the cosmos Descartes described is infinite. 21. Phillip Harth in Swift and Anglican Rationalism. . . makes a very convincing case for Swift's early acquaintance with and admiration for the work of Henry More. 22. Ralph Cudworth, The True Intelleccual System of the Universe (London, 1678), p. 175. 23. Henry More, Collection of Several Philosophical Writings (London, 1662). Cited from Koyre, p. 111. 24. On this point see Aharon Lichtenstein, Henry More: The Rational Theology of a Cambridge Platonist (Cambridge, Mass., 1962), pp. 89-90. 25. Plotinus, The Enneads . trans. Stephen MacKenna (New York, 1957), 1.6.9. 26. Nichols' observation is cited from Sir Harold Williams' edition of Swift's Poems, I, 35, n. 1. 27. Swift; the man, his works, and the age . I, 130. 28. Plato, Theaetetus , cited from The Dialogues of Plato , trans, Benjamin Jowett (New York, 1937), 176a-b. 29. An Antidote against Idolatry (London, 1672-1673), cited from Lichtenstein, p. 59.

PAGE 48

CHAPTER TWO Cadenus and Vanessa In 1767 Oliver Goldsmith touched on what is at once the most obvious and the most remarkable aspect of Swift ';= Cadenus and Vanessa . "This [poem] is thought," he commented, . . . one of Dr. Swift's correctest pieces; its chief merit, indeed, is the elegant ease with which a story, but ill con ceived in itself , is told. To put Goidsmich's poinc less charitably. Swift seems certainly, in this poem, to expend a prodigalicy of materials only to lead us finally to an apparently lame conclusion. Something of the effect may be gathered from the following synopsis. The poem opens ambitiously, presenting to us the Court of Venus met in full session. The reason for this session is, however, a professed decline of love between the sexes, and a multitude of shepherds and nymphs are joined in debate to fix on each other the responsibility for this decline. The pleader for the nymphs opens the debate by accusing both "that false creature, man," and Cupid himself of negligence in the pursuit of love. He cites as a sad result of this negligence, a universal decline of both romantic and conjugal felicity. Now love is dwindled to intrigue. And marriage grown a money league. (13-14) 36

PAGE 49

37 The pleader for the shepherds next states his case. He acknowledges that men have, indeed, grown indifferent to love but he fixes the responsibility for this decline on the nymphs themselves. The nymphs, he maintains, have turned from that celestial flame, chaste and pure, which characterized ancient love and which alone can inspire love in virtuous men. Their fancies, instead, are engrossed by the lowest trivia, and the nymphs are therefore not worthy of love from a worthy man. Venus, "much perplex 'd in mind/ To see her Empire thus declin'd" (128-129), finds her references to legal texts no help in settling this dispute. Therefore, she undertakes an experiment which she hopes will at once restore her reign and settle the merits of the case before her. Choosing out a particularly beautiful female infant, she endows the child with all the graces at her command--outward cleanliness, decency of mind, and a soft engaging air. Then, in order to make the child completely worthy of a virtuous and rational love, she deceives Pallas, goddess of wisdom, into believing the infant to be male. Thus deceived, Pallas grants the child those gifts of knowledge, judgment, wit, justice, truth, fortitude and honor which are traditionally the gifts of only the best of men. Venus' task is thus complete and, she hopes, she has only to allow the cause before her to spin itself out for sixteen years until a mature Vanessa can, by providing a model for nymphs and an object of adoration for shepherds, secure her reign. The experiment, however, is not a success. Pallas is quickly undeceived, and while she cannot resume the gifts she has given, she correctly predicts that they will hinder, rather than further, Venus' cause. And, in fact, Vanessa's very wisdom is Venus'

PAGE 50

38 undoing; for Vanessa is so unlike the beaux and dames whom she is to captivate that far from taking her as a model they unanimously find her "the dullest soul." Then tipt their Forehead in a jeer, As who should say--she wants it here, (360-61) Indeed, from Venus' point of view the experiment turns into a total disaster, since Vanessa herself has, apparently, too much sense to fall in love. At this point Cupid, longing to vindicate his mother's wrongs, succeeds in causing Vanessa to become enamoured of a fortyish priest, her tutor, Cadenus, And now the poem becomes, in some sense, biographical, the reflection of an actual relationship between Swift himself and Esther Vanhomerigh. Vanessa, smitten, betrays all the classic marks of love-sickness--she feels pain at heart, listens to her tutor's voice but not his lectures, and contrives ways in which to touch his hand. Cadenus, misunderstanding, concludes she has grown tired of his lectures; he therefore offers to withdraw, and thereby actually forces Vanessa to confess her love. Her confession precipitates a debate between them in which Vanessa attempts to maintain the reasonableness of her love while Cadenus offers only the unsatisfactory (to her) return of "Friendship in its greatest height." (780). At this point, with the outcome of the debate still undecided: Whether the Nymph, to please her Swain, Talks in a high romatick Strain; Or whether he at last descends, To act with less Seraphick ends, Or, to compound the Business, whether They temper love and books together, (820-25)

PAGE 51

39 Swift's muse, having already revealed so much, turns inexpicably coy and refuses to reveal anything more. Instead, we are rather lurchingly removed again to Venus' Court where she, having watched Vanessa's whole career, decides the case rather arbitrarily against the men and, leaving the world to Cupid's dubious discretion, Left all below at Six and Sev'n, Harness 'd her Doves and flew to Heaven. (888-889) The lavish number of lines, nearly nine hundred, expended to arrive at so halting a conclusion would be surprising even from an author whose power of economy was less proverbial than Swift's. Swift, however, in Cadenus and Vanessa , seems unable even to tell his story without numerous inconsistencies. Thus, for example, we are first told that Cupid, hoping to procure a lover for Vanessa, shot numerous arrows "Pointed at Col'nels, Lords, and Beaux" (478). Then we are told that Cadenus warded off these same arrows by placing books in the hands of (presumably) Vanessa. What Swift is getting at is clear enough; Cupid's efforts are in vain because Vanessa, tutored by Cadenus, is both learned and aloof. But the path of Swift's metaphorical arrows is impossible to trace. Worse still than such missteps, however, is the poem's general inconclusiveness, the air of indecision which hangs over the entire production. First, the debate between the shepherds and nymphs which opens the poem is never, by the parties themselves, brought to issue. Second, the debate between Cadenus and Vanessa not only is not concluded, it does not seem possible to conclude it since the argument springs from fundamentally unarguable circumstances:

PAGE 52

40 Vanessa is in love and Cadenus is not. Lastly, while a judgment is finally rendered by Venus against the men, that judgment is not very convincing, since, although it is true that the shepherds have failed to adore Vanessa, it is equally true that the nymphs have failed to model themselves after her. Therefore, despite Venus' judgment, the end of the poem finds all things as they were at its beginning, at a state of "six and seven." To seek, then, in Cadenus and Vanessa for a consistent and unified view of human love is to search for what, I suspect, does not exist in the poem. But that is not to say that Cadenus and Vanessa does not repay close study. On the contrary, the poem provides, first I think, as much insight as we shall ever have into what a more romantic age called "the mystery of Swift's life and loves." And secondly, while the poem is hardly an "art of love^" it is, I think, taken as a whole, a single large metaphor for "the difficulties which love attend." The poem has never been read this way, but reading it so shows, I think, its apparent missteps and its hopelessly futile debates as, not flaws, but as coherent parts of Swift's precise illustration of love's difficulties. II Just because Cadenus and Vanessa , while full of debate, apparently proceeds to no conclusion, it has proven a treasure trove of sorts for generations of critics seeking to document one or another attitude towards Swift or about his work. Most of the speeches which in the poem are assigned to Venus, Pallas, Vanessa and Cadenus have been, at some time, taken to represent Swift's genuine view. This tendency to take a speech from Cadenus and

PAGE 53

"zrr Vanessa and to assume, while disregarding the character to whom Swift assigned it, that it represents Swift's real view led to particularly amusing colloquies between Swift's earliest critics. Thus, for example. Lord Orrery first isolated for commentary the following passage. Two maxims she could still produce. And sad Experience taught their Use: That Virtue, pleas 'd by being shown, knows nothing which it dare not own; Can make us, without Fear disclose Our inmost secrets to our Foes: That common Forms were not designed Directors to a noble mind. (606-13) In remarking on this passage, however. Orrery completely disregarded the fact that the speech is only a recapitulation by the character, Vanessa, of an opinion supposedly held by the character Cadenus . Instead, Orrery used this speech to draw a very black picture indeed of the Dean of St. Patricks. He [Swift] taught her, that vice as soon as it defied shame, was immediately changed into virtue. That vulgar forms were not binding on certain choice spirits, to whom either the writings or persons of men of wit were acceptable. Then, a year after Lord Orrery's Remarks appeared, Patrick Delany, Swift's long-time friend, took up the cudgels for Swift in Observations on Lord Orrery's Remarks . In the course of defending Swift against Orrery's generally damning portrait Delany, too, falls upon Vanessa's speech. But, instead of correcting Orrery's mistake, Delany, like Orrery, assumes the passage must represent Swift's own view. Now, pray, my Lord, what is there in all this, which the most virtuous man alive might not own with his last breath to 2

PAGE 54

42 be his most sincere and genuine sentiments: For my own part, I can see nothing in it, but a panygyric upon purity and noble nature of virtue. All the difference which really exists between these two widely divergent readings is, of course, that Delany is kindly disposed towards Swift while Orrery is not. What is surprising, though, is not that this highly subjective and personal form of criticism should have been written by men who knew Swift well, but that it should still remain, as we shall see, the dominant strain in modern criticism of Cadenus and Vanessa . The antidote for it, after all, has existed for over two hundred years. For Swift's nephew, Deane Swift, while animadverting upon Orrery's Remarks a year after Delany, added to Delany 's reading of Cadenus and Vanessa the necessary fillip of critical insight. To Orrery's assumption that Cadenus and Vanessa are the exact counterparts to Swift and Esther Vanhomerigh, Deane Swift replied that, for all we know, the poem might be purely a work of Swift's imagination; and further, that even if we assume that Swift and Esther are, in some sense, Cadenus and Vanessa, the degree to which the poet's imagination has transformed them must remain hidden from us. A clearsighted application, then, of Deane Swift's insight to Cadenus and Vanessa should produce a reading of the poem which can be validated from the text and has nothing to do with either a critic's sympathy towards or dislike of' Jonathan Swift himself. But nothing can more clearly illustrate the difficulty of producing such a reading than a review of ' the most intensive and cogent of modern attempts on the poem. Peter Ohlin, in his article', ""'Ca'dehuis and Vanessa,' Reason I > • ' I / • , > . .. I 1 . 1 , 1 1 . . 1 1 . I . I • , I I iI • II I / I

PAGE 55

43 and Passion,"-' begins by attempting to open some aesthetic distance between the poem and the relationship between Swift and Esther Vonhomerigh which inspired it. Rather than turning towards what we know of that relationship in order to understand the poem, Ohlin suggests we draw "some aid from other and less immediately personal documents from Swift's hand." These sources, Ohlin argues, "will reveal that Cadenus and Vanessa is a delicately executed dialogue between reason and passion, utilizing the conflict between these two principles as the controlling device." The less immediately personal documents Ohlin uses are, principally, A Letter to a Young Lady on her Marriage , Swift's poems to Stella and Thoughts on Various Sub-jects . From these Ohlin draws documentation for what he calls Swift's "orthodox christian" view of love, a view which, though it does not find sexual passion evil, insists that this passion must be constantly directed by reason. This view of Swift's "orthodox Christianity" forms the background for Ohlin 's reading of the poem. The "two principles" of "reason" and "passion" are represented, according to Ohlin, by two characters apiece. "Passion's' prime representative is, of course, Venus, whom Ohlin characterizes as "vain, sensuous and deceitful." Fearful of the loss of her empire (and therefore vain)^ Venus deceives Pallas (whom Ohlin considers "reason's" first representative) into helping her create Vanessa. Vanessa, until her intellect is addled by the force of Cupid's dart is, Ohlin argues, reasonable because she is a perfect blend of reason and passion. When, however, she has once been inflamed by love, her passions mount inappropriately astride her reason and her mind is darkened by vain imaginings. Gazing at

PAGE 56

44 Cadenus she now, Imaginary Charms can find, In eyes with Reading almost blind; Cadenus now no more appears Declin'd in Health, advan'd in years. (526-29) Cadenus' response to her, Ohlin therefore maintains, is a perfectly correct attempt to restore her to reason's control and, in fact, represents Swift's own real views. Cadenus offers. . . .Friendship in its greatest Height, A constant rational Delight, (780-81) and promises that His want of Passion will redeem With Gratitude, Respect, Esteem. (786-87) What Cadenus is finally offering, according to Ohlin, is Swift's conception of the highest type of love, "that christian selfless love which is a reflection of the divine love of God for mankind." Unfortunately, however, Vanessa has meanwhile become so besotted by passion as not to recognize the value of what Cadenus offers her, and the debate is, therefore, as Ohlin argues, left at a standstill. Meanwhile Venus, who, Ohlin now argues, had attempted to give men a "reasonable passion," decides that "since they [men] cannot see perfect beauty and virtue for what they are when they appear in Vanessa, men do not deserve the ability to control their passions." Therefore, Ohlin concludes, "Venus leaves all 'below at Six and Sev'n' without the order she had planned to establish." The strong point of Ohlin 's argument is, it seems to me, his

PAGE 57

45 appreciation of the effects on Vanessa of her impassioned state. Swift makes it abundantly clear that, whatever our response to Vanessa might be, we are to understand that her arguments are not to be entirely trusted. She argues, Swift tells us. . . .as Philosophers, who find Some Fav'rite System to their Mind: In ev'ry Point to make it fit. Will force all Nature to submit. (722-25) Despite the apparent obviousness of the point, however, Ohlin is the first critic to notice it, and thus he frees himself, and us, of the need--which Delany and many another critic since has felt-to read Vanessa's lines as if they expressed Swift's own considered opinions. Vanessa's lines can therefore be read, not with an eye towards making them consistent with what we think is (or ought to be) Swift's opinion, but by the portrait Swift provides us of the character who speaks them. But if Ohlin 's strongest point is his treatment of Vanessa, his weakest point is his treatment of Cadenus. For although Ohlin treats Cadenus as the moral center of the poem and as Swift's own spokesman. Swift has, I think, compromised Cadenus quite as much as he has Vanessa. The speech, for example, in which Cadenus offers Vanessa that "gratitude, respect, and esteem," which Ohlin claims to be "christian selfless love," Swift, in fact, introduced with the remark. So when Cadenus could not hide. He chose to justify his Pride. (762-63) Ohlin is forced, by his own thesis, to touch very lightly on such

PAGE 58

46 embarrassing passages, and he therefore damages the complexity of both Cadenus' character and of Cadenus ' lines. Indeed, because Ohlin takes Cadenus' point of view for Swift's own, he misses much of the complexity of Cadenus and Vanessa . He is forced to read the whole of Cadenus and Vanessa from what he conceives to be Cadenus' preference for reason over passion, and he must, therefore, rigorously pare the poem down to the scope of Cadenus' vision. Ironically, the poem takes its revenge by involving Ohlin in contradiction. Thus, for example, Ohlin begins by describing Venus as Cadenus doubtless would have seen her--vain, shamelessly sensuous, and deceitful. But by the end of his article Ohlin is forced to admit that it is, indeed, "to the World's perpetual Shame/ [that] The Queen of Beauty lost her aim," (432-33) The moral of all this is, of course, only an extension of the point Deane Swift made over two hundred years ago--that neither Cadenus nor Vanessa nor any other of the poem's characters can be taken for Swift's own authentic voice. But, on the other hand, we ought not dismiss too quickly a critical error which has persisted for over two hundred years; for the error, I think, contains a germ of truth. For, although Orrery was certainly wrong in attacking Swift through the lines of a character whose arguments Swift himself has amply enough undermined, nevertheless, the opinions which Vanessa espouses can, as we shall see, be found in Swift's writings when he was speaking in his own person. Similarly, although Ohlin erred in drawing too tightly together Swift and the character whose flaws Swift clearly exposes, Ohlin has certainly demonstrated that Swift, at times, did offer arguments very much like those he provides Cadenus. Indeed, the complexity of the poem

PAGE 59

47 lies precisely in this: although Swift exposes Llie flaws of each of the characters in his poem, nevertheless, all of them argue in ways which he has argued. It is small wonder, then, that critics have so often seen, and felt forced to judge, Swift within his lines; for Cadenus and Vanessa is almost a psychomachia. Almost, I say, but not quite: for it is the nature of a psychomachia to move towards a conclusion in which virtue which is clearly virtue triumphs over vice which is clearly vice. But Cadenus and Vanessa reaches no conclusion; rather, as I hope to show, it exposes and judges the contrary opinions on love held by the Dean of St. Patricks Cathedral. It is, to repeat myself, a single large mataphor for "the difficulties which love attends." Ill On the basis of their surviving correspondence, the relationship between Swift and Esther Vonhomerigh seems peculiarly tailored to illuminate, for Swift, love's difficulties. Yet, for all that, the relationship began normally enough. Swift first met Esther in 1708 and was doubtless taken by her combination of youth (she was not, however, so young as Swift thought), good looks, good character and good sense. Further, to all these qualities Esther apparently added two more which Swift found certainly not charming but, nevertheless, compelling: these were a streak of laziness and, subsequently, a lady-like ignorance. These qualities were, for Swift, probably compelling, since, as is well enough known. Swift's penchant for reforming female manners amounted to something very like a life-long avocation. Therefore, as Irvin Ehrenpreis has put it, '"We may assume that

PAGE 60

48 he began the friendship as usual, by suggesting books for the young 6 woman to read and acquaintances for her to drop." How long this relatively simple friendship continued and when, and in what way, it deepened into both something more and something different it is not possible to say. If we could fix a date for the completion of Cadenus and Vanessa , we should know, at least, the latest date by which Esther had declared her love to Swift; but the date by which Swift completed that poem is as uncertain as anything else in the history of Swift and Esther. What we do know is that by 1711 Swift felt it necessary to suppress, in his correspondence to Esther Johnson, his previously numerous references to the Vonhomerigh establishment in general and Vanessa in particular. And we know too, that about this same time Swift and Esther held a series of secret meetings at the house of Swift's entirely trustworthy friend though not entirely reputable printer, Q John Barber. Clearly then, by the end of 1711 their friendship had complicated. Swift was deeply involved, and Vanessa, presumably, had conceived what she was later to call her "inexpressible passion" for Swift. Because Cadenus and Vanessa is, in some way. Swift's response to Esther's passion for him, it is worthwhile to see what her correspondence tells us of her and her passion. A surprising amount has been written about Esther, and most of it portrays her as a poor, weak-willed girl overpowered by both Swift and her own sentiments. This portrait is not confirmed, however, by either the quality of style or argumentation which one finds in her correspondence with Swift. To be sure, Esther could, and often did, address Swift in the most passionate of terms.

