In a message dated 01/11/2006 20:02:54 GMT Standard Time,
chtodel@GSS.UCSB.EDU
Don Johnson wrote:
We know
that VN had high regard for the poem--although it has little
in common with
the great bulk of his verse. Further, there is always an
element
of
individual tastes in poetry. N. was obviously trying to recreate a
"classic"
English style with a whiff of Frost. If Pope isn't your cuppa
of tea you
probably won't care for the poem. For the role in the book as a
whole,
it often
stunning.
I did read a comment that VN had said that composing Pale Fire the poem
was one of the most difficult things he had done; and I accept Matthew Roth's
statement that he gave a public reading of it once. However, did he actually say
that he had a high regard for it, as an original poetic composition he was proud
of? He doesn't strike me as someone who would ever say such a thing about his
own work. But I'm happy to be corrected.
Differences in taste are certainly, and traditionally, said be something
not open to discussion or dispute: not something I'm sure I entirely agree
with.
I wouldn't say Shade's poem has anything much at all in common with
Pope. On the other hand I would say it strongly resembles
Wordsworth's Prelude, with more of a whiff of Edsel than of Frost. My impression
is that these days Wordsworth is more highly admired in America than in England.
Most of my contemporaries reading English when I was an undergraduate found it
extremely difficult to enthuse over much of Wordsworth. "Two voices are there
..." etc. Personally I find The Prelude prosaic in long stretches, although it
occasionally rises above itself.
Shade's poem, and its quality, is obviously an absolutely crucial
and critical feature of VN's book. Perhaps one's whole understanding of the book
hinges on the poetic quality one attaches to the poem.
Charles Harrison-Wallace