An Analysis of the Romantic Poets' Views: A Wide, Varying Spectrum

Comparing the Romantic poets generates a wide and varied spectrum, with each widely varying in their individual views of poetry, including ideals, definition of heroes, and evil (Renee'). In contrasting the given authors, Keats and his theory of "Negative Capability" would be the polar opposite of Coleridge's "Satanic Hero." Midway between the two (but closer to Keats) would be Shelley and his unique perspective on what a poet is; finding middle ground between Shelley and Coleridge would be Byron's hero, Childe Harold. The four poets demonstrate a multitude of different beliefs that guided the Romantic Movement; however, in comparing their theories, an understanding of the differences as well as the similarities can be obtained.

John Keats is, in many opinions, the most complex and eloquent of all the Romantic poets. It is Keats who coined "Negative Capability," a term which describes Keats own theory of poetic genius. In a letter written to his brothers in 1817, he describes Negative Capability as occurring "when man is capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason" (Norton, 887). Much of Keats' poetry uses this concept and emphasizes the importance of holding on to beauty for the truth it holds rather than trying to make it fit into an established intellectual system. Essential to this theory is the idea that actual wording alone does not the poem make; it is through the use of contradictions that Keats finds his ultimate meaning and creates an atmosphere that rings true to the reader. In Ode on Melancholy, Keats describes Melancholy as a living thing that swells with mortal beauty:

She dwells with Beauty - Beauty that must die;

And Joy, whose hand is ever at his lips

Bidding adieu; and aching Pleasure nigh,

Turning to poison while the bee-mouth sips... (854, 21-24)

Keats takes melancholy, an abstract idea full of mystery and inconclusions, and essentially compares it to a goddess of human life. Showing a reverence and appreciation for the beauty that surrounds even his most deeply felt, dark melancholia, he demonstrates the concept of Negative Capability at work. The basic premise of Keats' theory is demonstrated by removing himself completely from the poem and simply immersing himself (and the reader) in the beauty that exists in even the most dreary and unexplainable things. The ability to grasp the pleasant and horrifying and find meaning and clarity in each and show how the two seemingly contradictory things complement each other makes the theory pervasive and concrete to the reader, and sets the standard upon which the other Romantic poets are judged.

In absolute opposition to Keats' theory of Negative Capability is the "Satanic Hero," as defined by Samuel Coleridge. The Satanic Hero, according to Coleridge, is a supremely evil creature who, unfortunately, has become a dominant, revered figure in our society. In Coleridge's mind, this "Commanding Genius" has grown from that which was once love, but through "the fearful resolve to find in itself alone the one absolute motive of action" has mutated into that which is vile, hateful and malevolent to the core (491). Essentially, this is a creature that has succumbed to the vanities and glories of self-serving power and has corrupted all that is good around him. This figure has grown from a normal being into that which has "hope in which there is no Cheerfulness; Steadfastness within and immovable Resolve, without outward Restlessness and whirling Activity; Violence with Guile; Temerity with Cunning; and, as the result of all, Interminableness of Object with perfect Indifference of Means" (491). Using Napoleon as an example, Coleridge demonstrates how the Satanic Hero takes advantage of the goodness surrounding him and sucks the decency out of everything around him. This kind of hero does so without remorse, using everything available to him to achieve his reprehensible goals. This horrifying figure has been so prevalent and glamorized in literature, however, and made to be so appealing (as evidenced in Milton's depiction of Satan in Paradise Lost) that real people, such as Napoleon, are succumbing to the temptation to be this abomination in reality. According to Coleridge, what was once human is now a living, breathing embodiment of all that is wrong in the world.

In contradiction to Keats' vision of Negative Capability, the Satanic Hero is completely self-absorbed and looks inward to find the answers to virtually all that is shrouded in mystery. It is, according to Coleridge, the Satanic Hero's motivating force to either destroy that which is beautiful or to use it to his own nefarious advantage. Instead of basking in the beauty of that which surrounds him, the Satanic Hero purges everything in his path of splendor, truth and honor and uses his ill-gained power to crush whatever is in his way. Keats's theory of Negative Capability and Coleridge's "Satanic Hero" are absolute, polar opposites of each other.