PAGE 61

49 :e Put ray passion under Che utmost restraint, send me as distant from you as the earth will allow, yet you cannot banish those charming ideas, which will ever stick by me whilst I have the use of memory. Nor is the love I bear you only seated in my soul, for there is not an atom of my frame that is not blended with it. Therefore don't flatter yourself that separation will ever change my sentiments, for I find myself unquiet in the midst of silence, and my heart is at once pierced with sorrow and love. But passion so well worded as this is argues for a cool head as well as for a warm heart, and particularly the carefully constructed final sentence of this passage persuades me that Esther understood the use of the blunt as well as the sharp end of her stylus. Further, passionate as she was, Esther could, on occasion, invert the whole form of passionate address by the delicate application of satire-and she could perform such mischief almost as well as Swift himself, who was the master of it. Now, because I love frankness extremely, I here tell you that I have determined to try all manner of human arts to reclaim you, and if all those fail I am resolved to have recourse to the black one, which, it is said, never does. Now see what inconveniences you will bring both me and yourself into. Pray think calmly of it. Is it not much better to come of yourself than to be brought by force. . . ?^0 Indeed, so stylistically sophisticated are Esther's letters that, it seems to me, they possess an interest even independent of their biographical significance. If, however, the style of Esther's letters is consistently good--and Swift thought it was--her mode of argumentation is often positively striking. For Esther's arguments are founded on elements of Swift's own principles and use those principles in such way that, as Esther might have put it, his thought "made for her."

PAGE 62

50 The aim of all her letters is, of course, to draw Swift closer to her, and her whole means for accomplishing this aim is her attractiveness to him. Her task, then, was to place Swift's emotional and subjective responses to her, his pity, friendship, admiration and love, within a frame of reference which would weigh those responses most heavily. Her art, practiced over a period of nearly a dozen years, consisted in the skill with which she culled, from Swift's own thought, those elements which honor subjective and individualistic response. Such elements really exist in Swift's thought, but because critics have found more striking Swift's alternative view--his rigorous demand for objective judgment--the subjective nature of many of Swift's maxims and much of his advice has often been overlooked. Thus, for example, the extreme objectivism of Swift's following advice to Stella (Esther Johnson) has been often pointed out: In Points of Honour to be try'd. All Passions must be laid aside; How shall I act? is not the Case; But how wouM Brutus in my Place? Drive all objections from your Mind, Else you relapse to human Kind. ( To Stella, Visiting me in my Sickness ) But, on the other hand. Swift's recognition, in other poems to Stella, that a subjective point of view is sometimes not only more charitable but, in some fundamental way, more true, has been rarely mentioned. But, Stella say, what evil Tongue Reports you are no longer young? That half your Locks are turned to grey: I'll ne'er believe a Word they say. Tis true, but let it not be known, My Eyes are somewhat dimmish grown: For Nature, always in the Right, To your Decays adapts my Sight,

PAGE 63

51 And till I see them with these Eyes, Whoever says you have them, lyes. ( Stella's Birthday, 1724-25 ) Similarly, numbers of critics have reminded us of the rigorously objective viewpoint which Swift proposed to a young lady as a guide for her married life. Often cited, for example, has been this advice. I will add one Thing, although it be a little out of Place, which is to desire that you will learn to value and esteem your Husband, for those good Qualities which he really possesseth; and not to fancy others in him, which he certainly hath not. For, although this latter be generally understood for a Mark of Love, yet it is indeed nothing but affectation, or ill judgment . •'^ But rarely cited, though from the same letter, is that passage in which Swift advised the young woman to pursue learning, not only because it would increase her husband's regard for her judgment and opinion, but also because. Swift tells her. The Endowments of your Mind will even make your Person more agreeable to him; and when you are alone, your Time will not lie heavy upon your Hands, for want of some trifling amusement. -' What I think is clear from these "matched sets" of examples--and they might easily be multiplied--is that though Swift honored the man who saw clearly and objectively, he also recognized the validity of certain kinds of subjective truths. He knew, that is, that beauty and, perhaps, truth is often in the eye of the beholder. Indeed, even aspects of Swift's thought which do not immediately appear subjective can often bear very subjective applications. Thus, as Orrery perceived. Swift's often repeated maxim, "Act what is right and do not mind what the world says," might itself be dangerously subjective, since it can make not only the

PAGE 64

52 responsibility for individual conduct, but ultimately the actual determination of values a matter of individual interpretation. But Orrery perceived this possible application of Swift's maxim much later than Esther, to whom Swift had taught it. "You had once a maxim, "Esther remarked to Swift when she would encourage ' his attention and diminish his reticence, "to do what was right and not mind what the world said. I wish you would stick to it now."^^ It was, of course, Esther's misfortune to be unsuccessful, and Swift proved reticent for a host of reasons, some of which we know, some, probably, not. Yet there can be, I tnink, no doubt that Swift loved her: indeed, he was even willing, on occasion, to spin out love's logic for her; to evaluate her by the only standard she wished to be judged by, the subjective truth of his affection for her. "What beasts in pettycoats," he tells her in a famous passage. are the most excellent of these women whom I daily see when I compare them to you. When I am in their company I cannot but observe that they fall miserably short of you in every way. Are they, I must ask myself, even of the same sex or species as yourself. ^^ Presumably, when Swift wrote this passage, and others like it, he felt he was telling the truth. But he knew, too, that he was telling only one kind of truth, and a very special kind at that. And he knew that a coldly objective view of his relationship with Esther must include the disparity of their ages, stations and temperaments, just as coldly objective view of Vanessa herself must include her impatient, splenetic temperament and her often total lack of discretion. Of course, there is something horribly unfair in first

PAGE 65

53 Celling a young woman to "do what was right and not mind what the world said," and then to berate her with, "You once bragged you were very discrete. Where is it gone?" But that is exactly Swift's dilemma. On the one hand he found, and recorded, his responsiveness to Esther; on the other hand he could not keep from seeing, and recording, an exact state of her qualities. Because the two accounts did not correspond, Swift's letters to Esther vary, as has long been recognized, from warm affection and abundant praise to something very like disdain and stern reprimand. Esther, of course, had no such double account and was, therefore, the much more perfect lover. Indeed, Esther seems in all her humors to judge Swift in all of his by exactly that subjective standard by which she passionately wished to be judged. I firmly believe, could I know your thoughts, I should find that you have often in a rage wished me religious, hoping then I should have paid my devotions to Heaven, But that would not spare you, for was I an enthusiast, still you'd be the deity I should worship. What marks are there of a deity but what you are to be known by? You are present everys^/here; your dear image is always before [my] eyes; sometimes you strike m.e with that prodigious awe, I tremble with fear; at other times a charming compassion shines through your countenance, which revives my soul.^^ But though Esther's love for Swift is so perfect as to remind us (and Esther, Coo, perhaps) of Heloise's love for Abalard, nevertheless. Swift, with his heats and chills, his double accounts, his affections and reticence, seems the more human. That is why Cadenus and Vanessa , in its painfully amusing account of the incompatibility of love with wisdom, has a universal validity.

PAGE 66

54 IV When Swift, in the opening lines of Candenus and Vanessa , causes the nymphs' advocate to complain before Venus' court. That, Cupid now has lost his Art, Or blunts the point of every Dart: His altar now no longer smokes, His Mother's Aid no youth invokes, (7-10) he is simply recording the enfeebled condition of Veaus' Kingdom, in England, after practically a century and a half of constant attack. "Free thinkers," as the advocate goes on to charge, had indeed been at work on the principles of love's religion, with the result that, at the beginning of the eighteenth century, the most prominent fact about Venus' kingdom, with its religion, laws, courts and mythology, is that it no longer could provide a possible metaphor for the reality of human love. That is why, to stress the obvious, we are amused by the high flying legalese which characterizes the opening speech of the nymphs' advocate. It is not the complaint he brings which is funny; "Now love," he tells us . . .is dwindled to Intrigue, And Marriage grown a Moneyleague, (13-14) and that is serious enough; but it is rather the idea that such a complaint is susceptible to the language of legal arbitration which amuses us. Just because we find such a combination of law and love amusingly irrelevant, Swift can count on our grinning

PAGE 67

55 when he drops his advocate, with a bathetic plump, from the heights of legal posturing. Which Crimes aforesaid, (with her leave) Were (as he humbly did conceive) Against our Sov' reign Lady's Peace, Against the Statute in that Case, Against her Dignity and Crown: Then Prayed an Answer and sat down. (15-20) There is, however, nothing inherently funny in the mixture of law and love which characterizes the courts and kingdom of Venus. A glance at the sixteenth century composition, The Court of Venus , and at its sources, makes clear that men of the sixteenth century and, of course, of earlier centuries, could take very seriously exactly the mixture of law and love which Swift, at the beginning of the eighteenth century, found a natural target for parody. That Swift intended us to be amused and that we are amused points rather to a radical shift of sensibility 1 8 which occurred in the seventeenth century. This shift, which is first fully recorded in the lyric verse of the Stuart poets, operated to dissolve any possible connection between law and love. For the Stuart poets are the first to fully affirm that the phenomenon of love has absolutely nothing to do with external reality but rather is a function of only internal reality, of the highly subjective needs of the lover himself. "Why slightest thou," asks Henry King, in significantly legal language. . . .what I approve? Thou art no Peer to try my love. Nor canst discern where her form lies, Unless thou saw'st her with my eyes. ^9

PAGE 68

56 And if this be true, all courts of love, even that court of Venus herself, must be irrevocably useless. Of course, this sort of observation was not unheard of before the seventeenth century. Presumably, so long as men have loved at all they have noticed that sexual love does not often smoothly follow the path of rational choice. Thus, for example, Horace notes that Barine's patent unfaithfulness does not diminish her attractiveness either for himself or for any man who desires her. Had ever any penalty for violated vows visited thee, Barine; didst thou ever grow uglier by a single blackened tooth or spotted nail, I'd trust thee now. But with thee, no sooner hast thou bound thy perfidious head by promises than thou shinest forth much fairer and art the cynosure of all eyes when thou appearest. (II, 8, 1-8, trans. C.E. Bennett) Horace understands, then, something of the fundamental irrationality of love and desire, but he does not like it. He would much rather that he might love the she whom he should, or better still, that the she whom he loved would be as she ought. And it is this perfectly human desire for a rational love, a love founded on tested merit, which is given metaphoric form, in so many medieval and renaissance poems, by the proofs, trials, laws, rules, in short, by the whole framework of Venus' courts and kingdom. In turn, it is the psychological validity of precisely this sort of love which, in the late sixteenth century and through the seventeenth century, came increasingly to be questioned. "Tell me where the beauty lies," one anonymous poet, remembering Shakespeare, asks.

PAGE 69

57 In my mistress? Or in my eyes? Is she fair, I made her so Beauty doth from liking grow. And that this highly subjective point of view became a common place of restoration lyricism can be confirmed by an examination of almost any restoration song-book. Suckling, for example, not only observed on one occasion that. 'Tis not the meat, but 'tis the appetite, Makes eating a delight, And If I like one dish More than another, that a pheasant is. but he was willing to extend his subjectivity far enough uo set, in truly amazing detail, the following dilemma: Each man his humour hath, and, faith, 'tis mine. To love that woman which I now define. Her nose I'd have a foot long, not above, With pimples embroider 'd for those I love; And at the end a comely pearl of snot. Considering whether ic should fall or not'. I have my utmost wish; and having so Judge whether I am happy, yea or no 7^2 And here, I think, Suckling sets for us, though in brutal terms, that dilemma which, as we shall see, is also the central problem in Swift's Cadenus and Vanessa . Our answer to the question posed by the final line of Suckling's poem, "Judge whether I am happy, yea or no?" must be "yea": the narrator of this poem has, after all, the woman he wants (his "utmost wish") and therefore must be happy. Yet, even as we say that the narrator is a happy man we cannot, I suspect, help thinking that since the woman the narrator has is a perfect horror when judged by any standard but his own, he ought not be happy. That is, we finally don't want to think that love is so subjective, so arbitrary, that a

PAGE 70

58 man might be happy with the awful hag described in Suckling's poem. We Vv,'ant love to be more objective, more rational than Suckling's lines suggest it is; and our own discomfort at love's arbitrariness thus becomes Suckling's joke on us. Swift, certainly, understood as well as Suckling that sexual love is fundamentally unreasonable and has nothing to do with absolute standards. "No wise man," Swift once noted, "ever married from the 23 dictates of reason," and several of Swift's epigrams insist on this same point. The glass, by lovers nonsense blurr'd Dims and obscures our sight: So when our Passions Love hath stirr'd It darkens Reason's light. But Swift is no Suckling. Suckling, as we have seen above, cooly forces us to see that, though we wish love were rational and objective, it is arbitrary, standardless and subjective. And having made his point. Suckling leaves us with the discomforting dilemma that love's arbitrariness raises in our own minds. Swift, on the other hand, incorporating this same dilemma within Cadenus and Vanessa , does not so much offer us a dilemma as struggle with one himself, and it is Swift's own struggles which give an order and coherence to a story which is otherwise, as Goldsmith remarked, apparently, "ill conceived in itself." Thus, although the debate between the shepherds and nymphs arrives at no conclusion, it is not, therefore, barren of meaning. Rather, it is an excellent demonstration that love is not susceptible to rules, laws, and legal arbitration. Or again, although the debate between Cadenus and Vanessa ends at stalemate, that is itself Swift's

PAGE 71

59 best demonstration that love is intransigently subjective and completely unamenable to arbitration. What makes these demonstrations so terribly convincing is precisely that they stem from failures. The narrative of the poem itself, that is, struggles to affect a reconciliation between love and wisdom^ and we cannot therefore help but feel Swift's sympathies are engaged on behalf of this reconciliation. That it is not, therefore, effected, must impress us far more deeply with love's subjective nature than does even Suckling's poem The Deformed Mistress , examined briefly above. For we cannot forget, I think, that Swift's desire to effect this reconciliation, and his failure to do so, have a deeply personal aspect. Finally, that is, Cadenus and Vanessa is Swift's very honest, yet most tactful explanation to Esther Vonhomerigh that he fails to wholly love her as she wished him to love her not because he does not desire to do so, and not because she is unworthy of him, but because, simply and sadly, he does not so love her. This failure, by the very nature of love, he cannot help. Something of Swift's struggle to establish a mean between, on the one hand. Suckling's extreme statement of love's subjectivity and, on the other hand, the highly idealistic, self-deceiving and psychologically naive assumption that love ought follow absolute and rational standards, can be seen in the shepherd's retort to the nymphs' accusations. To the nymphs' accusation that shepherds have ceased from loving, the shepherds' advocate, we remember, replies by admitting

PAGE 72

60 the charge but laying "all the fault on t'other sex." This strategy is dictated by the shepherd's demand that their nymphs be goddesslike, a demand which in turn is rooted in their highly idealistic view of love-A Fire celestial, chaste, refin'd. Conceived and kindled in the Mind; Which having found an equal flame, Unites, and both become the same; In different Breasts together burn. Together both to ashes turn. (29-34) Swift is, of course, aware that the shepherds, by placing such lofty requirements on the nature of love, imagine a passion which has no existence. Therefore, their advocates' description of this passion, as one which infallibly reduces its devotees to ashes, is both apt and laughable. Such passion, as the shepherds' advocate goes on to tell us, is nowhere discoverable in the world but was once sung by ancient poets. And this description makes it a near relative, I suspect, of what Swift, in his own person called, "that ridiculous passion which hath no being but in Play-books and romances," and which he prudently advised a recently married young woman against believing in. But, although Swift holds up to ridicule the psychologically naive view of love presented in the shepherds' complaint, the entire complaint is not made ridiculous. Rather, that part of the complaint which is directed against the nymphs has a very convincing ring since the frivolities which the shepherds accuse the nymphs of following to the exclusion of everything else are exactly those for which Swift, in his own person, often berated that "tribe of bold. 24

PAGE 73

61 ,,95 swaggering, rattling ladies whoui all his life he despised. Thus the condemnation of women spoken by the shepherds' advocate: Hence vje conclude no women's Hearts Are won by Virtue, Wits, and Parts: Nor are the Men of Sense to blame. For Breasts incapable of Flame: The Fault must on the Nymohs be placed. Grown so corrupted in their Taste, (61-67) is sympathetically echoed by Swift himself in his epistle to Lord Harley on his Marriage : For such is all the sex's flight. They fly from learning, wit and light: They fly, and none can overtake But some gay coxcomb, or a rake. (19-23) ^\Tiat emerges, then, even in the opening speeches of Cadenus and Vanessa , is Swift's attempt to honor two standards of love. On the one hand Swift, in good restoration fashion, is parodying Venus' Court and the high-handed methods with which both advocates apply rules to love. On the other hand. Swift is in sympathy with the shepherds' plea that love ought to respond only to an actual good and that, therefore, vjomen ought to be truly worthy of the love of a good man. Indeed, Venus' experiment is nothing other than an attempt to adjust these two standards to each other. For Venus, by endowing Vanessa with the perfection of every virtue, creates a woman whom, she hopes, all men needs must love, but whom it will be perfectly reasonable to love. Of course, Venus' experiment is, we remember, a total failure. For, although Vanessa is endowed with every virtue which, if virtue

