by
John Donne

Vol. II
Introduction and Commentary

With Introductions & Commentary by Herbert J. C. Grierson M.A.

Introduction

I
The Poetry of Donne

Donne’s position among English poets, regarded from the historical and what we like to call scientific point of view, has been defined with learning and discrimination by Mr. Courthope in his History of English Poetry. As a phenomenon of curious interest for the student of the history of thought and literary fashions, there it is. Mr. Courthope is far too well-informed and judicious a critic to explain Donne’s subtle thought and erudite conceits by a reference to ‘Marini and his followers’. Gongora and Du Bartas are alike passed over in silence. What we are shown is the connexion of ‘metaphysical wit’ with the complex and far-reaching changes in men’s conception of Nature which make the seventeenth century perhaps the greatest epoch in human thought since human thinking began.

The only thing that such a criticism leaves unexplained and undefined is the interest which Donne’s poetry still has for us, not as an historical phenomenon, but as poetry. Literary history has for the historian a quite distinct interest from that which it possesses for the student and lover of literature. For the historian it is a matter of positive interest to connect Donne’s wit with the general disintegration of mediaeval thought, to recognize the influence on the Elizabethan drama of the doctrines of Machiavelli, or to find in Pope’s achievement in poetry a counterpart to Walpole’s in politics. For the lover of literature none of these facts has any positive interest whatsoever. Donne’s wit attracts or repels him equally whatever be its source; Tamburlaine and Iago lose none of their interest for us though we know nothing of Machiavelli; Pope’s poetry is not a whit more or less poetical by being a strange by-product of the Whig spirit in English life. For the lover of literature, literary history has an indirect value. He studies history that he may discount it. What he relishes in a poet of the past is exactly the same essential qualities as he enjoys in a poet of his own day — life and passion and art. But between us and every poet or thinker of the past hangs a thinner or thicker veil of outworn fashions and conventions. The same life has clothed itself in different garbs; the same passions have spoken in different images; the same art has adapted itself to different circumstances. To the historian these old clothes are in themselves a subject of interest. His enjoyment of Shakespeare is heightened by finding the explanation of Falstaff’s hose, Pistol’s hyperboles, and the poet’s neglect of the Unities. To the lover of literature they are, until by understanding he can discount them, a disadvantage because they invest the work of the poet with an irrelevant air of strangeness. He studies them that he may grow familiar with them and forget them, that he may clear and intensify his sense of what alone has permanent value, the poet’s individuality and the art in which it is expressed.

Donne’s conceits, of which so much has been made and on whose historical significance Mr. Courthope has probably said the last word, are just like other examples of these old clothes. The question for literature is not whence they came, but how he used them. Is he a poet in virtue or in spite of them, or both? Are they fit only to be gathered into a museum of antiquated fashions such as Johnson prefixed to his study of the last poet who wore them in quite the old way (for Dryden, who pilfered more freely from Donne than from any of his predecessors, cut them to a new fashion), or are they the individual and still expressive dress of a true and great poet, commanding admiration in their own manner and degree as freshly and enduringly as the stiff and brocaded magnificence of Milton’s no less individual, no less artificial style?

Donne’s reputation as a poet has passed through many vicissitudes in the course of the last three centuries. With regard to his ‘wit’, its range and character, erudition and ingenuity, all generations of critics have been at one. It is as to the relation of this ‘wit’ to, and its effect on, his poetry that they have been at variance. To his contemporaries the ‘wit’ was identical with the poetry. Donne’s ‘wit’ gave him the same supremacy among poets that learning and humour and art gave to Jonson among dramatists. To certain of his Dutch admirers the wit of The Flea seemed superhuman, and the epitaph with which Carew closes his Elegy expresses the almost universal English opinion of the seventeenth century:

Here lies a king that ruled as he thought fit
The universal monarchy of wit;
Here lies two flamens, and both those the best,
Apollo’s first, at last the true God’s priest.

It may be doubted if Milton shared this opinion. He never mentions Donne, but it was probably of him or his imitators he was thinking when in his verses at Cambridge he spoke of

those new-fangled toys and trimmings slight
Which take our late fantastics with delight.

