ON A TASTE FOR POETRY.

421

unanimous AY is heard.) Those opposed to the resolution will The resolution is unanimously adopted.

say no.

III.IS POETRY PREJUDICIAL TO SUCCESS IN LIFE? Chairman. Gentlemen will come to order. The question for the present debate is as follows (reads from a paper): "Is the cultivation of a taste for poetry prejudicial to success in life?" I confess, gentlemen, that I have been too much occupied during the week to give to this subject the consideration which it deserves. I shall, therefore, withhold any expression of my views till I have heard what others have to say, and thus obtained some materials for a judgment. The Opener now has the floor.

us

Opener. Sir, I shall take the affirmative of this question, and maintain that the poetical is adverse to the positive, to the practical, to the real; and that the cultivation of a taste for poetry is apt to be a serious obstacle to worldly success. Sir, one half of the mistakes and ills of life arise from the abuse of the imagination. When we ought to be riveting our attention on the business immediately in hand, we let the imagination distract us with prospects clothed in its delightful rose-hues. Much pleasanter are those prospects, no doubt, than the matter before - pleasanter than a demonstration in Euclid, or a sum in algebra; pleasanter than any homely, every-day task. Now, just in proportion as the play of the imagination diverts us from the discharge of the serious duties of life, just in that proportion, I say, is the imagination an intruder and a mischief-maker. Well, sir, poetry ministers to the imaginative part of our nature; -it rouses, excites, and charms, the imaginative faculty-it stimulates that faculty to lord it over those soberer faculties, the faithful exercise of which is essential to our well-being. Why, sir, what says Shakspeare himself, the admitted king of bards, the very high priest of poetry?

"The lunatic, the lover, and the poet,
Are of imagination all compact'."

(Cries of order! gentleman is not Who can doubt?

He couples the poet, sir, with the madman, and with one who is often little better than a madman, the lover! shame! The Chairman raps and says: The out of order. He has a right to his opinion.) Sir, such interruptions shall not affect my plain speaking. Who can doubt, sir, I say, that Shakspeare himself regarded poetry as detrimental to success in life? And will the advocates of poetry

demand a higher authority than his? I think not, sir, and I am willing to accept that authority as the sufficient crown of my argument.

(Several members rise and cry, Mr. Chairman ! The Chairman calls the name of the Second Speaker.)

Second Speaker. There are as many sides to this subject, I believe, sir, as there are facets to a prism; and I may add that there are so many prismatic colors dancing about the question, that the judgment is bewildered as to its true aspect. But, sir, I will take a purely practical and historical view of it, and that view, I must contend, corroborates the argument of my predeces sor. Poets, sir, are proverbially unfortunate; and, as Young says, "Look into those, men call unfortunate, and, nearer viewed, you'll find they've been unwise." The name of poet, sir, brings up the recollection of Homer, a beggar and a vagrant; of the starving Otway, choked by a crust; of Marlowe, killed in a low and disgraceful quarrel; of Chatterton, seeking in death a refuge from penury; of Goldsmith, always in debt; of Burns, dissipated and unthrifty; of Savage, perishing in prison; of Byron, whose life was a failure; of Cowper, miserable and mad; of Tasso, triumphant only in death. Sir, I could go on extending the catalogue till I exhausted your patience. But I think I have refreshed your memory sufficiently to show that the poet's lot has been generally a most unenviable one; that his Jordan has been truly a hard road to travel; and that his success in life has rarely been such as to afford an argument adverse to our position on this question.

Third Speaker. I would like to know, sir, what we are to understand by the phrase "success in life.' There are various opinions on this head. With one person, "success in life" is the getting of money. The rich man is in his eye the successful man. John Jacob Astor and Stephen Girard are the incarnations of his idea of "success in life." With another, the attainment of office and position is success. The President, the Secretary of State, the Postmaster, the Governor, are successful men. With another, the man who can lead a life of pleasure and excitement has achieved success.

But, sir, my notions of success do not accord with any of these. To my mind, the man who has best developed his moral, mental, and physical faculties is the successful man. He has done the best that he could do for his health of body and soul. He has fulfilled those laws which, in his moments of clearest insight, he sees are sacred and divine. His lot may be lowly, but he is nobly contented. A "violet by a mossy stone" is to him a source

ON A TASTE FOR POETRY.

423

of happiness; for, along with his other faculties, he has cultivated his love of the beautiful-ay, sir, the poetical element of his being. The shifting of the clouds, the aspect of the ocean, the waving grass, the drifting snow, all the ministrations of nature, are to him joys and benedictions. Sir, such a man is a poet, though he may not know it:

66

Many are poets who have never penned

Their inspiration, and perchance the best."

And, sir, such a man has attained true success in life; for he has best fulfilled the great disciplinary object of living, the exercise and development of faculties which will best make him the recipient of heavenly and immortal joys. Sir, how immeasurably above the success of the rich man, or of the mere man of office, or of the man of pleasure, is such success!

Fourth Speaker. Mr. Chairman, I object to our allowing the remarks of the last speaker to carry any weight. A criminal is never suffered to be a witness in his own behalf. The gentleman who has so eloquently defended the cause of poets is himself a poet. He was caught the other day in the act, or, as we lawyers say, fla-gran'te de-lic'tu, Walker's Rhyming Dictionary in one hand, and a manuscript in the other, his eyes in a fine frenzy rolling, his hair uncombed, his

Third Speaker. Mr. Chairman, I object to these personalities. Fourth Speaker. But I maintain, sir,

Chairman. The gentleman will come to order.