PAGE 74

62 could command love, ought to have made her universally adored, still, as Venus sadly complains, Vanessa, "Never could one lover find." (867). And the moral of this is obvious: no matter what the shepherds claim, no matter how much men wish to love reasonably, sexual love is not reasonable. Rather, love has nothing to do with the true value of the one loved and everything to do wiih the values of the lover. And, in fact, this outcome has been predictable from the beginning of the poem, for, from the beginning of the poem, Venus and Pallas are professed foes and no possible reconciliation is ever offered between these goddesses of love and of wisdom. But if this outcome is obvious, we must not therefore miss its pathos in Cadenus and Vanessa . R£.ised on lyrics like, "I don't know why I love you like I do, I don't know why, I just do," and assuming naturally that love is subjective, it is possible, I suspect, for us to miss Swift's implied regret in lines like, "thus, to the world's eternal shame,/ The Queen of Beauty lost her aim" (431-432). But for us not to credit the regret in these lines would be a mistake, I think; for our understanding of the poem depends upon our recognizing that Swift's sympathies are clearly engaged by Venus and her experiment. For although only by deceit is Venus able to enlist Wisdom's aid towards endowing Vanessa and although Pallas proves to be perfectly right in asking her scornfully rhetorical question, . . . how can heav'nly wisdom prove An instrument to earthly love, (295-96) nevertheless, Pallas' scorn only makes more affecting the truth she tells. And we are, therefore, against all wisdom, made to participate in Venus' sorrow when,

PAGE 75

63 Too late with grief she understood Pallas had done more harm than good. (435-436) And indeed, in the defeat of Venus' experiment are involved a goodly number of cherished assumptions. Thus, for example, while it is true that Swift, by couching in trivial terms Venus' naive assumption that Vanessa's virtue must inspire universal love and imitation, made that assumption appear just as naive as it is; nevertheless, for all its simple-mindedness, there is something appealing about Venus' expectation that, Offending Daughters oft would hear Vanessa' s Praise rung in their Ear: Miss Betty , when she does a Fault, Lets fall her knife, or spills the Salt, Will thus be by her Mother chid; 'Tis what Vanessa never did. (240-245) Of course, love does not prove to be, in Cadenus and Vanessa , what it is assumed to be in so many romances both past and present--an instrument capable of reforming men's manners and morals. Those degraded shepherds and nymphs whom Venus hoped to reform through Vanessa's great example ironically find Vanessa lacking in knowledge, wit and judgment. Their judgment was, upon the Whole, --That lady is the dullest Soul-Then tipt their Forehead in a jeer, As v;ho should say--she wants it here. (358-361) And a)',a Ln, tlie moral of this is perfectly clear. Love cannot be an effective instrument of reformation because love has

PAGE 76

64 nothing to do with a reasonable appreciation of actual value, but is dependent solely on the nature of the lover. "Great examples," as Swift observes, "are but vain,/ Where ignorance begets disdain" (436-437). But, because Swift has put Venus' expectations in such a homely and appealing strain, there is something distinctly disappointing in discovering that Venus has, as Pallas prophesied to her, deceived herself, instead of Pallas. Pallas, is perfectly right, of course, and as she goes on to claim, "love" and "sense" have never had anything to do with one another; but there is, nevertheless, a pathos in that truth which Pallas seems incapable of appreciating buc which Swift, I think, has made perfectly plain. The source of this pathos, is, of course, most fully explored in the relationship of Vanessa and Cadenus, To be sure, everywhere in the narration of their relationship love's subjectivity and fundamental irrationality are insisted on„ Vanessa, for example, falls in love not because of the reasonable appreciation which she might have for Cadenus' gifts but rather through the violent and distressing efforts of Cupid. And once she is in love, Vanessa's reason is palpably affected, for, as we have already noted above, she comes badly to overestimate Cadenus' gifts while unmistakably blurring his failings, Cadenus now no more appears Declin'd in Health, advanc'd in Years She fancies Musick in his Tongue, Nor further looks, but thinks him young. (527-530) Now, plainly, to fancy thus is not reasonable: it is to make of Cadenus what Vanessa wants him to be, and even Vanessa herself must admit that the real cause of her love is not, ultimately, Cadenus,

PAGE 77

65 but herself. "Self love," she says, . . . in Nature rooted fast, Attends us first, and leaves us last: K'hy she likes him, admire not at her. She loves herself, and that's the matter. (684-687) Yet, Vanessa's attempts to reconcile her love for Cadenus with reason are enormously appealing. Because, she argues, those virtues which Cadenus taught and she, by the dictates of reason, accepted, have now become her character, she, in loving herself, must infallibly love him. Reason is thus, she may conclude, "her guide in love." Vanessa's arguments are as ingenious as they are attractive, and certainly we must admit about them what even Cadenus admits, that we "at least could hardly wish them wrong." And yet they are wrong, and Vanessa herself indicates the point at which they err. For, seeking to turn everything to her argument, Vanessa compares her love for Cadenus to his reverence for the authors of "ancient days," (Those authors he so oft' had nam'd For learning, wit and wisdom famed.) (690-691) But not even Vanessa can completely equate her passion for Cadenus to his for ancient authors. A scholar's feelings for such authors vjere, she knew, esteem, respect, devotion, and that sort of love which she rightly characterizes in remarking that were such an author now alive, "How all would for his friendship strive." (701) These are indeed the marks of esteem which reason can grant to apparent virtue, and were these love, love were reasonable. But

PAGE 78

66 this, it is made ironically clear, is neither love nor what Vanessa wants. For Cadenus offers her precisely Friendship at its greatest Height, A constant rational delight. On Virtue's Basis fixed to last When Love's Allurements long are past, (780-783) and promises further that he His want of passion will redeem With gratitude, respect, esteemo (786-787) And this offer Vanessa rejects out of hand. Her love for Cadenus springs from her own self-love and, finally, has nought to do with Cadenus' real qualities: no less passionate a commitment from Cadenus will satisfy her. Yet it is Vanessa, I think, rather than Cadenus, whom Swift has created to most engage our sympathies. True, Vanessa was able no more than Venus to reconcile love and reason, and Vanessa, in her subjective and passionate commitment to Cadenus shows herself willing to badly distort logic, and indeed, "all nature" in order to effect her ends. Yet, if the basis of Vanessa's love is irrational selflove, it is self-love more generously employed, one feels, than that love of self which guides Cadenus' actions. For both Cadenus' fear of gossip, "of what the world will say," and his susceptibility to flattery are aspects of his own most unhappy variant of self-love-pride. And as Vanessa has mistaken reason as her "guide in love" so Cadenus subverts reason to be his guide in pride, and the result is clearly much less admirable as he.

PAGE 79

67 Const 'ring the Passion she had shown. Much to her praise, more to his own, (764-765) concludes that, Nature in him had merit placed, In her, a most judicious taste. (766-767) But neither must x-ie judge Cadenus more harshly than does the poem itself. True, the mask of reason with which Cadenus attempts to cover his own self-interest is somehow always awry. Thus he, having offered to a woman whom he does not love what he claims is a higher good, "friendship. . .a constant rational delight," continues on, with splendid inconsistency to offer her. o . .that Devotion we bestov;. When Goddesses appear below. (788-789) But, even though this offer is both inconsistent and just what Vanessa does not want, there is something touching and generously redeeming in it. For finally, Cadenus is really not much different from anyone else in the cast of this poem: all the cast are engaged in the same funny, pitiable and human attempt to make truth submit to their own subjective needs and views. The shepherds and nymphs, reasonably blaming each other while holding themselves utterly blameless; Venus, by reason, defending her kingdom; Pallas, uncharitably but by reason defending hers; Vanessa reasonably defending her love and Cadenus reasonably defending his failure to love: each is a miniature proof that man is, at best, but dimly conscious of, and capable of controlling, his own nature. And yet they all.

PAGE 80

68 somehow, demand compassion from us because we are all, I suspect, a good deal like them. And so, apparently was Swift, who compassionately made them and thus formed this, the gentlest of satires.

PAGE 81

NOTES 1. The Collected Works of Oliver Goldsmith , ed. Arthur Friedman, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1966), V, 329. 2. John Boyle, Earl of Corke and Orrery, Remarks or. the Life and Writings of Dr. Jonathan Swift (London, 1752), p. 73. 3. Patrick Delany (London, 1754), p. 113, 4. Deane Swift, An Essay Upon the Life, Writir.,;o and Character of Dr. Jonathan Swift (London, 1755), p. 244. 5. SEL, IV (1964), 485-496. 6. Irvin Ehrenpreis, Swift: the man, his works, and the a:^e , 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1662-), II, 312. 7. Dates from 1713 to 1719 have been proposed for che completion of Cadenus and Vanessa . For a recenc review of the problems involved see The Collecced Poems of Jonj.Lhan Swift , ed. Joseph Horrell, 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1953), I, 388. 8. Swift: the man, his works, and the age , II, 641-644. 9. Vanessa and her correspondence with Jonathan Swift , ed. A. Martin Freeman (Boston and New York, 192i), p. 128. 10. Ibid ., p. 110-111. 11. For an example of just how sophisticated a writer Esther was, one might note that in the quotation just cited in my text Esther, probably consciously, is echoing Theocritus' Second Idyl . That is pretty good for "a brat who," Swift said, "never read." 12. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift , ed. Herbert Davis et aa., 13 vols. (Oxford, 1957), IX, 94. 13. Ibid ., p. 90. 14. Vanessa and her correspondence with Jonathan Swift , p. 103. 15. Ibid ., p. 109. 69

PAGE 82

70 16. Ibid ., p. 99. 17. Ibid ., pp. 139-140. 18. I am here and through the remainder of my chapter deeply indebted to H. M. Richmond's The School of Love: ThP Evolution of the Stua rt Love Lyric rPr^•nr^^nn_ K^r. ^.t^.^^ 1964) . 19, Cited from Richmond, p. 1S5. 20. Cited from Richmond, p. 189. -^The Wor ks of Sir John Suckling , ed. A. Hamilton Thomson M. A. (London, 1910), p. 15. 22. Ibid ., pp. 59-60. 23. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift . IX, 263. 24. Ibid ., p. 89. 25. Ibid ., p. 93.

PAGE 83

CHAPTER THREE On Poetry: A Rapsody I None of Swift's poems has been so consistently praised as has On Poetry: A Rapsody . Certain sections, at least, of the poem have been abundantly anthologized, and the poem has teen traditionally characterized as "one of Swift's chief claims to che title of poet." Indeed, one passage from the poem has been so often cited as to have transcended both Swift and his Rapsody ; the passage. Swift's famous comparison of fleas and poets, has achieved through frequent quotation an independent state of famous anonymity as an example of eighteenth century verse. The vermin only teaze and pinch Their Foes superiour by an Inch. So, Nat'ralists observe, a Flea Hath smaller Fleas that on him prey. And these have smaller yet to bite 'em, And so proceed ad infinitum : Thus ev'ry poet in his Kind, Is bit by him that comes behind. (335-42) Curiously enough, however, although the poem has remained popular since the time of Goldsmith's praise of it as "one of the best versified poems in our language and the most masterly production of its author," it has not, to the best of my knowledge, ever been made the subject of much close study. Rather, the observations which critics have usually flung in passing praise of the Rapsody are at once impressionistic and in surprising con71

PAGE 84

72 tradicCion v;ith each other. Thus, to choose two fairly recent examples, Ricardo Quintana has praised the poem by claiming that "of such high voltage is the satire, that the level of intensity, instead of declining as the piece continues, rises steadily from couplet to couplet,' while on the other hand, Maurice Johnson has maintained of the same poem that its "tone is so constantly level and chilly that it seemed unbearably insulting to Walpole and the others it named. ""^ Such vague and confused contrariness in praise of Swift's Rapsody has served only, I suspect, to blunt the force, subtlety and point of the poem, just as frequent quotation, in usually insipid contexts, of the famous lines cited above has elevated them to a bad, because vacuous, eminence. What has been missed in such criticism can be indicated by simply noting that these famous lines, though almost tamed by mere quotation, are really the center of Swift's description of a society so vicious that in it each man's hand is lifted against each man's hand, that in it Each Poet of inferiour Size On you shall rail and criticize; And try to tear you Limb from Limb, While others do as much for him. (331-34) This vicious society, I will argue, is the subject of the Rapsody and is one of Swift's most powerful depictions of the catastrophic results he thought to be implicit in the style of life he saw about him, a style he thought corruptive enough to reduce human life, as he tells us (beginning at line 319), to Hobbes' state of nature--to a situation where the life of man is but one long combat.

PAGE 85

73 Perhaps the most obvious characteristic of this combative world is that in it ail notion of vocation has apparently been lost. Swift begins the Rapsodv with the observation that all men have run mad after the office of poet, All Human Race would fain be Wits , And Millions miss, for one that hits, (1-2) and he goes on to depict a world in which all other offices as well have fallen into either abuse or desuetude. It is a world where prelates thrive "who no God believe," public ministers minister not, and no king rules. And because it is a world where all sense of office has been lost it is also a world where the very order of society, degree itself, has disappeared. Thus, "statesmen" grow indistinguishable from "south sea jobbers," "pickpurses" from judges, and "duchesses" from common whores. Ultimately, it is a world where even the most fundamental of all human distinctions and degrees, those which spring from family, from the relationship of parent to child and husband to wife, are perverted and overvjhelmed. A vivid insight into the subject and method of the Rapsodv can be gleaned by simply watching Swift build into the poem, by allusion to familial relationship, a sense of the way the society he depicts has grown corrupt. For in the world which Swift portrays in the Rapsodv . neither a loving relationship of husband to wife, nor legitimate parentage and the ties implied by it, are to be found. Promiscuity and bastardy, rather, introduced very early I.:'. to ti.i: y.'^\. \jy u/s-^rA&tiT.z ^'-^i^ whcse iofaats are

PAGE 86

74 . . .dropt, the spurious Pledges, Of Gipsies litt'ring under hedges, (37-38) provide the defining metaphors for most of the relationships and activities described in the Rapsodv . Like the actual hordes of beggars and gypsies who are so often anxiously mentioned by seventeenth and early eighteenth century preachers and whose masterless and wandering condition was thought to be an evil portent for society and a corruptive example to responsible men,^ the metaphor of familial disintegration infects every strata of society and level of endeavor described in this poem. Yet, always in this background of bastardy and disinheritance there are reminders, in the very terms Swift uses to create this background, that in well ordered societies it is the family, in its naturalness and mutual loving responsibilities, which has always been the supreme example for the conduct of even the highest offices of society. Thus, to cite the most obvious example of the use of this metaphor, the writing of bad poetry is repeatedly imaged in the Rapsodv as a type of misbegetting and unnatural parentage. And the perversions implicit in this comparison are especially pointed since, in the eighteenth century the writing of not bad, but good, poetry was often described in terms which suggest procreation. Thus, for example. Pope defines the operation of true wit as "a justness of thought and a faculty of expression; or (in the midwife's phrase) a perfect conception with an easy delivery."^ In the Rapsodv. Pope's basic comparison of writing to begetting is maintained but, since Swift is describing the generation of false

PAGE 87

75 wit, the terns are changed, and thus the inport of the comparison is reversed. The poets Swift describes "prostitute" their muses and the result, of course, is bastardy. The Product of your Toil and Sweating; A Bastard of your own begetting. (115-16) As Swift developes this metaphoric comparison of bad poets and bad poetry with promiscuity, bastardy, and parental and filial ungratefulness, the moral ugliness which he thought was involved in writing bad poetry becomes increasingly clear. Thus, he points out through this metaphor that the writer of bad verses not only commits an unnatural act in first v;riting but is then, all too often, forced to compound his first sin with another act even more unnatural: he is forced, in order to prevent discovery, to commit the metaphorical equivalent of child abandonment, "If you find," the bad poet is warned. . . .the general Vogue Pronounces you a stupid Rogue; . . .praise the Judgment of the Town, And help your self to run it [your poem] down. Give up your fond paternal pride. Nor argue on the weaker side. . . . (121,122,126-29) Thus, the writing of bad poetry comes, in the Rapsody , to involve more than just writing bad poetry, it becomes a way of prostituting one's moral sense as well. As Swift indicates early in the poem, maintaining still a metaphor based upon a perversion of familial relationship, the condition of poetry in the England this poem describes is like the condition of a disinherited family line.

PAGE 88

76 aad a line not only disinherited but whose portion has been attainted—lost through the sin of its progenitors. The poet's "portion," that is, inheritance, was never more than "one annual hundred pounds" (the laureate's grant) and now, Swift remarks, there is . . .not so much as in Remainder, Since Gibber brought in an Attainder; Forever fixt by Right Divine (A Monarch's Right) on Grubstreet Line. (56-59) Swift's point, of course, is that the unhappy appointment of so unworthy a man as Gibber to the laureatship, though the appointment is approved by royalty, disaccredits the whole race of poets. But promiscuity, bastardy and disinheritance are not, as I have already indicated, reserved in this poem to the office of poetry. Rather, Swift insists, these perversions reach to the highest of England's political offices, and much of the irony which permeates that praise of George II and his family, with which Swift concludes the Rapsody . turns upon the contrast between the familial harmony which ought to characterize England's ruling family and the scandalously public disharmony which actually characterized both that family and its rule. For Swift's first readers, then, much of Swift's mock praise of George II served only as a reminder that George was as corrupt a natural husband and father as he was a kingly father. Thus, for example, the praise of Queen Garoline as The Consort of his Throne and Bed A perfect Goddess born and bred, (425-426)

PAGE 89

77 must have reminded those readers only that George was often unfaithful to that bed. And the praise of George's eldest son, Fredrick Louis, Prince of Wales, as manly. t-Jhat Early Manhood has he shown. Before his downy Beard was grown. must have seemed a very thinly veiled allusion to that prince's undistinguished and undistinguishing promiscuity. Thus, much of the irony of this whole closing passage works to locate in the royal family that corruption of familial harmony which was first introduced into the poem through society's pariahs. Swift, in so closing the poem, completes a metaphor of disorder which runs from alien gypsies to England's sovereign power. But even as it minutely records this disorder, the Rapsody itself is a poem of affirmation. For, as I shall argue throughout this essay, the perversely inharmonious world of foolish men which the Rapsody describes is judged in the very terms of its description. Thus, to cite an example we have already seen, the whole efficaciousness of Swift's description of the Rapsody' s world in terms of promiscuity, bastardy and disinheritance depends upon our seeing, in the midst of Swift's irony, his insistence that the great pattern of well ordered states has traditionally been proper familial relationship. Our mode of reading the Rapsody , then, must be something like the method Edward Young commended in reading Scripture; it must be read by measuring its descriptions of men against what is requires of man in order that its "Satire on the weakness and iniquity of man "^ may be of profit.