Certainly the growing taste for ‘correctness’ led after the Restoration to a discrimination between Donne’s wit and his poetry. ‘The greatest wit,’ Dryden calls him, ‘though not the greatest poet of our nation.’ What he wanted as a poet were just the two essentials of ‘classical’ poetry — smoothness of verse and dignity of expression. This point of view is stated with clearness and piquancy in the sentences of outrageous flattery which Dryden addressed to the Earl of Dorset in the opening paragraphs of his delightful Essay on Satire:

‘There is more of salt in all your verses, than I have seen in any of the moderns, or even of the ancients; but you have been sparing of the gall, by which means you have pleased all readers, and offended none. Donne alone, of all our countrymen, had your talent; but was not happy enough to arrive at your versification; and were he translated into numbers, and English, he would yet be wanting in the dignity of expression. That which is the prime virtue, and chief ornament, of Virgil, which distinguishes him from the rest of writers, is so conspicuous in your verses, that it casts a shadow on all your contemporaries; we cannot be seen, or but obscurely, while you are present. You equal Donne in the variety, multiplicity, and choice of thoughts; you excel him in the manner and the words. I read you both with the same admiration, but not with the same delight.

He affects the metaphysics, not only in his satires, but in his amorous verses, where nature only should reign; and perplexes the minds of the fair sex with nice speculations of philosophy, when he should engage their hearts, and entertain them with the softnesses of love. In this (if I may be pardoned for so bold a truth) Mr. Cowley has copied him to a fault; so great a one, in my opinion, that it throws his Mistress infinitely below his Pindarics and his latter compositions, which are undoubtedly the best of his poems and the most correct.’

Dryden’s estimate of Donne, as well as his application to his poetry of the epithet ‘metaphysical’, was transmitted through the eighteenth century. Johnson’s famous paragraphs in the Life of Cowley do little more than echo and expand Dryden’s pronouncement, with a rather vaguer use of the word ‘metaphysical’. In Dryden’s application it means correctly ‘philosophical’; in Johnson’s, no more than ‘learned’. ‘The metaphysical poets were men of learning, and to show their learning was their whole endeavour; but unluckily resolving to show it in rhyme, instead of writing poetry, they only wrote verses, and very often such verses as stood the trial of the fingers better than of the ear.’ They ‘drew their conceits from recesses of learning not very much frequented by common readers of poetry’. Waller is exempted from being a metaphysical poet because ‘he seldom fetches an amorous sentiment from the depths of science; his thoughts are for the most part easily understood, and his images such as the superficies of nature readily supplies’.

Even to those critics with whom began a revived appreciation of Donne as a poet and preacher, his ‘wit’ still bulks largely. It is impossible to escape from it. ‘Wonder-exciting vigour,’ writes Coleridge, ‘intenseness and peculiarity, using at will the almost boundless stores of a capacious memory, and exercised on subjects where we have no right to expect it — this is the wit of Donne.’ And lastly De Quincey, who alone of these critics recognizes the essential quality which may, and in his best work does, make Donne’s wit the instrument of a mind which is not only subtle and ingenious but profoundly poetical: ‘Few writers have shown a more extraordinary compass of powers than Donne; for he combined what no other man has ever done — the last sublimation of dialectical subtlety and address with the most impassioned majesty. Massy diamonds compose the very substance of his poem on the Metempsychosis, thoughts and descriptions which have the fervent and gloomy sublimity of Ezekiel or Aeschylus, whilst a diamond dust of rhetorical brilliancies is strewed over the whole of his occasional verses and his prose.’

What is to-day the value and interest of this wit which has arrested the attention of so many generations? How far does it seem to us compatible with poetry in the full and generally accepted sense of the word, with poetry which quickens the imagination and touches the heart, which satisfies and delights, which is the verbal and rhythmical medium whereby a gifted soul communicates to those who have ears to hear the content of impassioned moments?