In the mid-level of this poetic spectrum is Percy Shelley, a poet who, in response to the allegation that poetry and language would become obsolete in the new age of industrialized England, defined his own view of poetry and the poetic mind. According to Shelley, poets are "the institutors of laws, and the founders of civil society and the inventors of the arts of life and the teachers, who draw into a certain propinquity with the beautiful and the true that partial apprehension of the agencies of the invisible world which is called religion" (792). In Shelley's view, poets are the moral "groundskeepers" in an age when immorality and social and political corruption were rampant. Shelley sees poets as those which are not only compelled, but are absolutely responsible to "imagine intensely and comprehensively; he must put himself in the place of another and of many others; the pains and pleasures of his species must become his own.... Poetry strengthens that faculty which is the organ of the moral nature of man in the same manner as exercise strengthens a limb" (796). Shelley's poet uses his mind as a conduit, receiving images and retaining lasting impressions that can be used in a divine sense; that which creates poetry.

In contrast to Coleridge, Shelley's poet isn't using destruction and evil for his own purposes; he is absorbing both the great and the horrible and using the echoes from each to "[redeem] from decay the visitations of the divinity in man" (799). Differing greatly from Coleridge's "Satanic Hero," he has much more in common with Keats' theory of Negative Capability. Shelley's poet appreciates the beauty in all things, even those which are marred by imperfection, destruction, or mystery. Differing from Keats, though, he feels that poetry "turns all things into loveliness; it exalts the beauty of that which is most beautiful, and it adds beauty to that which is most deformed" (799). Instead of, like Keats, appreciating the beauty that naturally exists (even in the dark and mysterious), Shelley's poet uses poetry to "transmute" everything into a glorious, wondrous creation, even that which is dead or destructive. To Shelley, poetry's "secret alchemy turns to potable gold the poisonous waters which flow from death through life" (800); in effect, poetry has the divine power to create (in the mind) new life from that which is dead and beauty from the horrible. While taking a much more passive approach by letting the good and the bad create imprints in his mind from which he then makes poetry, Shelley's views are much closer to Keats' theory of Negative Capability than Coleridge's Satanic Hero.

Inching a bit closer to the Satanic hero, however, is Childe Harold, a creation of George Gordon, Lord Byron. Childe Harold is the antithesis of both Keats' Negative Capability and Shelley's view of the poet. He is a pompous, overbearing knight who looks into himself for his answers and finds much in common with Napoleon. Childe Harold has numerous qualities in common with the Satanic Hero; however, amidst this self-involved spectacle of greatness is a glimmer of humanity that makes Childe Harold real and sympathetic.

In discussing Napoleon, a leader who was generally reviled and was the model for Coleridge's wretched Satanic Hero, Childe Harold sees him in a compassionate and real way. To Childe Harold (who is, in fact, the altar ego of Lord Byron), Napoleon is a great man; his military skill has let him take control and conquer numerous lands and governments. The destruction of so much, however, has left to a thirst for more. Napoleon, who was once nothing and who "wooed [fame] once, has become "a god unto thyself." In the spirit of Coleridge's Satanic Hero, Napoleon has looked inward and found himself to be a deity and have god-like, destructive powers (572). This feast of force and destruction has left him with a hunger for more; a hunger which, according to Childe Harold, can never be quenched. This quest for definitive supremacy has made Napoleon into a hated tyrant.

His tyrannical rule and abuse of power, according to Byron, was not entirely Napoleon's fault. Many great leaders are doomed from the very beginning. He had, within himself, the ability to achieve great things. In doing this, however, He awoke the "fever at the core/ Fatal to him who bears, to all who ever bore" (377-78). This fever, according to Byron, makes all who bear it fated to take greatness to realms of unenviable, sadistic glory. Childe Harold identifies himself with Napoleon, seeing the parallels between the two as he stands upon the mountain, looking down on all that beneath him, as Napoleon had done before. He sees the genius and greatness behind the madman and recognizes that this was, in fact, just a man who loved, fought, lost and won just like any other man. Childe Harold focuses inward when he assesses Napoleon and compares him to himself and embodies what Keats referred to as the "egotistical sublime," a tendency to focus on the "Me" in poetry and let it grow out of personal life and experience. He is a selfish, inwardly-looking character who has a spark of the Satanic Hero's malice. However, because of his humanity and depth of feeling, he would stand firmly to the right of the Satanic Hero, acknowledging the small bit he had in common with the theories of both Keats and Shelley.

Each has a distinct and definitive view on what poetry is, how it should be used, and how it should be created. In defining the differences, however, the subtle similarities between all four men's views become clear. All stress the importance of, in some way, developing spiritually, the importance of nature in this personal growth, and becoming more aware of intuition and feelings. This common thread, woven through the clear distinctions that set them apart, gives a rich and varied spectrum of the major views in a defining period of literature.

Sources
The Norton Anthology of English Literature, 7^th edition. Eds. M.H. Abrams & Steven Greenblatt. New York: Norton 2000.