Fourth Speaker. I will prove, sir, that

Chairman. Sit down, sir!

Fifth Speaker. Sir, the gentleman who is charged with being a poet has, nevertheless, raised a question of essential importance in this discussion. What are we to understand by the phrase "success in life"? I would like to have that settled before we proceed further.

Sixth Speaker. Mr. Chairman, we will not resort to subtleties and refinements of language for the purpose of obscuring what is plain and simple. By "success in life," every one means the attainment of that position of competence, of respectability, of popularity, which is, in the majority of cases, most conducive to happiness and a useful life. No one will contend that the bad rich man has attained more success in life than the good man of moderate means, who is yet rich in the esteem of his fellow-citizens. But the man who, through imprudence in worldly affairs, or too great devotion to pursuits incompatible with worldly advancement, has missed the prize of competence for himself and

family, that man, we say, has failed of success in life. Now, under this view of the case, how large a majority of the poets have failed! And, therefore, I contend that poetry is prejudicial to success.

Seventh Speaker. I think I understand the gentleman; but there is a fatal fallacy in his argument. If we are to measure a man's success in life by his attainment of a competence, of respectability, of popularity, then must we pronounce the lives i of some of the greatest ornaments and benefactors of humanity ! to be failures. Then Columbus did not achieve success in life, though he gave America to the world; John Gu'tenberg did not attain success, though he gave us the art of printing, for he impoverished himself, and made himself very unpopular, especially among the scribes, who got their living by copying manuscripts. John Huss did not attain success, for he was burnt at the stake

a very unpopular exit, and by no means respectable. Robert Fulton missed the prize of success in life, although he gave us the steamboat. In the words of my predecessor, his devotion was "too great to pursuits incompatible with worldly advancement." He derived little or no benefit from his invention, was scoffed at as a dreamer, and died poor.

Ah! sir, I do not believe in my friend's definition. That man is the most successful who has built up the noblest character, and who has done most for humanity. Though he die poor, though he die at the stake, though he die ignominiously on the gallows, still he is the truly successful one.

"Whether on the gallows high, or in the battle's van,

The fittest place where man can die is where he dies for man."

In short, sir, that man has best achieved "success in life" who has done deeds, and thought thoughts, which shall be to him the best crown of honor, the best source of satisfaction, in another and a higher life. Any other view of success than this is delusive, pernicious, and atheistical.

Eighth Speaker. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that gentlemen are straying, in a most unwarrantable manner, from the topic immediately before us. The question, as I understand it, is, whether a devotion to poetry is adverse to worldly prosperity.

Chairman. The gentleman has not stated the question with precision. It is, "Whether the cultivation of a taste for poetry is prejudicial to success in life." Such being the question, it is no straying from the subject to discuss what is meant by "success in life."

Eighth Speaker. Well, sir, I must still believe that the dis

ON A TASTE FOR POETRY..

425

cussion has taken too wide a range. We all have a general idea of what is meant by success in life; and I think there is no doubt that poets generally fail of that success. Why, sir, who is disposed to trust a poetical clerk, or a poetical lawyer, or a poetical doctor? No man of business wants a poet in his counting-house or his banking-room.

I know a young man who, whenever he wants money from his relations, threatens to publish a volume of poems. To prevent such a disgrace to the family-such a calamity to himselfthey readily come "down with the dust." Poets are notoriously improvident, careless, and unthrifty. The man who accosts me once a month with the inquiry, "You have n't such a thing as a V spot about you?" writes poetry for the magazines. Sir, I shall vote on this question in the affirmative.

Ninth Speaker. I hope, sir, that the gentleman will keep his mind open to conviction. Facts are unfortunately against him. When he asked "Who wants a poet in his banking-room?" I was irresistibly reminded of two American poets, who, if not at the head of the list, are second to none. I allude to Charles Sprague and Fitz-Greene Halleck. (Applause.) Halleck, the author of the immortal" Marco Bozzaris," was for many years the confidential clerk of the wealthiest man in the country, Mr. Astor. Sprague was the cashier of a bank, and famous for his punctiliousness, his diligence, and his wonderful accuracy in financial matters. If other examples are wanting, there is that of Horace Smith, a successful broker; of Samuel Rogers, a prosperous banker. Sir, it is not true that a taste for poetry unfits a man for active duties.

"Who trusts a poetical lawyer?" the gentleman asked. Sir, did he forget that Blackstone, the famous author of the Commentaries, of the first book studied in the law, was a poet? Did he forget that Mr. Justice Story, whose law-books are quoted throughout the land, was a poet? I might go on, and multiply instances without number, directly in the teeth of the gentleman's assertion; but there are other views of the subject more convincing than this, and I will make way for those who are better able to do them justice.

Tenth Speaker. Mr. Chairman, I do not believe that the cultivation of poetry is incompatible with legal studies or legal success. Sir, I have a friend in a lawyer's office, who is as diligent a student of Blackstone as can be found. He recently wrote some lines "on the coming on of spring." I am the fortu

* See Sargent's Standard Speaker, the most comprehensive of the series.