Before coming to close quarters with this difficult and debated question one may in the first place insist that there is in Donne’s verse a great deal which, whether it be poetry in the full sense of the word or not, is arresting and of worth both historically and intrinsically. Whatever we may think of Donne’s poetry, it is impossible not to recognize the extraordinary interest of his mind and character. In an age of great and fascinating men he is not the least so. The immortal and transcendent genius of Shakespeare leaves Donne, as every other contemporary, lost in the shadows and cross-lights of an age that is no longer ours, but from which Shakespeare emerges into the clear sunlight. Of Bacon’s mind, ‘deep and slow, exhausting thought,’ and divining as none other the direction in which the road led through the débris of outworn learning to a renovated science and a new philosophy, Donne could not boast. Alike in his poetry and in his soberest prose, treatise or sermon, Donne’s mind seems to want the high seriousness which comes from a conviction that truth is, and is to be found. A spirit of scepticism and paradox plays through and disturbs almost everything he wrote, except at moments when an intense mood of feeling, whether love or devotion, begets faith, and silences the sceptical and destructive wit by the power of vision rather than of intellectual conviction. Poles apart as the two poets seem at a first glance to lie in feeling and in art, there is yet something of Tennyson in the conflict which wages perpetually in Donne’s poetry between feeling and intellect.

But short of the highest gifts of serene imagination or serene wisdom Donne’s mind has every power it well could, wit, insight, imagination; and these move in such a strange medium of feeling and learning, mediaeval, renaissance and modern, that every imprint becomes of interest. To do full justice to that interest one’s study of Donne must include his prose as well as his verse, his paradoxical Pseudomartyr, and equally paradoxical, more strangely mooded Biathanatos, the intense and subtle eloquence of his sermons, the tormented passion and wit of his devotions, and the gaiety and melancholy, wit and wisdom, of his letters. But most of these qualities have left their mark on his poetry, and given it interests over and above its worth simply as poetry.

One quality of his verse, which has been somewhat overlooked by critics intent upon the definition and sources of metaphysical wit, is wit in our sense of the word, wit like the wit of Swift and Sheridan. The habit in which this wit masquerades is doubtless old-fashioned. It is not always the worse for that, for the wit of the Elizabethans is delightfully blended with fancy and feeling. There is a little of Jaques in all of them. But if fanciful and at times even boyish, Donne’s wit is still amusing, the quickest and most fertile wit of the century till we come to the author of Hudibras.

It is not in the Satyres that this wit is to us most obvious. Nothing grows so soon out of date as contemporary satire. Even the brilliance and polish of Pope’s satire — and Pope’s art is nowhere more perfect than in The Dunciad and the Imitations of Horace — cannot interest us in Lord Hervey, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, and the forgotten poets of an unpoetic age. How then should we be interested in Elizabeth’s fantastic ‘Presence’, the streets of sixteenth-century London, and the knavery of pursuivants, presented with a satiric art which is wonderfully vivid and caustic but still tentative, — over-emphatic, rough in style and verse, though with a roughness which is obviously a studied and in a measure successful effect. The verses upon Coryats Crudities are in their way a masterpiece of insult veiled as compliment, but it is a rather boyish and barbarous way.

It is in the lighter of his love verses that Donne’s laughable wit is most obvious and most agile. Whatever one may think of the choice of subject, and the flame of a young man’s lust that burns undisguised in some of the Elegies, it is impossible to ignore the dazzling wit which neither flags nor falters from the first line to the last. And in the more graceful and fanciful, the less heated Songs and Sonets, the same wit, gay and insolent, disports itself in a philosophy of love which must not be taken altogether seriously. Donne at least, as we shall see, outgrew it. His attitude is very much that of Shakespeare in the early comedies. But the Petrarchian love, which Shakespeare treats with light and charming irony, the vows and tears of Romeo and Proteus, Donne openly scoffs. He is one of Shakespeare’s young men as these were in the flesh and the Inns of Court, and he tells us frankly what in their youthful cynicism (which is often even more of a pose than their idealism) they think of love, and constancy, and women.

