Theodore Watts-Dunton: Poet, Novelist, Critic. Douglas James
Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Theodore Watts-Dunton: Poet, Novelist, Critic - Douglas James страница 20

СКАЧАТЬ this sonnet should be placed that entitled, ‘Dickens Returns on Christmas Day’: —

      A ragged girl in Drury Lane was heard to exclaim: ‘Dickens dead? Then will Father Christmas die too?’ – June 9, 1870.

      ‘Dickens is dead!’ Beneath that grievous cry

      London seemed shivering in the summer heat;

      Strangers took up the tale like friends that meet:

      ‘Dickens is dead!’ said they, and hurried by;

      Street children stopped their games – they knew not why,

      But some new night seemed darkening down the street.

      A girl in rags, staying her wayworn feet,

      Cried, ‘Dickens dead? Will Father Christmas die?’

      City he loved, take courage on thy way!

      He loves thee still, in all thy joys and fears.

      Though he whose smile made bright thine eyes of grey —

      Though he whose voice, uttering thy burthened years,

      Made laughters bubble through thy sea of tears —

      Is gone, Dickens returns on Christmas Day!

      Let me say here, parenthetically, that ‘The Pines’ is so far out of date that for twenty-five years it has been famous for its sympathy with the Christmas sentiment which now seems to be fading, as this sonnet shows: —

THE CHRISTMAS TREE AT ‘THE PINES.’

      Life still hath one romance that naught can bury —

      Not Time himself, who coffins Life’s romances —

      For still will Christmas gild the year’s mischances,

      If Childhood comes, as here, to make him merry —

      To kiss with lips more ruddy than the cherry —

      To smile with eyes outshining by their glances

      The Christmas tree – to dance with fairy dances

      And crown his hoary brow with leaf and berry.

      And as to us, dear friend, the carols sung

      Are fresh as ever. Bright is yonder bough

      Of mistletoe as that which shone and swung

      When you and I and Friendship made a vow

      That Childhood’s Christmas still should seal each brow —

      Friendship’s, and yours, and mine – and keep us young.

      I may also quote from ‘Prophetic Pictures at Venice’ this romantic description of the Rosicrucian Christmas: —

      (The morning light falls on the Rosicrucian panel-picture called ‘The Rosy Scar,’ depicting Christian galley-slaves on board an Algerine galley, watching, on Christmas Eve, for the promised appearance of Rosenkreutz, as a ‘rosy phantom.’ The Lover reads aloud the descriptive verses on the frame.)

      While Night’s dark horses waited for the wind,

      He stood – he shone – where Sunset’s fiery glaives

      Flickered behind the clouds; then, o’er the waves,

      He came to them, Faith’s remnant sorrow-thinned.

      The Paynim sailors clustering, tawny-skinned,

      Cried, ‘Who is he that comes to Christian slaves?

      Nor water-sprite nor jinni of sunset caves,

      The rosy phantom stands nor winged nor finned.’

      All night he stood till shone the Christmas star;

      Slowly the Rosy Cross, streak after streak,

      Flushed the grey sky – flushed sea and sail and spar,

      Flushed, blessing every slave’s woe-wasted cheek.

      Then did great Rosenkreutz, the Dew-King speak:

      ‘Sufferers, take heart! Christ lends the Rosy Scar.’

      Chapter IX

      GEORGE BORROW

      It was not until 1872 that Mr. Watts-Dunton was introduced to Borrow by Dr. Gordon Hake, Borrow’s most intimate friend.

      The way in which this meeting came about has been familiar to the readers of an autobiographical romance (not even yet published!) wherein Borrow appears under the name of Dereham, and Hake under the name of Gordon. But as some of these passages in a modified form have appeared in print in an introduction by Mr. Watts-Dunton to the edition of Borrow’s ‘Lavengro,’ published by Messrs. Ward, Lock & Co., in 1893, there will be nothing incongruous in my quoting them here: —

      “Great as was the difference in age between Gordon and me, there soon grew up an intimacy between us. It has been my experience to learn that an enormous deal of nonsense has been written about difference of age between friends of either sex. At that time I do not think I had one intimate friend of my own age except Rosamond, while I was on terms of something like intimacy with two or three distinguished men, each one of whom was certainly old enough to be my father. Basevi was one of these: so was Lineham. I daresay it was owing to some idiosyncrasy of mine, but the intimacy between me and the young fellows with whom I was brought into contact was mainly confined to matters connected with field-sports. I found it far easier to be brought into relations of close intimacy with women of my own age than with men. But as Basevi told me that it was the same with himself, I suppose that this was not an eccentricity after all. When Gordon and I were together it never occurred to me that there was any difference in our ages at all, and he told me that it was the same with himself.

      One day when I was sitting with him in his delightful house near Roehampton, whose windows at the back looked over Richmond Park, and in front over the wildest part of Wimbledon Common, one of his sons came in and said that he had seen Dereham striding across the common, evidently bound for the house.

      ‘Dereham!’ I said. ‘Is there a man in the world I should so like to see as Dereham?’

      And then I told Gordon how I had seen him years before swimming in the sea off Yarmouth, but had never spoken to him.

      ‘Why do you want so much to see him?’ asked Gordon.

      ‘Well, among other things I want to see if he is a true Child of the Open Air.’

      Gordon laughed, perfectly understanding what I meant. But it is necessary here to explain what that meaning was.

      We both agreed that, with all the recent cultivation of the picturesque by means of watercolour landscape, descriptive novels, ‘Cook’s excursions,’ etc., the real passion for Nature is as rare as ever it was – perhaps rarer. It was, we believed, quite an affair of individual temperament: it cannot be learned; it cannot be lost. That no writer has ever tried to explain it shows how little it is known. Often it has but little to do with poetry, little with science. The poet, indeed, rarely has it at its very highest; the man of science as rarely. I wish I could define it. In human souls – in one, perhaps, as much as in another – there is always that instinct for contact which is a great factor of progress; there is always an irresistible yearning to escape from isolation, to get as close as may be to some other conscious thing. In most individuals this yearning is simply for contact with other human souls; in some few it is not. There are some in every country of whom it is the blessing, not the bane that, owing to some exceptional power, or to some exceptional infirmity, they can get closer to ‘Natura Benigna’ herself, closer to her whom we now call ‘Inanimate Nature,’ than to brother, sister, wife, or friend. Darwin among English СКАЧАТЬ