PAGE 90

73 xl Like Pope's Dur.ciad , which Swift conspicuously footnotes (at line 393) in his poem, the Rapsody was written in an age when "Paper. . .became so cheap and printers so numerous, that a deluge of authors cover'd the land. "8 As "for poets," as Swift puts it. . , , (you can never want them. Spread thro ' Augusta Trinobantuin ) Computing by their Pecks of Coals, Amount to just Nine Thousand Souls. (279-282) And like the very beggars and gypsies, to whose fortunes Swift unfavorably compares the fate of poets, the everswelling hordes of bad rhymers emblemized, to Augustans like Swift and Pope, an entire society strayed loose from its traditional moorings, a race of men vjandered from their siraplest self-interest. Indeed, the first seventy lines of the Rapsody are permeated with Swift's astonishment at such men as have run mad after the name of poet, since, as Swift assures us, the office of poet has never worked to the apparent worldly good of any man so unfortunate to be called to serve in it. Not beggars' brats, nor shoe blacks, nor sons of whores. Swift insists, are . . .so disqualify'd by Fate To Rise in Church , or Law, or State , As he, whom Phoebus in his Ire Hath bla5:ted v;ith Poetic Fire. (39-42)

PAGE 91

79 Svjift demonstrates this thesis throughout the poem by listing a multitude of misfortunes which attend upon the poet's station. Of these miseries the most probable, of course, was the brand of blockhead--but it was not, by far, the worst. For, as Swift's mock lament should remind us. Poor Starvling Bard, how small thy Gains, How unproportion'd to thy Pains, (59-60) grinding poverty was often enough in eighteenth century London the lot of those who pretended to letters. Indeed, even prominence in the world of letters, Swift makes clear, was no assurance of either political or financial security. Pope, Swift notes, being Catholic, could not approach the court from which Gay was ultimately banished and in which Edward Young could eke out a living only so long as he could continue to . . .torture his Invention, To flatter Knaves or lose his Pension . (309-310) Given, then, these conditions we must share Swift's puzzlement when, in the Rapsody ' s first stanza, he wonders why men, even against the grain of their abilities, attempt to be poets and asks. What Reason can there be assign'd. For this Perverseness in the Mind? (11-12) Curiously, however, Swift has already formally answered this question within the first four lines of the Rapsody . "Pride," he has remarked, "was never known to spread so wide." And it is

PAGE 92

80 indicative of hox^7 far removed is the conduct of the race of wouldbe wits from Swift's own vision of man's proper role that, having once ansv/ered it, he raises the same question all over again. Here, that is, as throughout the Rapsody , we can sense not only Swift's anger, but also his astonishment, at that man who, having a choice, would . . .where his Genious least inclines. Absurdly bend his whole designs. (23-24) Thus, although it has been lamented that in the Rapsody there are no clear norms to judge those men whom Swift satirizes, in fact. Swift's own conviction that each man is so peculiarly endowed for his proper role that it takes an astoundingly energetic act of willful perversity to avoid that role is made clear enough even in the first paragraph of the poem. In that paragraph Swift compares man's chronic failure to follow his own natural bent with the ease with which "Brutes find out where their talents lie." The comparison was a popular one through the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; Swift might have found it in several places in both Montaigne and Pascal and, of course, he uses it in several places himself. But in the Rapsody Swift works an illuminating variation on the standard use of this comparison. Customarily, in both Montaigne and Pascal, for example, the comparison is used to remind proud man that in some ways, at least, the condition of brutes is preferable to the condition of man, to remind men that, though they consider themselves lords of the universe, in some ways nature has been a kinder mother to brutes (by making them

PAGE 93

31 instinctively aware of their abilities) than to mankind. Swift's use of this coraparison is, of course, like those of Montaigne and Pascal, directed against man's pride, but his emphasis is different from theirs; for Swift's point is not that nature has been a kinder mother to brutes than to man but that man is simply the most perverse of nature's children, the only creature, as Swift observes, Who, led by Folly , combats Nature ; Who, when She loudly cries Forbear , With Obstinacy fixes there. (20-22) Fully informed by nature, man, in Swift's view, insists on going wrong. And therefore, unlike the dog which. Swift tells us, knows to "turn aside" Xvzhen it "sees the ditch too deep and wide," man not only leaps into the ditch, but, as we shall see later in the poem, even attempts to invert the whole world in order to make a ridiculous virtue out of his bemiring failure. With Heads to Points the Gulph they enter, Link't perpendic ' lar to the Centre: And as their Heels elated rise. Their Heads attempt the nether Skies. (401-404) There is, however, both in Swift's certainty that each man has a particular role to play and in his condemnation of those would-be poets who undertake a vocation to which they are not called, something quite alien to a culture which, like ours, is secular. Generally, in twentieth century European and American literature, a choice of careers has been considered as a very complex process, since it has been understood to depend upon a

PAGE 94

82 large number of personal variables--Xvfhat will make a particular man happiest, most intellectually stimulated or most prosperous. One must simply observe that Swift had not this way of thinking; rather, as he makes abundantly clear in several of his sermons, and particularly in that sermon titled, The Duty of Mutual Sub -jection , a man's personal happiness was not and, from his view of the matter, simply could not be the primary consideration in the finding of a vocation. For Swift, a man's personal happiness was itself dependent upon another consideration, how useful a man might make his own advantages of wisdom, power or wealth to his neighbor. "If a man doth not use those advantages to the Good of the Publick," Swift observed. or to the Benefit of his Neighbour, it is certain he doth not deserve them; and consequently, that God never intended them for a Blessing to him; and on the other side, whoever doth employ his Talents as he ought, x^ill find by his own Experience, that they were chiefly lent him for the Service of others: for to the Service of others he will certainly employ them. •'••'• Indeed, Swift is willing to argue the proposition that each man's talent is a blessing to him only insofar as he is willing to devote it to the service of others even with respect to the gift of wisdom--a talent so often considered a good of itself. For Swift comments. Even great Wisdom is in the opinion of Solomon not a Blessing in itself: for in much Wisdom is much Sorrow; and Men of common understandings, if they serve God and mind their Callings, make fewer mistakes in ;:.'.e Conduct of Life than those who have better Heads. And yet. Wisdom is a mighty Blessing when it is applied to good Purposes, to instruct the Ignorant, to be a faithful Counsellor either in Publick or Private, to be a Director to Youth, and to many other Ends needless here 1 9 to mention. '^

PAGE 95

S3 By his potential usefulness, then, not by a vision of his potential happiness, must a man find his proper calling. As Swift argues, this world is providentially so ordered that the good of each particular man, and of society as a whole, is dependent upon the willingness of each particular man to serve his neighbor; as each man is dependent upon his neighbor's skills, so each man must bend his talents in subjection to his neighbor's good. Thus, Swift sums the matter up. As God hath contrived all the works of Nature to be useful, and in some manner a support to each other, by which the whole frame of the World under his Providence is preserved and kept up: so among Mankind, our particular Stations are appointed to each of us by God Almighty, wherein we are obliged to act, as far as our Power reacheth, towards the Good of the whole community. And he who doth not perform that Part Assigned to him towards advancing the Benefit of the Whole, in proportion to his Opportunities and Abilities, is not only a useless, but a very mischievous Member of the Publick; Because he taketh his Share of the Profit, and yet leaveth his Share of the Burden to be borne by others, which is the true principal cause of most Miseries and Misfortunes in Life. Measured, then, against Swift's view of a man's social responsibility, it should be obvious that the man who "absurdly bends his whole designs" against the inclinations of his own genius errs profoundly against both himself and his fellow man. He errs against himself because his own happiness, whether he acknowledges it or not, depends upon the serviceable utilization of his talents. And he errs against others since each abuse of one's own talents represents a choice, no matter how mistaken, of one's own good before the good of one's neighbor, and each such choice must weaken those bonds of mutual responsibility which are the very makings of a society. Thus, the "uncalled" poets Swift

PAGE 96

84 describes in the Rapsody are capable of working far worse than their own individual ill; they are, rather, at once active in and emblematic of a general social disaster. And their culpability extends beyond their having abandoned those offices and responsibilities to which their God-given talents gave them a natural and legitimate claim; for the office which they subsequently overrun simply by force of their numbers is exactly that office which traditionally has been considered primarily responsible for teaching what they, in even attempting poetry, have forgotten-the art, as Horace put it, to "bring all things to their proper native use. "^'^ III For Swift, then, what made doubly dangerous this headlong rush of men from their proper spheres to a vocation for which they had no calling is that it involved not only the abandonment of their several stations, but it meant also the adulteration by unfit men of an office of particular significance; an office for which. Swift assures us early in the Rapsody , many may feel called, but few are chosen. Not Empire to the Rising-Sun, By Valour, Conduct, Fortune won; Nor highest Wisdom in Debates For framing Laws to govern States; Nor Skill in Sciences profound, So large to graspe the Circle round; Such Heav'nly Influence require. As how to strike the Muses Lyre . (25-32) Unfortunately, critics seeing the scorn which Swift later in the Rapsody pours down upon the pretentions and pretentiousness of a

PAGE 97

85 city-full of bad poets, have been generally inclined to read that scorn back into the lines just cited; that is, Swift's critics have understood these lines to signify just the opposite of what they say. There is, however, no real reason to so interpret these lines, and there are good reasons, I think, why one should not do so. To begin with. Swift, in claiming that the office of poet required a special grace and therefore, implicitly, served a special function, does no more than state an intellectual commonplace which presumably he, as well as his contemporaries, inherited from the ages which preceded his. Horace had claimed that the particular function of poetry was Aut prodesse volunt, aut delectare and, as Thomas Maresca has recently argued, ''^ Horace's maxim was repeated, with special emphasis on and expansion of its first alternative, throughout the seventeenth century. "I could never," Ben Jonson asserted at the beginning of the century. . . .think the study of wisdom confined only to the philosopher or of piety to the divine, or of state to the politicke. But he that can fain a CommonWealth (v;hich is the poet) can gowne it with counsels, strengthen it with laws, correct it with judgments, inform it with religion and morals, is all of these. Wee do not require in him mere elocution, or an excellent faculty in verse, but the exact knowledge of all virtues, and their contraries, with the ability to render one Love'd and the other hated. ... At the end of the century, Dryden, speaking of tragedy, makes for it exactly the same claim which Jonson had made more generally for all poetry--and does so almost in Jonson 's words. The work of tragedy, Dryden claims, is to "reform manners by the delightful representation of human life," and it can only do this by teaching

PAGE 98

86 "love to virtue and hatred to vice; by shewing the rewards of one, and punishments of the other. . . [or, at least by] renderinjj virtue always amiable and vice detestable. "'^ This vision of poetry, as at once the repository of the particular truths of divinity, philosophy and politics and the ideal fountainhead for these truths is, in fact, the common denominator not only of one, but of more than two centuries of English critical thought and unifies tracts so disparate in time and diverse in spirit as Sidney's joyous Defense of Poesy and Sir William Temple's almost phlegmatic Of Poetry . As long as Horace's statement of the efficacy of poetry in teaching virtues and civility continued to command respect, it provided a common basis for critical thought. It was, therefore, as true for Dryden as for Sidney, for Pope as for Jonson, that poetry, because it illuminates the universal through the particular by teaching morality through clearly praiseworthy and blameworthy examples, is the ideal vehicle to render virtues love and their contraries hated. Indeed, just because poetry was considered to be at once so efficacious and so necessary in "insensibly influencing" a people to virtuous action, many a seventeenth century critic, like Sir William Davenant, felt he could confidently maintain that without the "help of the muses" no Divine or Leader of Armies, no Statesman or Judge could reasonably expect "a long or quiet satisfaction in government . "'•^ This whole background of ideas defining the nature of poetry and, more importantly, the ends poetry is to serve is, both by the title Swift chose to give his poem and by the way he chose to narrate most of it, made almost constantly available as a standard of judgment against which the activities imaged in the

PAGE 99

87 poem can be measured. The significance of the first half of the title is rather obvious; "On Poetry" refers back to that group of similarly titled works which, as they reflected Horace's moral view of poetry's function, reflected also the popular title of his fullest exposition of his view, the Ars Poetica . The significance of the second half of the title, however, may be somewhat obscured for a twentieth century reader since both the connotation and denotation of the word "rhapsody" have changed considerably since Swift used it. To the twentieth cencary reader the word normally denotes a specific type of music which is agreeable because of its charming lyrical freedom. In the eighceencn century, however, the word was often used to refer co any work which was distinguished by an unhappy disorder. Thus Pope, writing to Swift in 1729, defined by the word "rhapsody" the opposite of true wit's creative and orderly process: "This letter. . .will by a 20 rhapsody, it is many years since I wrote as a wit." As Swift, then, would have understood the words of his title, that title delineates the process his poem describes; a debasing and disordering of that very art which traditionally taught "the proper native use" of things and men." In the Rapsody , in fact, this disordering process is not only described, its very workings are, as we shall see, demonstrated. Up to line seventy, as we have already noted, the astonished narrator of the Rapsody seems to be Swift himself, and the mode of narration is a reasonably straight-forward description of disorder. After line seventy, however, the narration of the Rapsody becomes a subtler matter. We are introduced to a narrator who himself illustrates the actual force of disorder as it corrupts

PAGE 100

88 now poetry and now mankind, and the narration of the poem becomes, in fact, a perverse Ars Poetica , echoing, in its variegated subjects, oscillating style and in the very wording of its advice, that Horatian collection of practical advice, historical review, and social commentary which served as the foundation of that traditional view of poetry which we have discussed above. "How shall a new Attempter learn," Swift asks, moving into this new section, Of diff'rent Spirits to discern. And how distinguish, which is which. The Poet's Vein, or scribling Itch? Then hear an old experienc'd Sinner Instructing thus a young Beginner. (72-76) Thus Swift introduces what is probably some of the subtlest and most compact poetry he ever wrote by prefacing it with lines which are themselves perplexing. The narrator of the coming lines, Swift tells us here, is an "old experienc'd sinner." But, although Swift calls this narrator a sinner, it is not very clear why he does so, since he also tells us that the instructions which this sinner will offer are instructions in that art which is most necessary to all potential poets--and generalized, to all good men--the art of distinguishing between true poetic calling and a mere scribbling itch, between true vocation and mere whimsy. But, despite the initially confusing character of this introduction, it does provide us with at least one very strong indication of our new narrator's sinful and corruptive nature. In telling us that this old sinner will teach the skill, precisely, "of diff'rent Spirits to discern," Swift echoes a text, I Corinthians 12 ,

PAGE 101

89 which, given his general concern in the Rapsody for vocation, was very justly on his mind. The text is that particularly famous one in which Paul urges each man to be satisfied with his own particular spiritual gifts since, "v;hile there are diversity of gifts. . , it is the same God which worketh all in all." Illustrating this thesis Paul asserts that while to one is given by the Spirit the working of miracles; to another prophesy, to another the discerning of spirits . . . [nevertheless] in all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to each man severally, as He will . Thus, in Paul's context, the gift "of different spirits to discern" is a gift which, since it rests in God's hands to give or to withhold, it would be presumptious to attempt to learn and almost V7orse than presumptious to offer to teach. That an "old sinner" would impiously attempt to teach this gift, then, seems perfectly reasonable. But knowing the source and probable import of this allusion seemingly does more to confound than to clarify the lines in which it occurs. We are now faced with a sinner-instructor who apparently will at once attempt to teach what is not only unteachable but an impious violation of God's prerogative even to attempt to teach and yet who will at the same time teach the art to know vocation, to distinguish between the poet's vein and the scribbling itch. Yet, as confusing as these lines apparently are, they do define, by the very paradox they present, the character of the sinner-instructor's admonitions. For, on the one hand, these admonitions

PAGE 102

90 regularly echo just that moral view of poetry in which, as Horace makes clear in the first fifty lines of the Ars Poetica , the first thing needful for a poet is a sure sense of vocation and of the limits and strengths of his poetic gifts. But, on the other hand, the sinner-instructor misapplies the Horatian advice which he appropriates by promoting with that advice a kind of selfishness inimicably opposed to Horace's own social and moral views. This unhappy abuse of Horatian instruction is apparent in the first lines of the sinner-instructor's advice. Because this abuse is easiest to see if this first advice is read all at once I cite it here in full. Consult yourself; and if you find A Powerful Impulse, urge your Mind, Impartial judge within your Breast What subject you can manage best; Whether your Genius most inclines To Satire, Praise or hum'rous lines; To Elegies in mournful Tone, Or Prologue sent from hand unknown. Then rising with Aurora' s light The Muse invok'd, sit down to write, Blot out, correct, insert, refine. Enlarge, diminish, interline: Be mindful, when Invention fails, To scratch your Head, and bite your Nails. (77-90) To a reader familiar with Horace's Ars Poetica much of this advice must seem very familiar. The first eight lines, for example, very closely parallel the import of the following Horatian advice. Let poets match their subject to their strength, And often try what weight they can support, And what their shoulders are too weak to bear. [For] After a serious and judicious choice. Method and eloquence will never fail.

