,     ` · . T - . » V=·· . · •* ri ,   .» 2 A. .  M v r ¤=‘ ‘ r ¤'* ~  r·¤ »· "‘. T  · V *‘f · ‘·`·‘***·  or -`·"-****’~r"*‘*`  ' .-  "‘“    
  » $1 T H E N E VV RE P U B LIC —r February 24, I932` i in  eg `W ’‘_V   » -- ii  ,»A ii?
E i, conservation. Middle-class writers, as such, have lost the much contemporary poetry an affinity with the metaphysical  Q '4‘ir `iiiii
    _ capacity to deal creatively even with their own spiritual school, although such affinity in most cases is not reasonably ii `V     `:`_  
  pf heritage: even Franklin and Emerson, even Whitman and justihed by either technique or spirit. Thisclaimz however,  ij
    Hawthorne, are too much for them. It is now the spokes- can more readily be maintained in regard to a number of  €_ 
g ;» men for another class who will have to say what is worth the poems published here, ·   5 
  _· _ saying about these bourgeois geniuses. In the. first place, there is apparent a certain "tOngh T ' ;;»¤fg}_{ `i.  4  
  L There is no reason why a volume of essays on American reasonableness"—a meticulous structure of idea—beneath ;· ..Ei”ei-of  ‘_’_  
  ~ literature could not be written "from and for” the year the differing degrees of lyric grace on the surface of these ·.  
; i 1930. But it would have to be written by men fully con- poems. Judgment, to employ the sometimes vicious abstrac-      
1   scious that they live in a period of social crisis, of revo- tions of Hobbes, provides the structure, and fancy the 1 ¥1=i_,i_i?i; fi}?.
2 2_ lutionary social transition; that, hence, the momentous ornament. In a few of the items, such as “Love in Con- · "    
V things to say about literary history are now only to be said stancy” or the title piece, the material is ordered in .the_ i     ifi?
Q ` from a social, not “primarily from a literary point of precise terms of argument, the principle of approachused   i__` j  
r   view"; that the vital questions now are: VVhat, realis- by l\-larvell and certain of his predecessors with such dis-  
` tically, has been the social history of the American mind-? tirctive poetic success. Indeed, in almost all of Mr. Por- r V   ·‘`’ i
1 `\Vhat classes have held social power long enough to achieve t€1'iS work, sometimes in default of other virtues, thereiis »    
i cultural maturity? VVhat have been the idiosyncrasies of a sense of direction and intellectual suspense not present in ;§i;   _ rj-
their culture, and what connection have these with their thi? D0€U‘Y of flw i1`¤1T1€€li=1f€ TS1`Hdlti0¤ \Vhi€h engaged itself ·   Qi —
economic needs? X/Vhat classes havelbeen excluded from S0 frequently in the mere exploitation of mood.     ‘  
i culture in part or altogether? When did American litera·_ `But the success of such a method as Mr. P0l'f€1‘ has   ‘ 1
ture reach its apogee, and what has been the pathology of chosen depends on thedegree to which fancy emotionally   ° V ii
i its decline? How much of it was valid for a particular realizes, rather than ornaments, the progression and end y   i  
class in a particular era, and how much of it rises above its P¤'€$€i`ib€d by lUdgm€¤t· OT, Si¤€€ 5UCh realization l$il¤‘   V _
- class setting into general validity? How is this latter to deed the Secret of all poetic effect, the matter can be stated if  - V
; be saved from the philistines and made available to another Conversely with more p¤rti¤e¤ce= with this treatment of —    
class in another age? Such questions cannot be answered th€m°» 3 failurc in such Yegllzatlon l$» by mmmsl with iii _
‘ by Vvritcrs `vho Speak "p1»{mar{]y from Z litcrary point Of the naked logical expertness, more obvious and vulnerable. ,  
view.” Literary values, not social, are at stake; but a sense Sometimes, as in “T·he Signature of Pain" itself, this is the [ 
V of literary valuesis not limited to critics who ignore all @*5% ami tim Ycadcr l$—b€tmY€d into admiration, OF l¤t€Y‘   , `“
other values; and, in a period of profound social change, ESB by qualifies which MC not P€€u1l¤Y1Y POEHC- 4   i
these can be isolated and clarified in their true independ· The Uaturc Of MY- PQYt€YiS Hlvltn is not Without b€&Y‘   —
ence only when all the relevant non—literary questions have lng On this Point- In dsvelvpiag an idea he USES 3 WP'? vf |' _
been carefully asked and Cogcmly ;mSw€r€d_ TO ask comparison, or implied figure, of a non-sensory character  ?_ ·
them, and to answer them, wsu be to initiate a battle beside, Whisk iS~b<=S¤r<=>>¤—    
  i t    
  Ws-,      we -W-..,-,__t-.-...”._e_.__.w__________r_,_-_____oe-~.,__,__;______________,________l__________s _, is ._ ..i`”·`  t.»i as ii`  I