Of all miracles, Donne cries, a constant woman is the greatest, of all strange sights the strangest:

If thou findst one, let mee know,
Such a Pilgrimage were sweet;
Yet doe not, I would not goe, Though at next doore wee might meet,
Though shee were true, when you met her,
And last, till you write your letter,
Yet shee
Will bee
False, ere I come, to two, or three.

But is it true that we desire to find her? Donne’s answer is Woman’s Constancy:

Now thou hast lov’d me one whole day,
To-morrow when thou leav’st what wilt thou say?

She will, like Proteus in the Two Gentlemen of Verona, have no dearth of sophistries — but why elaborate them?

Vain lunatique, against these scapes I could
Dispute, and conquer, if I would,
Which I abstaine to doe,
For by to-morrow, I may think so too.

Why ask for constancy when change is the life and law of love?

I can love both fair and brown;
Her whom abundance melts, and her whom want betrays;
Her who loves loneness best, and her who masks and plays.
             .      .      .      .      .      .      .
I can love her and her, and you and you,
I can love any so she be not true.

It is not often that the reckless and wilful gaiety of youth masking as cynicism has been expressed with such ebullient wit as in these and companion songs. And when he adopts for a time the pose of the faithful lover bewailing the cruelty of his mistress the sarcastic wit is no less fertile. It would be difficult to find in the language a more sustained succession of witty surprises than The Will. Others were to catch these notes from Donne, and Suckling later flutes them gaily in his lighter fashion, never with the same fullness of wit and fancy, never with the same ardour of passion divinable through the audacious extravagances.

But to amuse was by no means the sole aim of Donne’s ‘wit’; gay humour touched with fancy and feeling is not its only quality. Donne’s ‘wit’ has many strands, his humour many moods, and before considering how these are woven together into an effect that is entirely poetical, we may note one or two of the soberer strands which run through his Letters, Epicedes, and similar poems — descriptive, reflective, and complimentary.

Not much of Donne’s poetry is given to description. Of the feeling for nature of the Elizabethans, their pastoral and ideal pictures of meadow and wood and stream, which delighted the heart of Izaak Walton, there is nothing in Donne. A greater contrast than that between Marlowe’s Come live with me and Donne’s imitation The Baite it would be hard to conceive. But in The Storme and The Calme Donne used his wit to achieve an effect of realism which was something new in English poetry, and was not reproduced till Swift wrote The City Shower. From the first lines, which describe how

The South and West winds join’d, and as they blew,
Waves like a rolling trench before them threw,

to the close of The Storme the noise of the contending elements is deafening:

Thousands our noises were, yet we ‘mongst all
Could none by his right name, but thunder call:
Lightning was all our light, and it rain’d more
Than if the Sunne had drunke the sea before.
        .    .    .    .    .    .    .    .    .
Hearing hath deaf’d our sailors, and if they
Knew how to hear, there’s none knowes what to say:
Compared to these stormes, death is but a qualme,
Hell somewhat lightsome, and the Bermuda calme.

The sense of tropical heat and calm in the companion poem is hardly less oppressive, and, if the whole is not quite so happy as the first, it contains two lines whose vivid and unexpected felicity is as delightful to-day as when Ben Jonson recited them to Drummond at Hawthornden:

No use of lanthorns; and in one place lay
Feathers and dust, to-day and yesterday.

Donne’s letters generally fall into two groups. The first comprises those addressed to his fellow-students at Cambridge and the Inns of Court, the Woodwards, Brookes, and others, or to his maturer and more fashionable companions in the quest of favour and employment at Court, Wotton, and Goodyere, and Lord Herbert of Cherbury. To the other belong the complimentary and elegant epistles in which he delighted and perhaps bewildered his noble lady friends and patronesses with erudite and transcendental flattery.