PAGE 103

91 And again the sinner-instructor's exhortation to his pupil to "blot out, correct, insert, refine" is, in its very wording, reminiscent of Horace's admonition, in the Ars Poetica , not to praise any poem which has not been through many days and many blots, multa dies et multa litura . But, of course, it is our very familiarity with this traditional advice and with the reverence with which it is usually given that makes the final, jingling, meaningless couplet of this first speech so surprising. For while the sinner-instructor's sudden collapse into trivia does not in any way detract from the validity of the Horatian advice he has just offered, it does indicate that he has not really understood but simply mouthed that advice. Unconcernedly unaware of the viex^ of poetry's nature and function which this advice both inculcates and assumes, the sinnerinstructor has appropriated it and, mixing in his own nonsense, attempted to make it serve him as an impressive opening. And this method of first appropriating the terms of that moral and traditional poetic discussed above and then turning them to serve the interests of his own vanity and avarice is the whole foundation of the sinnerinstructor 's own method of instruction and the whole point of the craft he teaches. For the sinner-instructor, as he makes explicitly clear in several places, the entire end of the art of poetry is to enhance the reputation and enrich the purses of its practitioners. By its success or failure to accomplish this end, he judges the worth of all poetry, and towards the accomplishing of this end he bends the terms of traditional poetics. Thus, for the sinner-instructor

PAGE 104

92 as well as for Dryden or Jonson, the ability of poets to praise and blame is an essential element of their craft. But for Dryden and for Jonson, as we have seen above, the poetic function of particular praise and blame is subservient to the teaching of moral universals, to the teaching of what is virtuous by making it appear amiable and what is vicious by making clear its detestability. On the other hand, for the sinner-instructor there apparently are no moral universals. Rather, for him, good and evil, true and false, virtue and vice are only so many names. These names, as he makes clear, have no referral value at all for him; they are simply terms of vague approbation or disapprobation to be assigned in accord with the selfish interest of a particular poet. Thus, for him, a prince is not called virtuous because he participates in virtue. Rather "a prince," he instructs his pupils, "the moment he is crown'd, [ is said to] Inherit ev ' ry Virtue round" (191-192), because to say so is one of the ways to thrive. Because, that is, the sinner-instructor's advice is founded in mean self-interest, his advice inculcates an ethical relativism which sweepingly dismisses all notion of absolute good and evil. Good and evil, for the sinner-instructor, refer only to things or acts which do, or do not, constitute ways to thrive. It is good, the sinner-instructor maintains, to praise bad kings, to defend corrupt statesmen, to plagerize from Horace and Longinus, because all these are ways to thrive. And thus the sinner-instructor's advice is the absolutely corrupt reversal of the traditional purpose of poetry: traditionally, as we have seen above, poetry encouraged men to do the good by showing them that to do the good

PAGE 105

S*j was ultimately profitable or, at least, admirable; the sinrierinstructor, on the other hand, encourages his pupils to determine the good by its immediate profitability. In the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries the philosphic system of one man, Thomas Hobbes, was consistently reviled for promoting precisely the kind of etaicai relativism which characterizes the sinnerinstructor ' s advice. '^^ "Good, evil, and contemptible," Hobbes maintained, "are ever used with relation, to the person that useth them: there being nothing simply or absolutely so."^^ Naturally enough then, it is to Hobbes' description of nature as fundamentally lawless and subsequently savage that the sinnerinstructor refers in order to provide a general and authoritative statement of his own view of the human situation. "Hobbes clearly proves," he states, . . .that ev'ry Creature Lives in a State of War by Nature. Tne Greater for the Smallest watch. But meddle seldom with their Match. (319-322) And because the sinnerinstructor ' s prescriptions for human conduct, though recognizably corrupt, are also recognizable descriptions of the way most men do act (men do, after all, praise bad kings, defend bad ministers, plagerize, and get bastards), the sinnerinstructor ' s identification of Hobbes' view of man's condition as the basis of his own advice brings home, I think, the real sting of Swift's satire. Men do, that is, live as if Hobbes is right, and they suffer for it: men live as if there is no "common rule of good and evil to be taken

PAGE 106

94 from the nature of things themselves," and, seeking, therefore, to produce their own personal good, they manufacture their own evil. Thus, the selfishness and subsequent ethical relativism which is the foundation of the sinnerinstructor ' s advice can be seen finally as an explanation for the vicious world the Rapsody describes. That world is, as we have already seen, one characterized by the imagery of familial disharmony. What we can see now is how completely appropriate this imagery is; for the world of the Rapsody is one in which the very principles of natural relationship and legitimacy have been replaced by a relativism at once so thoroughgoing and so debilitating that it has obliterated not only the distinctions of natural and unnatural, and good and bad, but of up and down as well. Thus, the poets described in the Rapsody , disdaining the heights of poetry, pervert even the natural metaphor arising from the action of gravity, "And with rebellious Arms pretend/ An equal Priv'lege to descend " (381-382). Unwilling to acknowledge any rule but the rule of self, disclaiming that either they themselves or anything else has a "proper native use," the princes and prelates and especially the poets of the Rapsody' s world live in a constant state of rebellion against both the facts of nature-gravity for example--and against each other. Thus, it is for their own foolish presumption that they suffer. "Teazing, pinching and biting" each other, the men of this poem are shown punishing each other while all conspire to corrupt, through selfish manipulation, the goods of Church, State and poetry, the traditional sources of

PAGE 107

95 that "knowledge of virtues and their contraries," so desperately, painfully lacking in their world. IV Swift's Rapsody , then, to recapitulate for a moment, is a kind of full length, poetic demonstration of Swift's thesis, cited in full above, that "most of the miseries and misfortunes in Life" are attendant simply upon the abuse and selfish misapplication of one's own goods and talents. Indeed, it is emblematic of the selfinflicted nature of misfortune that the instructions of our sinnerinstructor follow a significantly descending path, that this guide in blind selfishness only manages to proffer his disciples ever less noble stations for ever more base reasons. Thus, the proteges whom he had encouraged, as the Rapsody began, in a mistaken aspiration to poetry, are gradually brought to seek their very bread through party writing and then paid panegyrics and finally empty criticism. But, further, as one reads through the Rapsody one senses, also, that its tone involves something even more than Swift's ire with man's propensity to wound himself on his own selfishness. One hears, too, running through the whole of the Rapsody, Swift ' s moral indignation and his insistence that a man's neglect of proper vocation is an act against God as well as an act against himself, a sin, that is, as well as a folly. And this deeper moral condemnation is, given Swift's view of vocation, exactly what we might expect to find; for, as Swift explained to his own congregation, "our particular stations are appointed to us by God Almighty," and

PAGE 108

96 therefore to fly that station is to refuse service at once to oneself, to one's fellow and to God. At the risk, then, of explaining the obvious, one must observe that the "old experienc'd sinner," to whose corruptive measures so much of the Rapsody' s world seems to dance, is a very sinner indeed. Snatching a bit of Horace here, commending a passage of Longinus there, he is actively engaged in recruiting men from cheir assigned callings to service amongst his band. Like the very devil himself, to whom it does not seem inappropriate to compare him, he tempts men through their pride to disobedience of God. And in the Rapsody' s England his followers are legion and they are all damned. Thus, as is made very clear early in the poem by the ease with which kings, at death, re-establish their courts in hell to ply in "the scenes of endless woe... their former arts below" (209-210); between the world of the Rapsody and hell itself, there is finally very little difference. Indeed, throughout the dark and divided world of the Rapsody , with its futile activity, dark intestine wars. Godless priests and pecks of coal, there constantly shimmers, I believe. Swift's suggestion that England has been transformed by its proud denizens to a very type of hell. It is not, however, until the last lines of the poem that we can see fully the blasphemous nature of the rapsodic world which Swift has portrayed. But in his final condemnation Swift is as ironically explicit as one could wish: "For many a year," Swift sums up, Christ "never intermeddl'd here,"

PAGE 109

97 Nor, tho' his Priests be duly paid. Did ever we desire his Aid: We now can better do without him, Since I-Joolston gave us Arms to rout him. (490-494) The Woolston to whom the final line of the poem refers is, I think, the Thomas Woolston who, in 1713-14, published the most famous of his numerous tracts-those six discourses which he together titled, On the Miracles of Our Saviour . "^-^ These tracts were thought dangerous enough in their time to have drawn numerous rebuttals; and dangerous, in fact, they were. For in them Woolston, with an ingenuousness which is even today disarming, attempted to argue that since he found the miracles of Christ, as described by Scripture, unamenable to his own reason, they therefore absolutely could not have occured. Rather, V/oolston argued, each of Christ's miracles, indeed, the New Testament itself, is literally untrue. But, Woolston continued, the New Testament does allegorically figure forth the truth. And that truth, as refined by Woolston' s own reason, is that Christ has not been but is coming, and the miracles attributed to him in the Nev7 Testament but figure forth the greater and (Woolston trusted) more reasonable miracles which he will perform. History has, of course, relegated Woolston and his tracts to obscurity but, nevertheless, because of his enormous presumption, because of his willingness to deny Christ's intercession for man simply because the mode of it did not please him, because, in short, of his pride, there is much that is ludicrous and yet something that is darkly awesome about Woolston. He is a fitting last figure

PAGE 110

98 in Swift's rapsodic world where men, to please themselves, neglect the proper use of all things and neglect especially God's particular calling to them. Indeed, after Woolston's comically tiny, yet damningly real, denial of God, the sudden end of the poem seems, to me at least, entirely appropriate. For the resultant hiatus seems somehow to echo in its sudden emptiness the world the poem has described. And in the words with which Swift both announces that hiatus and closes his poem there is something ominously apocalyptic-"Caetera desiderantur , " Swift notes, the rest is wanting. Yet, just because Swift's final portrait of a rapsodized England, lapsing into Godlessness, is so very dark, it would be, I think, a particularly unhappy oversight to close this study without reminding ourselves of that powerful commitment to his own calling and to true justice which inform the extent and nature of Swift's gloom. For if, in the Rapsody , Swift's condemnation of his generation and of its works reaches almost a prophet's dark scorn, it has something too, of the prophet's moral certitude. At the very real risk 24 that the publication of the Rapsody might precipitate his own arrest. Swift nevertheless quietly praised Pope and Gay and ironically exposed King and Ministers and thus made of his own verse a sharp and moral instrument and an affirmation that justice had yet a powerful presence in the world.

PAGE 111

NOTES 1. Maurice Johnson, The Sin of Wit: Jonathan Swift as a Poet (Syracuse, N. Y. , 1950), p. 15. 2. The Works of Oliver Goldsmith , ed. Arthur Friedman, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1966), V, 523. 3. Ricardo Quintana, The Mind and Art of Jonathan Svift (New York, 1936), p. 18. 4. The Sin of Wit , p. 18. 5. See Michael Waltzer, The Revolution of the S'^L:.c-.. . . (Cambridge, Mass., 1965), particularly pp. 216-218. 6. The Correspondence of Alexander ?'pe , ed. George Sherburn, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1956), I, 2. 7. The Poetical Works of Edv7arc You.-tr , ed. Rev. J. Mitford (Boston and New York, n. d.), p. 59. The quotation is from Young's preface to Love of Fame, Tr.e Universal Pasfeion . 8. The T^Jickenham Edition of the Poems of Alexander Pope , ed. John Butt et al . , 6 vols. (London and New Haven, 1939-61), V, 49. 9. See, for example, J. Middleton Murry, Jonathan Swift: A Critical Bio,g:raphy (London, 1954), pp. 460-462. 10. See George Boas, The Happy Beast in French Thought of the Seventeenth Century (New York, 1966). I am deeply indebted for my summary of theriophily in Montaigne and Pascal to this book. 11. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift , ed. Herbert Davis et al ., 13 vols. (Oxford, 1957), IX, 146. 12. Ibid ., pp. 148-149. 13. Ibid ., p. 142. 14. Citations, like this one, from the Ars Poetica are from the translation done by the Earl of Roscommon in The Complete Works of Horace , ed. Dr. John Marshall (New York, 1923). 15. See, for example, Herbert Davis, Jonathan Swift: essays on his satire and ocher studies (New York, 1964), pp. 168-171. 99

PAGE 112

100 16. Pope's Horatian Poems (Columbus, Ohio, 1966), pp. 7-12. 17. Critical Essays of Che SevcnLconCh Century , ed. J. E. Spingarii, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1957), I, 28. 18. Of Dramatic Poesy and other Critical Essays , ed. George Watson, 2 vols. (London and New York, 1962), I, 213. 19. Spingarn, II, 38. 20. The Correspondence of Jonathan Swift , ed. Sir Harold Williams, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1963), III, 362. 21. See Samuel Mintz, The Hunting of Leviathan. . . (London, 1962), p. 23. 22. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan , ed. M. Oakeshott (Oxford, 1946), p. 32. 23. The Dictionary of National Biography , ed. Sir Leslie Stephens and Sir Sidney Lee, 22 vols. (Oxford, 1937), XXI, 908-910. 24. As is well enough known, the publication of the poem did lead to the arrest of several of Swift's friends. Further, Walpole forbore prosecuting Swift himself only because he was convinced that it would require ten thousand men to take Swift prisoner in Dublin.

PAGE 113

CHAPTER FOUR Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift. D.S.P.D. I Even the briefest outline of the Verses o.i the ueach of Dr. Swift, D.S.P.D. must highlight the great, single p.-oblcm which tne poem has always presented to those who have read it with care. That problem is to discover the relationship between the panegyric with which Swift's poem ends and that maxim of La Rochef .--acaulc which, Swift tells us in his headnote, occasioned the entire ooem. ' Dans I'adversite de nos meilleurs amis nocs crouvons quelque chose, qui ne nous deplaist pas. In the Adversity of our best Friends, we fine something that doth not displease us. [Swift's translation] In the first section of the Verses (i-72)--thac section which Swift himself caiis a "proem"--Swif c undertakes to prove, through "reason" and his own "experience," the universal scope and applicability of che maxim; to prove that even with the best of u£. The strongest Friendship yields to Pride, Unless the Odds be on our Side. (37-38) The second section of the poem (73-298) is an application of the maxim to a specific and extreme case: in this section Swift imagines the niggling comforts and ignoble sentiir.ents which his death will stimulate in most of his friends. But the final, panegyrical section of the poem-which Swift imagines spoken a year after his death and by "one quite indifferent in the cause"--seems to exist in flat contradiction both to the maxim and co the first two sections of the poem. For in the final 101

PAGE 114

section of the poem Swift offers himself as that man to whose actions La Rochefoucauld's maxim is not applicable, as that man who, far from finding his private ends in his friends' misfortunes. Without regarding private Ends, Spent all his Credit for his Friends. (331-332) This apparent contradiction in the logic of the poem obviously troubled Swift's contemporaries quite as much as it has his modern readers. When, in 1738, Swift entrusted the first and London . a^il :^cition of the Verses to William King, King excised almost the whole of the panegyric, substituting for the cancelled sections lines from the 2 Life and Genuine Character of Dr. Swift . This Kir,g aid, a^aicst certainly, with the advice of Alexander Pope, whose opinion of the original poem was that "the latter part. . .is inferior to t\-i^ beginning, the character too dry as well as too Vain in some respeccs, and in . . .,3 one or two particulars, not true. Certainly Swifc, when he saw King's edition, could not have failed to understand the reasons behind his friends' eraendations--their fear that "the poem might be thought by the public a little vain, if so 4 much were said by himself of himself." But, although Swifc was usually very willing to submit his work to the correction of his friends, he was not willing to do so in this case. Rather, as soon as King's edition reached Swift in Ireland, he expressed his dissatisfaction with it and caused the poem to be printed by his Dublin printer, Faulkner, in its original form. Clearly, Swift, despite his friends' responses, thought his own poem sufficiently consistent and thought its panegyric justifiable. Since Swift's contemporaries wrestled with the poem there have been numerous attempts made to understand it. Of these

PAGE 115

it/ J attempts two articles, both very recent, seem to be particularly illuminating. The first of these, titled "The Ironic Intention of Swift's Verses on his own death," was argued by Barry Slepian in 1963. In this article Professor Slepian maintains that in the panegyric which ends the Verses Swift consciously completes his thesis that all mankind is "egotistical, selfish and proud" jy showing himself to be so. While finally, I thinK, we shall see that Professor Slepian 's insistence that the whole of the panegyric is ironic pushes a good insight too far, .nevertheless his assumption that Swift would hardly have written a panegyric upon himself without some leavening irony seems very sane. Certainly some of the examples Slepian uses to illustrate this irony are very convincing; he reminds ^s, for example, that the lines in whicr. Swire, apparently ingenuously, praises his own originality carry an ironic burden: To Steal a Hint was never known. But what he writ was all his own; (317-3x8) for these lines themselves were stolen rrom Denham's elegy on Cowley: To him [Cowley] no author was unknown Yet what he wrote was all his own. Nevertheless, to show that these lines, or even many lines of the panegyric, have an ironic value is not to prove that all the lines are ironic or that the whole design of the panegyric is ironic. Slepian's thesis, however, leads him to find irony everywhere and to assert its presence where he cannot demonstrate it. Thus, when he suggests that the following lines are obviously ironic

PAGE 116

104 because they are obviously overinflated he is arguing in a circle and telling us more about his own taste than about Swift's lines. Fair LIBERTY was all his Cry; For her he stood prepar ' d to die; For her he boldly stood alone; For her he oft expos 'd his o;^m. (347-350) The language of these lines is dramatic, it is true, but they are written on a subject about which Swift is usually dramatic. In his o\^m epitaph Swift defines his commitment to liberty even more dramatically than he has defined it in these lines, but I do not think that even Slepian would suggest this epitaph is intentionally ironic. Here lies the body of Jonathan Swift, Dean of St. Patrick's Cathedral. He has gone where fierce indignation can no longer lacerate his heart. You who pass by, imitate if you can, this fierce protector of Liberty.^ In the context of Swift's normal practices, therefore, it is insufficient simply to assert that the line "Fair LIBERTY was all his cry" is obviously ironic. There is, too, a more serious objection to be raised to Slepian' s treatment of the Verses , and this objection is raised in an article written by Marshall Waingrow and published in 1964. As Waingrow understands, the effect of reading the final part of the poem (as Slepian does) as a perfect piece of irony is to destroy any possibility of discovering a moral norm in the poem. And to despair of finding a moral norm in Swift's Verses is, as Waingrow feels, a particularly perverse way of dealing with a poen; in which Swift has always seemed to his critics entirely too "willing

PAGE 117

103 to offer himself as a model of moral perception and behavior, , . .' Waingrow, therefore, attempts to deal with Swift's praise of himself as a straight-forward yet very useful praise. Swift ^ W^iugrow argues, generously takes the occasion of his ow.i death noc only co demonstrate the selfish responses of most men to their fellows' suffering, adversity and death, but also to provide men a model (which apparently is desperately needed) of truly selfless conduct. Swift's panegyric, therefore, is not a demonstration of Swift's selfishness, but is rather, Waingrow maintains, & proof of Swift's utter selflessness and a complete rebuttal of La Rochefoucauld's maxim. Swift's conduct in penning his panegyric is, Wi^ingrow continues, in sharp contrast to che conduce of even Pope, G^y av.d Arbuthnot, who have been, like almost all the vorld, j>o "corrupted" by the fact i.i^^ they must die that they cannot forget themselves long enough to r..ourn Swift's passing. Swift, however, is not thus "corrupted;" he remains "superiour to his fate" ar.d triumphs over even "the one absolutely inescapable physical condition of human existence, the necessity of dying" by makii-.g that "necessity" but another occasion to teach what Waingrow calls "the code of the moralist"--"public uses, not private ends" should be the concern of the good man. Thus, as Waingrow concludes his essay, "the ironic understatement of the [ Verses ' ] early couplet. • Tho' it is hardly understood, Which way my Death can do them good: vanishes before the force of the poem's expanding moral, That private end which is death can indeed have its public uses.

