1855 There's a palace in Florence, the world knows well, Ages ago, a lady there, The bridesmaids' prattle around her ceased; They felt by its beats her heart expand— The selfsame instant, underneath, Gay he rode, with a friend as gay, Hair in heaps lay heavily Crisped like a war-steed's encolure— And lo, a blade for a knight's emprise He looked at her, as a lover can; Now, love so ordered for both their sakes, (For Via Larga is three-parts light, To Florence and God the wrong was done, The Duke (with the statue's face in the square) Face to face the lovers stood Bowed till his bonnet brushed the floor— In a minute can lovers exchange a word? That was the bridegroom. At day's brink Calmly he said that her lot was cast, The world meanwhile, its noise and stir, Since passing the door might lead to a feast, "Freely I choose too," said the bride— "If I spend the night with that devil twice, "I fly to the Duke who loves me well, "'Tis only the coat of a page to borrow, (She checked herself and her eye grew dim) "Is one day more so long to wait? She turned on her side and slept. Just so! That night the Duke said, "Dear or cheap And on the morrow, bold with love, And smiled "Twas a very funeral, "What if we break from the Arno bowers, The bridegroom, not a thought to be seen "But, alas! my lady leaves the South; "Nor a way exists, the wise opine, Quoth the Duke, "A sage and a kindly fear. And then to himself—"Which night shall bring "Yet my passion must wait a night, nor cool— "I need thee still and might miss perchance "For I ride—what should I do but ride? So said, so done: nor the lady missed Be sure that each renewed the vow, But next day passed, and next day yet, And still, as love's brief morning wore, They thought it would work infallibly, Meantime they could profit in winter's dearth And to press a point while these oppose Meantime, worse fates than a lover's fate, And she—she watched the square like a book When the picture was reached the book was done, So weeks grew months, years; gleam by gleam Which hovered as dreams do, still above: One day as the lady saw her youth The brow so puckered, the chin so peaked, Fronting her silent in the glass— "Him, the Carver, a hand to aid, "Let Robbia's craft so apt and strange "Make me a face on the window there, "And let me think that it may beguile "To say, 'What matters it at the end? "Where is the use of the lip's red charm, "Unless we turn, as the soul knows how, But long ere Robbia's cornice, fine, (And, leaning out of a bright blue space, Eying ever, with earnest eye The Duke had sighed like the simplest wretch Some subtle moulder of brazen shapes— "John of Douay shall effect my plan, "In the very square I have crossed so oft: "While the mouth and the brow stay brave in bronze— "And it shall go hard but I contrive * * * * * So! While these wait the trump of doom, Still, I suppose, they sit and ponder Only they see not God, I know, Burn upward each to his point of bliss— I hear you reproach, "But delay was best, As a virtue golden through and through, Must a game be played for the sake of pelf? The true has no value beyond the sham: Stake your counter as boldly every whit, If you choose to play!—is my principle. The counter our lovers staked was lost Is—the unlit lamp and the ungirt loin, The two volumes of Dramatic Idyls are full of paradoxes, for Browning became fonder and fonder of the paradox as he descended into the vale of years. The Russian poem Ivan Ivanovitch justly condemns mothers who prefer their own safety to that of their children. When a stranger gives up his life for another, as happens frequently in crises of fire and shipwreck, we applaud: but when a mother sacrifices her life for that of her child, she does the natural and expected thing. The woman in this poem was a monster of wickedness and did not deserve to live. She started with three children and arrived with none. Now there are some things in life for which no apology and no explanation suffice. What do we care about her story? Who cares to hear her defence? What difference does it make whether she actively threw out the children or allowed the wolves to take them? She arrives safe and sound without them and there is no mistaking the fact that she rejoices in her own salvation. She does not rejoice long, however, for Ivan, who is Browning's ideal of resolution, neatly removes her head. Practically and literally Ivan is a murderer: but paradoxically he is God's servant, for the woman is not fit to live, and he eliminates her. From the practical point of view there is a difficulty ahead. The husband is due; when he hears that the children are lost, he will suffer horribly, and will enquire anxiously as to the fate of his wife. When he learns that she arrived in good condition and that then Ivan knocked her head off, he may not fully appreciate the ethical beauty of Ivan's deed. But this detail does not affect the moral significance of the story. Yet I can not help thinking that a man with such strong convictions as Ivan ought not to carry an axe. Ivan, however, is still needed in Russia. Two or three years ago, immediately after a wedding ceremony, the bride and groom, with the whole wedding party, set out in sledges for the next town. The wolves attacked them and ate every member of the party except the four in the first sledge—husband, wife, and two men. As the wolves drew near, these two heroes advised the husband to throw out the bride, for if he did so, the three left might be saved, as their haven was almost in sight. Naturally the bridegroom declined. Then the two men threw out both bride and groom, and just managed to reach the town in safety, the sole survivors of the whole party. I wish that Ivan had been there to give them the proper welcome. The poem Clive is a psychological analysis of courage and fear, two of the most interesting of human sensations. Clive seems to have been an instrument in the hands