In the first class, and the same is true of some of the Satyres, notably the third, and of the satirical Progresse of the Soule, especially at the beginning and the end, the reflective, moralizing strain predominates. Donne’s ‘wit’ becomes the instrument of a criticism of life, grave or satiric, melancholy or stoical. Despite Matthew Arnold’s definition, verse of this kind seldom is poetry in the full sense of the word; but, as Stevenson says in speaking of his own Scotch verses, talk not song. The first of English poets was a master of the art. Neither Horace nor Martial, whom Stevenson cites, is a more delightful talker in verse than Geoffrey Chaucer, and the archaism of his style seems only to lend the additional charm of a lisp to his babble. Since Donne’s day English poetry has been rich in such verse talkers — Butler and Dryden, Pope and Swift, Cowper and Burns, Byron and Shelley, Browning and Landor. It did not come easy to the Elizabethans, whose natural accent was song. Donne’s chief rivals were Daniel and Jonson, and I venture to think that he excels them both in the clear and pointed yet easy and conversational development of his thought, in the play of wit and wisdom, and, despite the pedantic cast of Elizabethan erudite moralizing, in the power to leave on the reader the impression of a potent and yet a winning personality. We seem to get nearer to the man himself in Donne’s letters to Goodyere and Wotton than in Daniel’s weighty, but also heavy, moralizing epistles to the Countess of Cumberland or Sir Thomas Egerton; and the personality whose voice sounds so distinct and human in our ear is a more attractive one than the harsh, censorious, burly but a little blustering Jonson of the epistles on country life and generous givers. Donne’s style is less clumsy, his verse less stiff. His wit brings to a clear point whatever he has to say, while from his verse as from his prose letters there disengages itself a very distinct sense of what it was in the man, underlying his brilliant intellect, his almost superhuman cleverness, which won for him the devotion of friends like Wotton and Goodyere and Walton and King, the admiration of a stranger like Huyghens, who heard him talk as well as preach: — a serious and melancholy, a generous and chivalrous spirit.

However, keepe the lively tast you hold
Of God, love him as now, but feare him more,
And in your afternoones thinke what you told
And promis’d him, at morning prayer before.

Let falshood like a discord anger you,
Else be not froward. But why doe I touch
Things, of which none is in your practise new,
And Tables, or fruit-trenchers teach as much;

But thus I make you keepe your promise Sir,
Riding I had you, though you still staid there,
And in these thoughts, although you never stirre,
You came with mee to Micham, and are here.

So he writes to Goodyere, but the letter to Wotton going Ambassador to Venice is Donne’s masterpiece in this simpler style, and it seems to me that neither Daniel nor Jonson nor Drayton ever catches this note at once sensitive and courtly. To find a like courtliness we must go to Wotton; witness the reply to Donne’s earlier epistle which I have printed in the notes. But neither Wotton nor any other of the courtly poets in Hannah’s collection adds to this dignity so poignant a personal accent.

This personal interest is very marked in the two satires which are connected by tone and temper with the letters, the third of the early, classical Satyres and the opening and closing stanzas of the Progresse of the Soule. Each is a vivid picture of the inner workings of Donne’s soul at a critical period in his life. The first was doubtless written at the moment that he was passing from the Roman to the Anglican Church. It is one of the earliest and most thoughtful appeals for toleration, for the candid scrutiny of religious differences, which was written perhaps in any country — one of the most striking symptoms of the new eddies produced in the stream of religious feeling by the meeting currents of the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation.

It was a difficult and dangerous process through which Donne was passing, this conversion from the Church of his fathers to conformity with the Church of England as by law established. It would be as absurd, in the face of a poem like this and of all that we know of Donne’s subsequent life, to call it a conversion in the full sense of the term, a changed conviction, as to dub it an apostasy prompted by purely political considerations. Yet doubtless the latter predominated. The position of a Catholic in the reign of Elizabeth was that of a man cut off rigorously from the main life of the nation, with every avenue of honourable ambition closed to him. He had to live the starved, suspected life of a recusant or to seek service under a foreign power. Some of the most pathetic documents in Strype’s Annals of the Reformation are those in which we hear the cry of young men of secure station and means driven by conscientious conviction to abandon home and country. It is possible that before 1592 Donne himself had been sent abroad by relatives with a view to his entering a seminary or the service of a foreign power. His mother spent a great part of her life abroad, and his own relatives were among those who suffered most severely under Walsingham’s persecution. ‘I had’, Donne says, ‘my first breeding and conversation with men of suppressed and afflicted Religion, accustomed to the despite of death, and hungry of an imagined Martyrdome.’ To a young man of ambition, and as yet certainly with no bent to devotion or martyrdom, it was only common sense to conform if he might.