PAGE 118

lOS Waingrow's article is, it seems to me, the deepest peneLraLioii iiito the Vcr. •:(.': to liave appeared so far and is therefore the natural starting point for further thought on Swift's poem. Nevertheless, there are several objections which must, I think, be raised both about particular points in the article and finally about its entire thesis. To begin with, Waingrow's refutation of Slepian's article seems a bit too thorough. Some of the irony Slepian argues for in the panegyric seems to be legitimately there. Therefore, a complete and completely acceptable reading of the Verses must account for the presence of this irony in terms which relate it to the import of the entire poem. Further, Waingrow seems to strain some of the lines of the poem in order to accommodate them to his total thesis--his view of Swift as a model of selfless conduct. Thus, for example, when he argues that Swift seriously intends, in the Verses , to chastise Pope, Gay and Arbuthnot "for their poor capacity for mourning," he neglects, I think, both the tone of Swift's lines and Swift's lifelong habit of penning what may appear to be "a satyr where he most commends." The lines which characterize the mourning of Swift's three friends run. Here shift the Scene, to represent How those I love, my Death lament, Poor Pope will grieve a Month; and Gay A Week; and Arbuthnot a Day. . . . (205-208) While Swift in these lines recognizes that "no Passion burns forever in so frail a lamp as man," his clear-eyed knowledge of human limits also makes the compliment he pays his friends all the more valuable. To be thought capable, by Swift, of truly

PAGE 119

107 grieving a luonthj a week, a day, is to be highly complimented, a fact we will recognize more clearly if, as Charles Williams' suggests, we honestly ask ourselves "for which of our friends we should come anywhere near anything that could be called grieving for anything Q like a month? And which of them for us?" Finally, Waingrow's neglect of the ironic undertone which Slepian detected in Swift's final panegyric and Waingrow's failure to see, in the midst of Swift's satire, the real commendation Swift presents to those he loves, both stem from a more serious problem in Waingrow's reading. In his desire for us to see that the panegyric is a moral exemplum Waingrow, I think, has discriminated far too sharply between the unselfish goodness of Swift and the corruption of all the world besides. The distinction is not, I think, nearly so sharply made in the poem: Swift sometimes, particularly at the beginning of the poem, is made a less than noble figure, while Pope, for example, so affected by the death of Swift as to mourn a full month, is himself exemplary. To neglect these facts is to overlook the strategy of the poem.. Indeed, to push too far the difference between Swift and the rest of the world is to create a sophisticated version of the problem its early readers had with it. King found the final section of the Verses a self-praise which was vain; Waingrow, I think, finally makes the panegyric a model which is inimitable. To see Swift finally as a man of only public ends — and to identify no way by which he became so — is to place him beyond the grasp of us poor mortals whom Swift is trying to teach. Rather, I think, the panegyric is qualified — and qualified not only by the ironic undertones which run through it but by the entire progress of the

PAGE 120

10c poem which has led up to it. It seems to me that before the Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift is a justification of the satirist, or a model for us, or anything else, the poena is a deeply personal, and, at the same time, very traditional consideration by Swift of the implications of his o\m death. If Swift warrants the panegyric at the end of the poem, and if we can learn from it, it is because, I think, he has followed the command-momento mori --and has drawn from his meditation that truth which is the traditional end of such meditations: "Happy is he whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord his God,"^ II That Swift thought often on his own death — not only in old age but through the course of his entire life — we know both by inference and by direct statement. "When I was your age," Swift wrote to Pope, when Pope was forty-five, "I thought every day of Death, but now [when Swift was sixty-six] every minute." Even the briefest examination of Swift's correspondence makes clear that this apparently hyperbolic statement lacks very little of being absolute truth. From a surprisingly early period of his life, and to all manner of correspondents. Swift observed that he was one who . . .must expect to decline every month, like one who lives upon his principal sum which must lessen every day. Further, themes of his own mortality and of the generally transitory character of this world color not only Swift's correspondence but are early and often repeated themes in his poetry. Exiled--

PAGE 121

109 from his point of view — from England, Swif.'u arrived in Dublir; in 1714 to assume his deanshiji both sick and lonely. His sickness was not, his correspondence would indicate, unto death; but, characteristically, he projected his sickness and loneliness into the deathbed poem, In Sickness , which, though it was composed thirty years before his death, ends with this final request. Ye formal Weepers for the Sick, In your last Offices by quick, And spare my absent Friends the Grief, To hear, and give me no Relief; Expir'd To-day, emtomb'd To-morrow, When kno\im, will save a double sorrow. (23-28) Swift's tendency to make his own illnesses, the illnesses and deaths of his friends, indeed, even the wearing out of his old cassocks, occasions for reflections on his own end is partly attributable, perhaps, to his own particular affliction. He was, the whole of his adult life, the victim of Meniere's disease, •'^ Since this disease of the inner ear was completely unknown to the physicians of Swift's age, its victim only knew that he could expect to be suddenly overcome, at irregular intervals, by severe and protracted attacks of deafness, extreme giddyness and nausea. To be subject at any moment to such dark and debilitating attacks might well influence a man to think often on the frailty of his own flesh. But, surprisingly, Swift's reflections on death have nothing of the horror one would naturally expect in thoughts of death which rose out of personal disabilities. Neither did Swift's imagination dwell upon vivid deathbed scenes or upon the circumstances

PAGE 122

no of final corruption, although, as we shall see, he knew very well the tradition in which such description was commonplace. Rather, his serious reflections on death seem to focus finally, and easily, on its providentially benevolent nature. "It is impossible," he concludes in more than one place, that anything so natural, so necessary and so universal as death, should ever have been designed by providence as an evil to mankind. And this conclusion is natural for Swift because, I think, his tendency to reflect often on death owes at least as much to the seventeenth century traditional meditatio mortis as it does to his own afflictions. Unfortunately, however, it is difficult to clearly delineate the precise form of traditional meditations on death because a survey of meditations on death which were available in seventeenth century England yields a bewildering variety of texts. As Louis Martz points out in his study. The Poetry of Meditation , of all / the forms of meditation spawned by the counter-reformation in England the meditation on death was certainly "the most widely and intensely cultivated." And, naturally, because the form itself was so popular, the meditation on death came, in the seventeenth century, to serve many purposes. Some of these meditations were obviously undertaken as truly mystic exercises, attempts to pierce now, through death, so as to see, now, as "face to face." Most meditations, however, were something less exalted; they were exccises, as Robert G. Collmer puts it,^^ in "hard, close thought" about death; they were intended to extract wisdom from the grave "where,"

PAGE 123

Ill Fray Luis dc Granada assured his readers throughout the seventeenth century, "almighty God is wont to teach those that be his."^" Of these latter, less exalted meditations, there are also a wide variety of types: those which are intended first to cure the natural fear of death, those which most encourage a true repentance of sin, and those which emphasize a true contempt of the world and a desire for Godliness. But though there is no "typical" meditation on death, there are certain themes which most such meditations share, more or less, in common. First, although each meditation has its own particular emphasis, most do at least touch on three related moral topics: they encourage a repentance of sin; they insist that the concerns of this world are transitory; and they teach men to put their trust in God. Second, many of these meditations share, particularly in their description of the corruption to which man's flesh is heir, a kind of wry irony. This irony or "grim humor," which is fully documented with examples in Louis Martz' study, can be illustrated V7ith a quotation from what is perhaps the best known group of seventeenth century meditations on death, John Donne's Devotions upon Emergent Occasions and Several Steps in my Sickness . Donne, describing the dissolution of the body, often turns to jest a topic which might equally well inspire horror. Now all the parts built up, and knit by a lovely soule, now but a statue of clay, and nov;, these limbs melted off, as if that clay were but snow; and now the whole house is but a handful of sand, so much dust, and but a pecke of rubbidge, so much bone. If he who, as this Bell tells mee is gone now, were some excellent Artificer, who comes to

PAGE 124

112 him for a clocke, or for a garment now? or for counsaile, if hee were a lawyer? If a Magistrate for Justice? Finally, of course, these meditations share in common, as already mentioned, an enormous popularity. Nor was it a popularity which ended with the seventeenth century. Well into the eighteenth century discourses on death which strongly reflect the meditative tradition were being composed, and sixteenth and seventeenth century meditations were being translated and, in many cases, retranslated. As an indication of the continuing vitality of the tradition in the eighteenth century one may note that not only did the playwright Nicolas Rowe aid, in 1709, in the translation of an edition of meditations, but that in 1711 Rowe used a book of formal meditations as an important 1 ft prop in the death scene of his The Fair Penetant . ° Presumably, then, Rowe could count on his eighteenth century audience being familiar with the formal meditation on death. It would be strange, therefore, if Swift, who as a relatively young man "thought every day of death" and, as an older man, "every minute," were unaware that in so reflecting on his own death he was participating in that great meditative tradition according to which precisely those persons are blessed "that ever have the houre of death before their eyes, and that everie day dispose themselves to die."''"^ Further, there are lines within the Verses on t.io. Death of Dr. Swift which indicate, I think, that Swift was fully conversant with both the grim situations which possessed the imagination of the seventeenth century meditator on death and with the wryly ironical quality so characteristic of that imagination. Thus, Swift in

PAGE 125

vividly imagining, first, the scene of his d.iach and then, in the following lines, the hypocritical responses of his friends, seems to be following almost exactly the directions for a meditation on death imaginatively presented by Thomas Persons in his Christian Directory . Here is Persons: lei. Imagine then (my friend) even thou I saye, . , . z\ii thou were even at this present, stretched out upon e. bed; wearied and worn with dolour and paine; thy carnal friendes about thee weeping and wailing and desiring thy goodes. . . ,20 And here is Swift: "Behold the fatal Day arrive I "How is the Dean? He's just alive. "Now the departing Prayer is read: "He hardly breathes. The Dean is dead. "Before the Passing-Bell oegun, "The News thro' half the Town has run. "0, may we all for Death prepare I "rthat has he left? And who's his Heir? (146-154) Or again, Swift, in conjecturing what must become of his writings, of his literary remains , seenis exactly attuned to the writer of meditations on a>iath whose imagination traced, in unbelievable variety of ways, "the noble dust c; Alexander till he found it stopping a bunghole." Here, for example, is Fray Luis de Granada: A time maie happen, when some buildinge maie be made neare unto thy grave, (be it never so gaie, and sumptous,) and that they maie digge for some earthe out of the same to make morter for a walle, and so shall thy seelie bodie (beinge now changed to earthe) become afterwardes an earthen walle. . . .^2 And here is Swift's highly ironic version of the same theme:

PAGE 126

114 Now Curl his shop from Rubbish drains: Tlircc genuine Tomes of Swift: ' s Remains. And l.hen lo matle Ihem \t;ii;r, the ;.', I i.bher , Rovis'd by Tibbalds , Moore and Gibber . (197-200) There are, I think we shall see, more than enough such instances to indicate that Swift did have a general familiarity with both the topics of the formal meditation on death and with the ironic humor with which the writers of these meditations portrayed "all the follies of the world" mouldering into dust. But, more importantly, it seems to me, there is a connection between Swift's Verses and those meditations which goes beyond Swift's scattered echoes of them; finally, I think. Swift's poem is written for the same purpose as are these meditations and, therefore, in something like the same form. Swift's Verses , that is, like the seventeenth century meditation on death, is involved in the paradoxical and precarious attempt to draw from death — that ineradicable mark of man's first fall and sinful nature — a positive good. "Memoraria novissima et in aeternum non peccabis," (Remember the last things [death, judgment, heaven, hell] and you will never sin). This text from Ecclesiastes was the touchstone for the whole tradition of meditation on death: in the very fact that man must, soon or late, die to the world lay, for the Christian meditator, the answer how to live well in it. And this same paradoxical vision, it seems to me, informs Swift's poem. Swift's Verses , which begin with La Rochefoucault ' s observation that in the adversity of our friends there is that

PAGE 127

115 which does r.ot displease us, end by asserting what is both the most extreme form of that maxim and the central tenet of all meditations on death-in the sickness and death of our friends (and of ourselves) is our strongest moral instruction. Further, the progress of the Verses to this truth--the poem's three part structure-is controlled, though unobtrusively and with great delicacy, by the three traditional topics of the meditation on death: a recognition and repentance of sin, a true contempt for that which is purely worldly, and, finally, that reliance on God which makes possible charity towards man. Beginning with a painfully clear vision of that sinful and worldly nature he shares with every man. Swift ends with a demonstration of what can be made of it. Svjift demonstrates, that is, through / the contemplation of his own death, those lessons which he prays Stella may learn in her last illness: Almighty and most gracious Lord God, extend, we beseech Thee, Thy pity and compassion towards this Thy languishing servant: teach her to place her hope and confidence entirely in Thee; give her a true sense of the emptyness and vanity of all Worldly things; make her truly sensible of all the infirmities of her life past, and grant to her such a true sincere repentance, as is not to be repented of,2'+ III In the fall of 1725 there passed between Swift and Pope one of those bagatelles which great men seem occasionally to contrive only to tease out of thought men yet unborn. The exchange was begun by Pope who, knowing, apparently very well.

PAGE 128

J.J.O the Dean's admiration for the maxims of La Rochefoucauld, sent the Dean a proposal to write "a set of Maximes in opposition to all Rochefoucauit ' s principles." The Dean, in turn, vigorously replied. I tell you after all that I do not hate Mankind, it is vous autres, who hate them because you would have them reasonable animals, and are aag,ry for being disappointed, I have always rejected that Definition and make another of my own. [Swifc's famous definition is, of course, animal rationis capax , man is an animal capable of reason, j I aia no more angry with Walpole then I was with the Kite that last week flew away wich one of my Chickens and yet I was pleas 'd when one of my servants shot him two days after. This I say, because you are so hardy as tc tell me of your Intentions to write Maxims in Opposition to Rochefoucauit who is my Favorite because I found n ' • u • 25 my wnole cnaracter in him. . . , -^ Certainly, as Kathleen Williams, to whose insighcs I am frequently indebted in this chapter, has observed, "Pope's sweeping announcement ,. .has the challenging sound of a piece of deliberate baiting and Swift's reply is similarly exaggerated...."^^ But, as Williams goes on to point out. Swift's reply, exaggerated as it is, seems also to be "a defense of his [Swift's] own view of man, which has, certainly, something in common with that of La Rochefoucauit. "27 ^t ^11 events, however seriously we weigh Swift's reply, it is obvious that in 1725 he seemed unwilling to see Pope undertake a rebuttal of La Rochefoucauld's maxims. Therefore it hardly seems likely that, in 1731, he himself should pen such a rebuttal. Thus, although Marshall Waingrow's conclusion that the panegyrical close of Swift's Verses constitutes "a direct rebuttal of La Rochefoucauld's maxim" '^^ is a tempting conclusion

PAGE 129

11/ (it obviates the necessity of reconciling Swift's apparent selflessness with La Rochefoucauld's claim that all human action is self-interested), it seems improbable. Rather, I think we must believe that Swift is being perfectly truthful when, in the first paragraph of his poem, he tells us that, As Rochefoucault his Maxims drew From Nature, I believe 'em true: They argue no corrupted Mind In him; the Fault is in Mankind. (1-4) In fact, in these lines, Swift is stating an assumption about mankind which, as we shall see, early and late controls tr.e development of this poem. This assumption that mankind is essentially selfish and profoundly faulted is not, we should begin by remarking, a view which is incompatible with the traditional Chriscian view of human nature. La Rochefoucauld himself (although it has been remarked of his maxims that "so far as God affects his meditations, he might have been an athiest"^^), when he sought an explanation for the abuse of self-love he observed in men, couched that explanation in traditionally Christian terms. To punish man for original sin, God has let him deify his love of self, that he may be tortured by it at every stage of his life.^^ But, traditional as it is, this view of man as selfish and faulted, indeed the Christian terms in which this view was normally couched, was under severe attack even as Swift asserted it as his own. Through the last quarter of the seventeenth century