of Destiny. When an obscure young man, he twice tried to commit suicide, and both times the pistol missed fire. A born gambler, he judged that he was reserved for something great. He was: he conquered India. Then, after his life-work was fully accomplished, his third attempt at suicide was successful. After describing the dramatic incident at card-play, which he gave to the old buck as the only time in his life when he felt afraid, his companion remarked that it was enough to scare anybody to face a loaded pistol. But here comes the paradox. Clive was intensely angry because his friend failed to see the point. "Why, I wasn't afraid he would shoot, I was afraid he wouldn't." Suppose the general had said contemptuously that young Clive was not worth the powder and ball it would take to kill him—suppose he had sent him away wholly safe and wholly disgraced. Then Clive would have instantly killed himself. Either the general was not clever enough to play this trump, or the clear unwinking eyes of his victim convicted him of sin. Clive was one of those exceedingly rare individuals who have never known the sensation of physical fear. But I do not think he was really so brave as those men, who, cursed with an imagination that fills their minds with terror, nevertheless advance toward danger. For your real hero is one who does not allow the desires of his body to control his mind. The body, always eager for safety, comfort, and pleasure, cries out against peril: but the mind, up in the conning-tower of the brain, drives the protesting and shivering body forward. Napoleon, who was a good judge of courage, called Ney the bravest of the brave: and I admired Ney more intensely when I learned that in battle he was in his heart always afraid. The courage of soldiers in the mass seems sublime, but it is the commonest thing on earth: all nations show it: it is probably an inexplicable compound of discipline, pride, shame, and rage: but individuals differ from one another as sharply in courage as they do in mental ability. In sheer physical courage dive has never been surpassed, and Browning, who loved the manly virtues, saw in this corrupt and cruel man a great hero. The poem MulÉykeh, which is one of the oldest of Oriental stories, is really an analysis of love. The mare was dearer to her owner than life itself: yet he intentionally surrendered her to his rival rather than have her disgraced. His friends called him an idiot and a fool: but he replied, "You never have loved my Pearl." And indeed, from his point of view, they did not know the meaning of love. What is love? Simply the desire for possession, or the desire that the beloved object should be incomparably pure and unsullied by defeat and disgrace? The man who owned MulÉykeh really loved her, since her honor was more precious to him than his own happiness. The short poem Which? published on the last day of Browning's life, is a splendid paradox. In the Middle Ages, when house-parties assembled, an immense amount of time was taken up by the telling of stories and by the subsequent discussions thereupon. The stock subject was Love, and the ideal lover was a favorite point of debate. In this instance, the three court ladies argue, and to complete the paradox, a Priest is chosen for referee. Perhaps he was thought to be out of it altogether, and thus ready to judge with an unprejudiced mind. The Duchess declares that her lover must be a man she can respect: a man of religion and patriotism. He must love his God, and his country; then comes his wife, who holds the third place in his affections. I could not love thee, dear, so much, The Marquise insists that her lover must be a man who has done something. He must not only be a man inspired by religious and patriotic motives, but must have actually suffered in her service. He has received wounds in combat, he is pointed out everywhere as the man who has accomplished great deeds. I can not love him unless I can be proud of his record. The Comtesse says that her ideal lover must love her first: he must love her more than he loves God, more than he loves his country, more than he loves his life—yes, more than he loves his own honor. He must be willing, if necessary, not only to sacrifice his health and life in her behalf, indeed, any true knight would do that: he must be willing to sacrifice his good name, be false to his religion and a traitor to his country. What do I care whether he be a coward, a craven, a scoundrel, a hissing and a byword, so long as he loves me most of all? This is a difficult position for the AbbÉ, the man of God: but he does not flinch. His decision is that the third lover is the one of whom Almighty God would approve. One thing is certain: the third man really loved his Lady. We do not know whether the other two loved or not. When a man talks a great deal about his honor, his self-respect, it is just possible that he loves himself more than he loves any one else. But the man who would go through hell to win a woman really loves that woman. Browning abhors selfishness. He detests a man who is kept from a certain course of action by thoughts of its possible results to his reputation. Ibsen has given us the standard example of what the first and second lover in this poem might sink to in a real moral crisis. In A Doll's House, the husband curses his wife because she has committed forgery, and his good name will suffer. She replied that she committed the crime to save his life—her motive was Love: and she had hoped that when the truth came out the miracle would happen: her husband would step forward and take the blame all on himself. "What fools you women are," said he, angrily: "you know nothing of business. I would work my fingers to the bone for you: I would give up my life for you: but you can't expect a man to sacrifice his honor for a woman." Her retort is one of the greatest in literature. "Millions of women have done it." |