Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
In Browning's second letter to Elizabeth Barrett he uses the imagery of “white light” versus “prismatic hues” to represent the contrast between the full and direct reflection of her personality in lyric utterance, and the partial and oblique refraction of his own personality in the medium of the dramatic monologue. A little later, he reveals his consciousness of the limitations of his poetry through a kindred image: “these scenes and song-scraps are such mere and very escapes of my inner power, which lives in me like the light in those crazy Mediterranean phares I have watched at sea, wherein the light is ever revolving in a dark gallery, bright and alive, and only after a weary interval leaps out, for a moment, from the one narrow chink, and then goes on with the blind wall between it and you …” In response, Elizabeth Barrett, while deprecating the merit of her own poetry and paying tribute to the worth of Browning's, acknowledges the justice of his self-criticism: “and in fact, you have not written the R. B. poem yet—your rays fall obliquely rather than directly straight. I see you only in your moon” (i, 22). In one of her letters, though referring to “the glory of dramatic art,” she urges: “Yet I am conscious of wishing you to take the other crown besides—and after having made your own creatures speak in clear human voices, to speak yourself out of that personality which God made, and with the voice which he tuned into such power and sweetness of speech” (ii, 182).
1 Letters of R.B. and E.B.B., i, 17.
2 The Works of John Ruskin, ed. E. T. Cook and Alexander Wedderburn (London, 1909), xxxvi, xxxiv.
3 See in this connection Ch. 9, “Browning's Conception of Love as Represented in Paracelsus,” in my book, The Infinite Moment and Other Essays in Robert Browning (Toronto, 1950).
4 See his Introd. in Miss E. H. Hickey's edition of Strafford (London, 1840).
5 The Life of Browning, Everyman's Library ed. (London, 1915), p. 111.
6 Cf. ll. 31–39 in “Plot-Culture”:
7 A similar idea is expressed in ll. 652–655 of Bishop Blougram's Apology:
8 Cf. the imagery of the use of “an optic glass” in A Death in the Desert. This is symbolic of the way in which, through the Incarnation of Christ, the truth of God's nature is adapted to man's apprehension by being “reduced to plain historic fact” and “diminished into clearness.”
9 Robert Browning: A Portrait (London, 1952), pp. 259–261. I agree that Browning's statement to Furnivall, “I had no particular woman in mind,” does not preclude an autobiographical element in Numpholeptos. The poet was frequently evasive in answering questions of members of the Browning Society, especially when they seemed to pry into the privacy of his personal life. Moreover, the autobiographical reference is, as I have said, indirect and glancing, confined to the point of contrast between the nymph's idealism and her lover's humanism.
10 A Browning Handbook (New York, 1935), p. 410.
11 Robert Browning (Edinburgh and London, 1905).
12 Life and Letters of Robert Browning (London, 1891), p. 20.
13 Evelyn Abbott and Lewis Campbell, Life of Jowett, i, 400–401.
14 Letter of 25 April 1856.