PAGE 130

Ixo and into the eighteenth century, the doctrine of original sin — with its insistence on man's faulted condition — met tremendous philosophical resistance. To men like Shaftesbury, Burnet and Bolingbroke, this doctrine which insisted that man is born, though essentially good, yet with a powerful inclination co evil, was untenable. To oppose this doctrine Shaftesbury and others proposed one exactly contrary: man is born possessed of instinctive benevolence. And from this doctrir.e the benevolentists drew, naturally, consequences contrary to La Rochefoucauld's coi-iciusion that all human acts, good or evil, spring from his own self-love. Thus Richard Cumberland comments, in an exact contradiction of che maxim of La Rochefoucauld which begins Swift's Verses , that "there are in mankind, considered as animal beings only , propensities of benevolence towards each other. "-*^ And indeed, for Shaftesbury, to be motivated to a good ace by principles of self-interest — of honor or of glory, say — was to be vicious. Whatsoever therefore is done which happens to be advantageous co the species through an affection merely towards self-good, does not imply any more goodness in the creature than as the affection itself is good. Let him, in any particular, act ever so well, if at the bottom it be that selfish affection 32 alone which moves him, he is in himself, still vicious. Thus, in choosing to begin the Verses with a defense of La Rochefoucauld's maxims, a defense, that is, of a view of mankind in which man is imaged as a distinctly selfish and faulted creature. Swift has automatically involved himself and his poem in a very lively argument. Further, Swift does nothing to make his view more palatable to a benevolentist when he insists not only on the

PAGE 131

lli* truth of La Rochefoucauld's maxim but on che truch of its corollary as well — not only, Swift argues, are men not displeased at the misery of friends, but so self-interested are they that they are themselves made miserable by their friend's successes. What Poet would not grieve to see, Kis Brethren write as well as he? But rather than they should excel, He'd wish his Rivals all in Hell. (31-34) And while Swift argues very gently, in the first paragraphs of the Verses , for the validity of chat view of man he is defending — he begins whimsically by asking "Who would not at a crov/ded show,'' Stand high himself, keep otners low?" (15-16) — ultimately his initial gentleness only serves co make his final conclusion all the more crushing. Self-love, Swift asserts, conditions all human relationships, even the strongest friendships, by both making them possible and by limiting their strength. If this conclusion seeiris as unacceptable to us as it was to many of Swift's contemporaries that is partly because we are, in some vague way, the intellectual inheritors of the benevoientists. But we must nevertheless remember that within the traditionally Christian ethic from which Swift was working, it is possible, without contradiction, to both grant the possibility of real friendship and yet understand the strongest of friendships to be limited. This is true because the Christian conception of even the strongest friendship is linked indivisibly to self-love: "thou Shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" is both the beginning and end of the Christian counsel of friendship. And Swift drew

PAGE 132

120 out bluntly enough the consequences of this commandment at the beginning of his sermon. Do las Good . Nature directs every one of us, and God permits us to consult our own private Good before the private Good of any other person whatsoever. We are, indeed, commanded to love our Neighbor as ourselves, but not as well as ourselves. The love we have for ourselves is to be the pattern of that love we ought to have towards our neighbor; But, as the copy doth not equal the original, so my neighbor cannot think it hard, if I prefer myself, who am the original, before him, who is only the copy . -^-^ Given then Swift's traditional view that the love we have for our friend is founded in our own self-love, it follows that "the strongest friendship [must] yield to pride,/ Unless the odds' be on our side." But as Swift moves towards this conclusion he is moving, we must realize, in the realm of paradox. To begin with, if as we have already seen, self-love ultimately limits for Swift the strength of the strongest friendship, yet self-love is not, for Swift, as it is for Shaftesbury, a viciously anti-social force; for self-love also provides the pattern and the reason which makes "strong friendship" a possibility. Further, for Swift, even the meanest effects of self-love--envy, say, or avarice--bear a perverted testimony to our felt communion with other human beings. Thus, although in the first forty lines of the Verses Swift insists on showing us that we glory in the misery and are miserable in the glory of other men, he simultaneously shows us that, as Marshall Waingrow observes, "Ironically, what appear to be the most self-regarding of emotions are in fact utterly dependent

PAGE 133

121 34 upon the condition of others." This paradoxically social quality of selfishness is amply demonstrated in Swift's mock protest. Give others Riches, Power, and Station, 'Tis all on tr.e an Usurpation. (43-44) The man who makes this stingy observation (and that man is, at some time, all of us, as Swift, who himself confesses having made this observation, knows) is not, of course, being very sociable, but he is being social; he does recognize, though in a clearly perverse way, that his lot is somehow related to that of his fellows. Envy and magnanimity then, while very different in their effects, come to seem, in the proem, not so very different in their generation; they are both self-interested responses to the condition of other human beings. Indeed, Swift demonstrates how close they are by actually translating, before our eyes, his own envy into magnanimity. "In Pope," he says. . . . I cannot read a Line But with a Sigh, I wish it mine: When he can in one Couplet fix More Sense than I can do in Six. . (47-50) Obviously, these lines on Pope (as well as Swift's similar lines on Gay, Arbuthnot and Pultney) are a confession of Swift's envy. Just as obviously these lines are handsome praise and an act of true magnanimity. With this capacity to transform his meanest selfishness into praise Swift did not need Shaftesbury's assumption that men possessed a "benevolent impulse" in order to propose a standard of moral conduct for men. In fact, for Swift, Shaftesbury's benevolence

PAGE 134

122 only obscured man's real moral task, to draw from his potentially dark and selfish nature a truly generous conduct. But to recognize that Swift's willingness to confess his envy transforms that envy into a generous praise is to raise another question--how can one account for Swift's willingness to work this transformation? The beginnings of an answer to this question can be found, I think, in the two ironic lines which conclude Swift's oblique praise of his friends. If with such Talents Heav'n hath blest 'em Have I not Reason to detest 'em? (65-66) These lines are ironic, of course, since the answer to the question which they pose is necessarily "no." But the reason why it must be "no" informs Swift's magnanimity. Swift himself discusses this i reason in numerous places, most notably in his sermon On Mutual ( / Subjection . -^^ In that sermon Swift states clearly the doctrine, only ironically implied by the lines above, that the division of not only talents, power and riches among mankind, but the entire condition of each man--his health, wits and all--is granted not by i chance but by Divine dispensation. From this doctrine Swift, in this sermon, draws several conclusions with respect to envy. First, to envy a man who is possessed of apparently greater gifts than oneself is, in effect, a blasphemous act because it is ultimately to challenge the wisdom of Heaven. Second, and most important with respect to the lines we are considering, to envy another man is to contradict one's own best self-interest; for if the man envied uses his gifts as he ought (as Pope, Gay, Arbuthnot and Pultney clearly have done), then these gifts will manifest themselves as social

PAGE 135

123 good. To er.vy such men then is pure folly, since, Sv;ift comments, "you cannot envy [with any reason] your neighbor's strength if he maketh use of it to defend your life, or carry your burden." And further if the man envied abuses his talents and uses them viciously then to envy him is obviously a greater folly still, for you envy him only his own viciousness. Therefore what Swift's ironic question--"Have I not reason to detest 'em?"--evok.es by implication is an understandable and unmysterious reason for his willingness to transform his own envy -into magnanimous praise. In che light of his ironic question Swift's envy appears as a blindly self-interested and hence unprofitable response, while his magnanimity appears as a response which is not necessarily less self-interested but which is much more finally attuned to conditions fixed by divine dispensation. In fact, it is precisely Swift's ability to see that all the conditions of life and death are by divine dispensation and ought to serve his own true good which, as we shall see, makes him so fitting a model for panegyric. IV The import of the proem can be summarized as follows: first, it is an argument to demonstrate that the motivation for all our actions and relationships is always self-interest; second, it shows us that, though we are by nature selfish, we are by our very selfishness involved in the condition of others; lastly, it obliquely reminds us that our condition as well as the condition of everyone else is granted by divine dispensation--a fact which, if we are to

PAGE 136

124 follow our true self-interest, must affect our response to those conditions. The proem, then, is not directly prescriptive, but the sum of its arguments do leads to a moral position. That position is that it is not only permissible (indeed, inevitable) to seek one's own self-interest in one's dealings in this world, but it is important to succeed. That one succeed, however, depends upon remembering first one's communion with other men, and secondly that all things in this world are of God. The irony of the second section of Swift's Verses is not, then, that his friends are willing to seek their own self-interest in Swift's illness and death; that, as Swift himself has told us, is in accord with nature and permitted by God. The irony is that they are unable to find their self-interest. For, if in the prosperity of our friends our own self-interest leads us to assert our commonality with them then the same lesson should be, if anything, more clear in our friends' adversities. Donne in his Devotions makes this point in a way which illuminates the misguided responses of Swift's friends. We scarce hear of any man preferred, but we think of ourselves that we might very well have been that man; why might not I have been that man that is carried to his grave now? Could I fit myself to stand or sit in any man's place, and not to lie in any man's grave: I may lack much of the good parts of the meanest, but I lack nothing of the mortality of the weakest; they may have acquired better abilities that' I, but I was born to as many infirmities as they.-^" It is precisely this extremely self-interested wisdom which Swift's friends (trying, for the most part, to escape the fact of their own mortality) ironically fail to discover in Swift's death. The irony of the situation is established from the first lines of the second section. I J

PAGE 137

12:. The Time is not remote, when I Must by the Course of Nature dye: When I foresee my special Friends, Will trv to find their private Ends, (73-76) It is, of course, precisely their own ends which Swift's friends ought to be able, but seem unwilling, to foresee in Swift's own. Rather, most of them view Swift's decline and , . .hug themselves, and reason thus; "It is not yet so bad with us." (115-116) In this failure Swift's friends seem, one must say, remarkably obtuse, for Swift has imagined his own death in such way as to make its universally fatal implications extremely clear. When the Dean's knell is tolled it immediately involves whole communities. The news runs through Dublin, begets a race of elegies, spreads to London, invades the court, is told at Chartres, inspires activity at Curl's, reaches out to Twickenham, and lastly filters through a female card party. The spreading of the news itself becomes emblematic: no human scene, it is clear, is completely exempt from a passing-bell. Further, the commonality of death is what Swift emphasizes in the way he imagines his own, for the Dean dies of no unique disease; his death is, rather, in accord with "the course of nature" to which all men must submit. Therefore, _-' and here Swift puts a very fine point on the commonality of death, a neighbor can be readily imagined who might "feel a Pain,/ Just in the Parts, where I complain." (135-36). But, as clearly as Swift paints the moral of his death _ (that any man may lie down in the grave prepared for Swift himself.

PAGE 138

no since every man is destined for his own),nevertheless, he imagines this moral to be almost universally disregarded. Even that very neighbor whose pains presage his approaching end is pictured iaquiring, not after the "way to die," but frantically after wayo to live, . . .what Regimen I kept; What gave me Ease, and how I slept, (139-140) while the rest. . . .give a Shrug and cry, I'm sorry; buwe ail must dye, (211-212) and pass ov^r with that shrug both the seriousness and moral implicatio.is o.: the tJuLh they have uttered. Repelled, ther., as Swift's companions are by the thc-ghc of their own dec.ths, it is hardly surprising thac they prove almost aggressively indifferent to the news of their friend's, mingling that news with cards and politics and talk of heirs. Sut it is "7 I not really for their indifference to his own death that Swift is satirizing them; that indifference is only symptomatic of their greater failing. Swift's satire of them is based upon their failure to grasp the significance of that admonision which follows immediately upon the imagined advent of Swift's death--"0, may we all for death prepare."'(153) . That warning is, within che Christian scheme, the great moral of Swift's and every man's death. J It is the moral stressed in that Departing Prayer which, as it was traditionally read at every Christian's death. Swift imagined read

PAGE 139

127 at his: "teach us who survive," says that prayer. to see ia this and other like spectacles of mortality, how frail and uncertain our own condition is; and so to number our days that we may seriously apply our hearts to that holy and heavenly wisdom while v/e live here, which may in the end bring life everlasting. . . 37 It is in their failure to avail themselves of Swift's death as a reminder of their own, and thus as a warning to be mindful of ultimate values, that most of Swift's friends desert, not Swift, but their own self-interest and thus become pare of that group which has always been the object of satire--the group of men who, not not knowing themselves, do not know their own good. This is not to say that Swift does not distinguish between his friends' varied responses to his death. Between those who amuse themselves by predicting the day of Swift's death and, say. Pope, who truly mourns Swift for a full month, there is a world of difference. The former fail both in compassion and comprehension. They fall to numbering the days remaining to Swift's life when, in fact, the event of Swift's death should teach them to number their own days. That is why they are subject to Swift's satire. There is, on the other hand, as we have already seen, a high compliment for Pope in Swift's compassionate recognition that "Poor Pope will mourn a month. ..." But, as different as are these two imagined responses to Swift's death, they share one thing in common: they both can remind Swift (and us) of that which most of his friends have forgotten, "how transitory are all things below."-* Thus, even while Swift, in imagining that Pope will mourn a full mor.th is obliquely complimenting him, his compliment itself only more strongly

PAGE 140

128 reinforces the moral which has been evident through all the imagined responses to Swift's death: Where's now this Fav'rite of Araollo ? Departed; and his Works must follow . (249-250) Indeed, the transience of men and things is, it seems to me, the whole burden of lines 243-2S9, the concluding lines of the second section. Earlier in this section, we will remember. Swift imagines that his literary remains will pass through tne soiling grasp of Tibbalds, Moore, and Gibber. But it is only in the last fifty lines of this section that we learn how extensive Swift imagines their triumph to be. It is the works of these men, who stand for so much Swift hated, that he imagines filling the bookshops. Indeed, as Swift imagines it, a short year after his death will see Walpole find a vindication, and Henley an audience, and Woolston, who showed "That Jesus was a grand Imposter," a pension and perhaps a mitre. No seventeenth century meditator, caught up in the theme of contemptus mundi , and demonstrating through the wormy circumstances of death the absolute corruptibility of all worldly things, could put the point more clearly than Swift has put it here. Swift's " | ! imagined description of the hypocritical mourning of some of his friends, the limited mourning of the best of his friends, and the apparently unlimited triumph of his enemies at his death, verges, it seems to me, almost on despair for his world and everything in it. How anything of lasting value can be done or gotten in such a world is almost impossible to conceive. And yet, it is precisely at this point that Swift chooses to pen a panegyric the basis of which is the good that he has accomplished in this world.

PAGE 141

129 This cr^nsiiion, chough iz is £cccr.v3lished by the introduction of an "indif ferenc" narrator, is in one sensv^, very abrupt. In another sense, how>2ver, the transition has been prepared for by the whole logic of the poem. The great fictional device of this poem has been, from its title on, that Swift is first dying and then dead. It is written throughout from the point of view of a man who has nothing either to hope or fear from the world; it is written, that is, from the "indifferent" point of view of Swift's panegyrist. 1 Swift has been able to freely assure us that the single motivation of his life has been self-inuerest, and he has confessed easily enough instances in his life v/here that self-interest was excessive. But he has also arrived ac that point where he can hardly confound his true self-interest wich any worldly good--rather, from the dissolution of his own flesh, as any seventeenth century meditation on death would tell him, he m.ay judge the transience of friends and \ ram.e and fortune. He has arrived at that point of philosophy where ' the traditional meditation on death pressed home its strongest truth-that the only true good of man is trust in God. And thac, I will argue, is the V7hole lesson of Swifc's complex and subtle panegyric. Yet Swift's panegyric is neither overtly an adjuration to us to trust in God nor an overt profession of Sx';ift's own faith. On the face of it the panegyric is simply a list of the good Swift has done his fellow man (i.e., defeated Wood's half pence, left money to build an asylum) and of the adversities under which he did chis good (i.e., he was exiled to Ireland i:i\d a price was put on his head). But the language Swift uses to aescribe both the good he has done and the adversities he has faced is a very highly allusive language--and its allusions are most'.y to Scripture. Thus,

PAGE 142

130 ^^?hen he tells us that his defense of Ix^eland brought him into conflict with a judge "who long all justice had discarded/ Nor feared he GOD, nor man regarded ," he has done more than simply indicate that this judge was a very wicked fellow; he has indicated too that his own cause was, in some way, regardful of both man and God. By this process of allusion, often repeated, Swift, without ever openly saying so, sutures his good works to his faith. Swift's allusive method does obviously complicate the job of rendering a creditable explication of his panegyric, but it is, certainly, a method entirely in keeping with his own life. For although we, having Swift's private writings and his correspondence, have no reason to doubt the Dean's faith, yet in his life so strictly did Swift adhere to Christ's adjuration to be privately pious (lest through public piety one fall into pride) that many of his contemporaries, while praising the Dean's work, doubted his faith. His panegyric, therefore, in submerging its references to his faith within its descriptions of his works, more exactly mirrors the life it describes. Further, we have been prepared earlier in the poem to find that in the panegyric Swift's good works both reflect and are dependent upon his trust in God. His graceful transformation of envy to magnanimity (which we examined in the proem) was rendered rationally explicable, we will remember, by those lines in which he obliquely reminded us that the gifts of his friends had been assigned them by heaven. In a very similar way, both before the panegyric and in it, his allusions to portions of Scripture which commend with particular force a trust in God and/or discommend

PAGE 143

131 an overattachment to the things of this world make more instructive, more meaningful, the good Swift does. Thus, for example, we may examine the matter of Swift's will, In the second section of the poem we learn, not that Swift has endowed an insane asylum, but only that he has left his money to public uses, and, as Waingrovj has pointed out, we can see Swift's real charity by contrasting his gift to the response of the public. "To Publick Use I A perfect T^.im "^JTiat had the Publick done for himi "And had the Dean, in all the Nation, "No worthy Friend, no poor Relation? "So ready to do Strangers good, "Forgetting his own Flesh and Blood? (157-158, 161-164) Swift, that is, unlike the anonymous public speaker of these lines, makes clear by his willingness to do strangers good that he recognizes an obligation which extends beyond friends and kin, recognizes that, to employ again Donne's phrases, "all mankind is of one author, and is one volume, "^^ and that, therefore, he is involved in it and has obligations to it. But here we must be extremely careful not to translate Swift's willingness to do strangers good into an act motivated by a soft-headed "benevolence towards the species," for to do that would be to undermine the whole import of Swift's proem. Nor is it at all necessary to do that, because to discover Swift's motive one need look no further than the Book of Psalms . The Psalter affirms in a variety of ways and places that "both the rich and the poor shall die and leave their money unto strangers, "^^ a point the logic of which, given