From this dilemma Donne escaped, not by any opportune change of conviction, or by any insincere profession, but by the way of intellectual emancipation. He looks round in this satire and sees that whichever be the true Church it is not by any painful quest of truth, and through the attainment of conviction, that most people have accepted the Church to which they may belong. Circumstances and whim have had more to do with their choice than reason and serious conviction. Yet it is only by search that truth is to be found:

On a huge hill
Cragged, and steep, Truth stands, and hee that will
Reach her, about must, and about must goe;
And what the hills suddenes resists win so.
Yet strive so, that before age, deaths twilight,
Thy Soule rest, for none can work in that night.

It was not often in the sixteenth or seventeenth century that a completely emancipated and critical attitude on religious, not philosophical, questions was expressed with such entire frankness and seriousness. From this position, Walton would have us believe, Donne advanced through the study of Bellarmine and other controversialists to a convinced acceptance of Anglican doctrine. The evidence points to a rather different conclusion on Donne’s part. He came to think that all the Churches were ‘virtual beams of one sun’, ‘connatural pieces of one circle’, a position from which the next step was to the conclusion that for an Englishman the Anglican Church was the right choice (Cujus regio, ejus religio); but Donne had not reached this conclusion when he wrote the Satyre, and doubtless did not till he had satisfied himself that the Church of England offered a reasonable via media. But changes of creed made on purely intellectual grounds, and prompted by practical motives, are not unattended with danger to a man’s moral and spiritual life. Donne had doubtless outwardly conformed before he entered Egerton’s service in 1598, but long afterwards, when he is already in Orders, he utters a cry which betrays how real the dilemma still was:

Show me, deare Christ, thy spouse, so bright and clear;

and the first result of his ‘conversion’ was apparently to deepen the sceptical vein in his mind.

Scepticism and melancholy, bitter and sardonic, are certainly the dominant notes in the sombre fragment of satire The Progresse of the Soule, which he composed in 1601, when he was Sir Thomas Egerton’s secretary, four months before his marriage and six months after the death of the Earl of Essex. There can be little doubt, as I have ventured to suggest elsewhere, that it was the latter event which provoked this strange and sombre explosion of spleen, a satire of the same order as the Tale of a Tub or the Vision of Judgment. The account of the poem which Jonson gave to Drummond does not seem to be quite accurate, though it was probably derived from Donne himself. It was, one suspects from several circumstances, a little Donne’s way in later years to disguise the footprints of his earlier indiscretions. According to this tradition the final habitat of the soul which ‘inanimated’ the apple

Whose mortal taste
Brought death into the world and all our woe,

was to be John Calvin. The tradition is interesting as marking how far Donne was in 1601 from his later orthodox Protestantism, for Calvin is never mentioned but with respect in the Sermons. A few months later he wrote to Egerton disclaiming warmly all ‘love of a corrupt religion’. But, though sceptical in tone, the poem is written from a Catholic standpoint; its theme is the progress of the soul of heresy. And, as the seventh stanza clearly indicates, the great heretic in whom the line closed was to be not Calvin but Queen Elizabeth:

the great soule which here among us now
Doth dwell, and moves that hand, and tongue, and brow
Which, as the Moone the sea, moves us.

Donne can hardly have thought of publishing such a poem, or circulating it in the Queen’s lifetime. It was an expression of the mood which begot the ‘black and envious slanders breath’d against Diana for her divine justice on Actaeon’ to which Jonson refers in Cynthia’s Revels the same year. That some copies were circulated in manuscript later is probably due to the reaction which brought into favour at James’s Court the Earl of Southampton and the former adherents of Essex generally.