PAGE 144

132 a generation or two, is indisputable. Swift then, in willingly leaving his money to strangers, has done no more than what he must. But the key vjord here, of course, is willingly. Swift, recognizing that the way of this world is such that he must leave his money to strangers, acquiesces; choosing to align his will (in both senses) with the way of this world and presumably with Him Whose will controls this world, he acts charitably. It is just this sort of clearsightedness about what things are transitory, what permanent, which distinguishes those good works of Swift which are praised in the panegyric. The panegyric begins with a brief defense of Swift's satire, to which topic we vjill return at the close of this study. Immediately after this defense we are plunged into those lines of the panegyric which are so often cited as exemplary of Swift's overweening pride. Swift begins them by claiming that, He never thought an Honour done him Because a Duke was proud to own him: Would rather slip aside and chuse To talk with Wits in dirty shoes, (319-322) and Swift's expressed preference has been taken as his own variety of inverse snobbery. It is true, there is a sort of pride in these lines, but it is a very specialized pride--the pride of a man who knows to a surety the source of ultimate value. "He never courted men in Station," Swift goes on to claim, " Nor persons had in admiration ." And our understanding of this last line, and of the whole passage in which it occurs, depends upon our recognizing

PAGE 145

133 that Swift has taken this line directly from the close of the Book of Jucie . Jude, having charged an unidentified group of heretics with inverting all religious values, ends his charge vjith the assertion that while these heretics disregarded God, they "persons had in admiration." ' Swift's claim, therefore, that he was such a man as did not have "persons in admiration" at least suggests, by reference to Jude, vjhat Swift did have "in admiration." As he goes on to claim, he Of no Man ' s Greatness was afraid. Because he sought for no Man ' s Aid. (327-238) He was, therefore, at perfect liberty to honor merit in whatever station he found it--which is exactly the virtue he claims for himself. Further, Swift in the panegyric does not only imply what he has "in admiration" by telling us what he does not have "in admiration;" occasionally he does, by allusion, tell us what he trusts. Let us examine, for example. Swift's claim that. Fair LIBERTY was all his Cry; For her he stood prepared to die; For her he boldly stood alone; For her he oft expos 'd his own. (347-350) Barry Slepian, we will remember, took this claim to be a piece of self-satire, but, I think we shall see, this claim Swift made in absolute earnest. In order to understand this claim we must first understand Swift's use of the word "liberty." And that use, in turn depends, I believe, on the lines which begin the verse

PAGE 146

134 paragraph in which 'chis claim appears. In those lines Sv;ift tells us ne With Princes kept a due Decorum, But never stood in Awe before 'em. He follow'd David ' s Lesson just, In Princes never put thy trust . (339-342) The lesson to which Swift refers is to be found in psalm 146: Put not your trust in princes, Nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish. Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the Lord his God.'^^ And with this lesson as his moral guide it is small wonder that Swift x^7as provoked at the sight of a "slave in power." Trust in God, not subjugation to princes "in whom there is no help," is Swift's ideal of liberty. Therefore, Swift could truly claim of himself, not out of bravado, but from the center of his own moral values, that . . .Power was never in his Thought; And Wealth he valu'd not a groat. (357-358) Understanding, as he did, the transience of power and fame and worldly station Swift could, as he claimed, afford to lose them. Indeed, i.n losing them, he gains no less than everything. Neither the panegyric, then, nor the whole of the Verses should be understood as a praise of Swift's stoic fortitude in the face of adversities, but rather as a praise of Swift's ability, through trust in God, to translate these adversities to positive

PAGE 147

135 goods. Take, for example, the adversity on v;hich Swift dwells so often in this poem, the limitations and vagueries of human friendship. The coldness of most of Sv;ift's friends at his death plays a prominent part in the second section of the Verses and Swift returns to the ultimately undependable nature of human friendship in the panegyric, remarking that he knew a time when. . , . ev'n his own familiar Friends Intent upon their private ends Like Renegadoes now he feels, Against him lifting up their Heels . (403-406) No doubt this sort of becrayal pained Swift deeply, more deeply perhaps, than it might most men, but, nevertheless, the terms in which he expresses this betrayal indicate that he knew hov; to find his own true self-interest even in this most painful form of adversity. For the italicized sections of this quotation are drawn from Psalm 41, Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of iny bread, hath lifted up his heel against me. and the whole argument of this psalm is relevant, I think, to Swift's poem. The psalm begins with a statement of faith: the Lord will show mercy to the charitable man. Then the psalm becomes a highly personal narration which, something like Swift's Verses , begins with a. confession: I said, Lord, be merciful unto me: heal my soul; for I have sinned against thee.

PAGE 148

136 Quickly we learn that the narrator is sick both in soul and body and that his friends have chosen this moment of his adversity "to speak evil of" him and to plot against him: All that hate me whisper together against me: against me do they devise my hurt. An evil thing, say they, cleaveth fast unto him: and now that he lieth he shall rise no more. The similarity between these friends of the narrator (who actually "devise his hurt") and Swift's friends who, if they do not actually devise his hurt, anticipate his death with unseemly indifference is, I think, obvious. Swift himself acknowledges the similarity by forming, as we have seen above, his own complaint out of the words of the psalm. But the relevance, for us, of the intersection of Swift's Verses with Psalm 41, lies in the conclusion of that psalm, a conclusion which both is, and is not, like the conclusion of Swift's poem. But thou, Lord, be merciful unto me, and raise me up, that I may requite them. [my unfaithful friends]. By this I know that thou favourest me, because mine enemy doth not triumph over me. The narrator of this psalm knows that in his adversities his only I refuge is the Lord. But the narrator--who is an Old Testament narrator--can conceive of God's graciousness manifesting itself towards him only by permitting him to recover his full earthly power. Swift, on the other hand, recognizes that it may also be a mark of grace to die in charity ^jith those who have sinned against one. It is this good which he draws from those who have

PAGE 149

137 betrayed him. Ingratitude he often found. And pity'd those who meant the Wound: But, kept the Tenor of his Mind, To merit well of human Kind. (359-3o2) Over and over the lesson is repeated as Swift, in the panegyric, draws from all the adversities of his life-the political jars of his friends, his exile to Ireland, Wood's half-pence, the list goes on and on-his own true good. And that good is a good, not only for him, but, because it is founded on his trust in God's way with man, a good for all the members of God's community. Even out of the flaws of his own character Swift can draw good. The Dean, he admits, "Had too much Satyr in his Vein" (456) and, others might add, too much vanity as well. But from his overabundance of satire he built , . .a House for Fools and Mad: And shev;'d by one satyric Touch, No Nation wanted it so much. (480-482) And from a combination of satire and vanity he drew no less a piece of charity than the Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift itself, x-jhich, as much as any seventeenth century meditation on death, can instruct one how to find in the greatest earthly adversity, death itself, that true Good "vjhich may in the end bring life everlasting."

PAGE 150

NOTES 1. "This maxim was XCIX in the first edition of Reflexions ou sentences et maxi mes morales , and, together with a number of others, was suppressed by La Rochefoucault in later editior.s. It will^be found in modern editions among the "Reflexions Supprimees." Sir Harold Williams, The Poems o f Jonathan Swift , II, 553, n. 7. "~ 2. This version first appeared in April, 1733 wich the imp;:int of J. Roberts. Swift always denied authorship of the version, but it is, nevertheless, generally considered his work. 3. The Correspondence of Alexander Pope , ed. George Sher^iurn, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1956), IV, 130. ^« The Correspondence of Jonathan Swift , ed. Sir Harold Williams, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1965), V, 139. 5. Review of English Studies . N. S. XIV (1963), 249-256. 6. The epitaph is, of course, in Latin. HIC DSPOSITUM EST CORPUS JONATHAN SWIFT, S.T.D. HUJUS ECCLESIAE CATHEDP..LIS DECANI. UBI SAEVA INDIGNATIO ULTERIUS COR LACERARE N^iQUIT. ABI VIATOR, ET IMITARE, SI POTERIS, STRENUUM PRO VIRILI LIBERTATIS VINDICATOREM. 7. " Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift ." SEL, V, 513-518. 8. For both this view of these lines and for the supporting quotation from Charles Williams I am indebted to Maynard Mack's discussion in Ma.ior British Writers , ed. G. B. Harrison et_al., 2 vols. (New York, 1954), I, 237. 9. Psalm 146:5. 10. Correspondence of Swift . IV, 152. 11. Ibid . IV, 476. 12. Irvin Ehrenpreis, Swift, the man, his works, and the age . 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1962-), I, 106. 13. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift , ed. Herbert Davis etal. 13 vols. (Oxford, 1957), IX, 263. 14. (New Haven, 1954), p. 135. 15. "The Meditation on Death and its Appearance in Metaphysical Poetry," Neophilologus . XLV (1961), p. 325. 16. Of Prayer, and Meditation . Cited from Martz, p. 135. 138

PAGE 151

ijy 17. Devotions. . . (Ann Arbor, 1959), p. 116. "Meditation XVIII." 18. 19. 20. 22. 29. L. A. Wyman, "The Tradition of the Formal Meditation in Rove's The Fair Panitent ." PP. XLII (1953), 412-41&. The Imitation of Clirlst . Cited from Martz, o. 136. Robert Persons, A Christian Directorie . CiteG froro Mc'irtz p. 136. " ~ 21. Hamlet . V, i, Of Praye r, and Meditation . Cited from Marc^, p. 137. 23. Ecclesiastas 7. 24. The Prose Works of Jonathar. Swift . IX, 256 25. Correspor.der.ce of Swift .. Ill, 118. 26. Swift an d the A'ge ol Compromise (Lawrence, Xaasao, 1S5S), p. 66. o , ^7 . Ibid . , p. 66 28. SEL, p. 517 The Mtxi.Tis of La Rochefoucauld , ed. Louis Xronenoergcir (New York, 1959), p. xvi. 30. Ibid ., p. 129. "Maxim 509," 31. A Philosophical Enquiry into the Laws of Nature , [first published 16 72] , trans. John Towers (Dublin, :.75C). p. 211. 22. Characteristics. . . . ed. John M, Robercson, 2 vols. (Gloucester, Mass., 1963), I, 249. 33. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift . IX, p. 232. 34. SEL, p. 514. 35. The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift . IX, p. 139. 36. Devotiono. . . . p. 103. "Meditation XVI." 37. The Book of Common Prayer . "Communion of che Sick. 38. The line is from Swift's poem. The Journal . 39. Devotions. . . . p. 103. "Meditation XVI." 40. Psalm 49:10. 1. •>

PAGE 152

140 41. Jude , 16. 42. Psalm 146:3, 4, 5. 43. The Book of Common Prayer, "Communion of the Sick.

PAGE 153

WORKS CITED Boas, George. The Happy Beast in French Thought of the Seventeenth Century . New York, 1966. Book of Common Prayer, The . London, 1662. Collmer, Robert, G. "The Meditation on Death and its Appearance in Metaphysical Poetry," Neophilolugus . XLV (1961), 331-332. Corke and Orrery, John Boyle, Earl of . Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr. Jonathan Swift . London, 1752. Cowley, Abraham. The English Writings of Abraham Cowley , edited A. R. Waller. 2 vols. Cambridge, Eng., 1905. Cudworth, Ralph. The True Incellectual System of the Universe . London, 1678, Cumberland, Richard. A Philosophical Enquiry iato the Laws of Nature , trans. John Towers. Dublin, 175G. Davis, Herbert. Jonathan Swift: essays on his satire and other studies . New York, 1964. Delany, Patrick. Observations upon Lord Orrery's Remarks . London, 1754. Dictionary of National Biography, The , edited by Sir Leslie Stephen and Sir Sidney Lee. 22 vols. Oxford, 1937. Donne, John, Devotions upon Emergent Occasions, Together with Death's Duel . Ann Arbor, 1959. Dryden, John. Of Dramatic Poesy and Other Critical Essays , edited George Watson. 2 vols. London and New York, 1962. Ehrenpreis, Irvin. Swift: the man, his works, and the age . 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 1962. Finley, John, H. Jr. Pindar and Aeschylus . Cambridge, Mass., 1955. Goldsmith, Oliver. The Collected Works of Oliver Goldsmich . edited Arthur Friedman. 5 vols. Oxford, 1966. 141

PAGE 154

142 Harrison, G. B. editor et_al. Major British Writers . 2 vols. New York, 1954. Harth, Phillip. Swift aad Anglican Rationalism; The Religious Background of "A Tale of a Tub" . Chicago, 1961. Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathon, edited M. Oakeshott, Oxford, 1946. Horace. The Complete Works of Horace , edited Dr. John Marshall. New York, 1923. Imitation of Christ, The , edited Edward J. Klein. From the first edition of an English translation made c. 1530 by Richard Whitford. New York, 1941. Johnson, Maurice. The Sin of Wit: Jonathan Swift as a Poet . Syracuse, New York, 1950. Johnson, Samuel. Lives of the English Poets , edited George Birkback Hill. 3 vols. Oxford, 1905. Koyre, Alexander, From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe . New York, 1957. Kuhn, Thomas S. The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought . New York, 1959. La Rochefoucauld, Francoic, due de . The Maxims of La Rochefoucault , edited Louis Kronenberger. New York, 1959. Lichtenstein, Aharon. Henry More: The Rational Theology of a Cambridge Platonist . Cambridge, Mass., 1962. Luis de Granada. Of Prayer, and Meditation , trans. Richard Hopkins. Douay, 1612. Maresca, Thomas, E. Pope's Horation Poems . Columbus, Ohio, 1966. Martz, Louis, L. The Poetry of Meditation: A Study in English Religious Literature of the Seventeenth Century . New Haven, 1954. Mintz, Samuel. The Hunting of Leviathan: Seventeenth-Century Reactions to the Materialism and Moral Philosophy of Thomas Hobbes . London, 1962. More, Henry. An Antidote Against Idolatry . London, 1672-73. . Collection of Several Philosophical Writings . London, 1662,

PAGE 155

Murry, J. Middleton, Jonathan Swift: A Critical Biography . London, 1954. Ohlin, Peter. "'Cadenus and Vanessa': Reason and Passion," SEL, IV (1964), 485-496, Paulson, Ronald. "Swift, Stella, and Permanence," SLH , XXVII (1960), 298-314. Persons, Robert. A Christian Directorie . [Rouen] , 1585. Pope, Alexander, The Correspondence of Alexander Pope , edited George Sherburn. 5 vols. Oxford, 1956, . The Twickenham Edition of the Poems of Alexander Pope , edited John Butt et al , 6 vols. London and New Haven, 1939-1961, Plato. The Dialogues of Plato , trans. Benjamin Jowett, New York, 1937. Plotinus. The Enneads , trans. Stephen MacKenna, New York, 1957. Quintana, Ricardo. The Mind and Art of Jonathan Swift . New York, 1936. Richmond, H. M. The School of Love: The Evolution of the Stuarc Love Lyric . Princeton, New Jersey, 1964. San Juan, E. , Jr. "The Anti-Poetry of Jonathan Swift," P^, XLIV (1965), 387-396. Shaftesbury, Anthony Ashley Cooper, third Earl of . Characteristics of Men, Manners, Opinions, Times, etc. , edited John M. Rooercson. 2 vols. Gloucester, Mass., 1963. Slepian, Barry. "The Ironic Intention of Swift's Verses on his own death." Review of English Studies . N.S. XIV (1963), 240-256. Spingarn, J. E. editor. Critical Essays of the Seventeenth Century . 3 vols. Oxford, 1957. Suckling, John. The Works of Sir John Suckling , edited A. Hamilton Thomson, M.A. London, 1910. Swift, Deane, An Essay upon the Life, Writings, and Character of Dr. Jonathan Swift . London, 1755. Swift, Jonathan. Jonathan Swift: A Tale of a Tub , edited A. C. Guthkelch and D. Nichol Smith. Oxford, 1958. . The Collected Poems of Jonathan Swifc , edited Joseph Horrell. 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass., 1962.

PAGE 156

144 Swift, Jonathan. The Correspondence of Jonathan Swift , edited Sir Harold Williams. 5 vols. Oxford, 1963. . The Poems of Jonathan Swift, edited Sir Harold Williams. 3 vols. Oxford, 1958. . The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, edited Herbert Davis et al . 13 vols. Oxford, 1957. . Vanessa and her correspondence with Jonathan Swift. edited A. Martin Freeman. Boston and New York, 172x. Trevelyan, G. M. History of England . 2 vols. New York, 1954. Waingrow, Marshall. " Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift ," SEL, V (1965), 513-518. Waltzer, Michael. The Revolution of the Saints: A Study Ipthe Origir.s of Radical Politics . Cambridge, Mass., 1965. Williams, Kathleen. Swift and the Age of Compromise . Lawrence, Kansas, 1958. Wyman, L. A. "The Tradition of the formal Meditation in Rowe ' s The Fair Penetent ," P^, XLII (1963), 412-416. Young, Edward. The Poetical Works of Edward Young , edited Rev. J.. Mitrord. Boston and New York, n.d.

PAGE 157

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Joha Lrwin Fischer was born May 26, 1940, in Chicago, Illinois. In June, 1958, he graduated from Bexley High School in Columbus, Ohio. From 1958 to 1962 he attended The Ohio State University, where in June, 1962, he received the degree of Bachelor of Arts (in English). From September, 1962, until the present time he has pursued work towards the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the University of Florida. In 1962 Mr. Fischer held an honorary Woodrow Wilson Fellowship. From 1962 to 1965 he held an NDEA title IV Fellowship, and in 1966 a Graduate Fellowship from the University of Florida. Since 1966, he has been a Graduate Assistant at the University of Florida. John Irwin Fischer is married to the former Judith Lee Stirling. He is a member of the Modern Language Association.

PAGE 158

60l5 //