POETIC THEORY

S h e l l e y ' s "Defence o f P o e t r y " was w r i t t e n a s a

r e s p o n s e t o P e a c o c k ' s "Four A ~ e so f P o e t r y " . The essay
a s i t e x i s t s t o d a y i s what was i n t a n d e d t o b e t h e f i r s t
p a r t o f a l a r g e r work. S h e l l e y , however, d i d n o t w r i t e
t h e r e s t o f it.

S h e l l e y ' s d e f i n i t i o n o f what c o n s t i t u t e s p o e t r y
i s u n i q u e , i n t h e s e n s e t h a t it s p e a k s more o f a s t a t e
o f mind, o r a q u a l i t y o f p e r c e p t i o n , r a t h e r t h a n a k i n d
of literary activity. I t i s p m b a b l e t h a t he a r r i v e d
a t t h i s p o s i t i o n i n t h e c o u r s e o f responding t o Peacock's
c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e need f o r p o e t r y would d i m i n i s h k i t h
t h e advancement of t h e s c i e n c e s . His answer t o t h i s i s
t h a t t h e c o n d i t i o n of p o e t i c p e r c e p t i o n i s n o t l i m i t e d
t o v e r b a l e x p r e s s i o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r kind. It i s
p r e s e n t i n any a c t i v i t y t h a t y i e l d s i n s i g h t s i n t o man
and n a t u r e . T h e r e f o r e P l a t o i s a p o e t , and, i f one
extended t h i s f u r t h e r , a s c i e n t i s t who d i s c o v e r e d t r u t h s
a b o u t man and n a t u r e would a l s o p a r t a k e o f t h e c o n d i t i o n
of poetry.

The b a s i c t e r m s o f t h i s d e b a t e have continued

t o be r e l e v a n t . The a r t - s c i e n c e dichotomy which has
become a p a r t o f o u r c u l t u r a l consciousness today i s
i n i t s n a s c e n t form i n P e a c o c k ' s v i e w p o i n t .
~ h e l l e y ' s answer t o it i s e q u a l l y i m p o r t a n t , f o r it
g r a s p s t h e b a s i c p s y c h o - p h i l o s o p h i c c o r e of t h e i s s u e
i n addressing i t s e l f t o t h e cp?stion of perception
i t s e l f r a t h e r t h a n one form o f i t s e x p r e s s i o n t h r o u e h

poetry.

S c i e n c e , however, i s n o t t h e o n l y s o u r c e o f
p r e s s u r e f o r a r t i n t h i s century. F r e u d i a n psychology
h a s p u t p o w e r f u l weapons i n t h e hands of a n o l d enemy
of poetry -- namely, t h e contention t h a t t h e poet's
s a n i t y i s s t r o n g l y susk?ect. t l a t o ' s charge of "divine

madness" g e t s c o n v e r t e d i n t o a b e a u t i f u l l y reasoned
and c o n v i n c i n g c a s e a g a i n s t t h e s a n i t y o f t h e p o e t o r
a r t i s t i n general. The p o i n t o f i n t ~ r e s tl i e s i n t h e
f a c t t h a t p e r h a p s t h e b e s t answer t o t h i s lies i n a
document w r i t t e n decades b e f o r e Freud -- S h - l l e y ' s
"Defence o f P o e t r y " .

References t o t h e a l t i s t ' s e x t r a o r d i r ~ f ~ r y
a b i l i t y t o produce a c c u r a t e p ~ y c h o l ~ i ' i ~r ae al d i n g s
i n works o f l i t e r a t u r e o c c u r r e p e a t e d l y i n F r e u d ' s
writing. F o r example:

The theme o f t h e r i n g l e a v e s one once

a g a i n with t h e i m p r e s s i o n o f how h a r d it
i s f o r a psychoanalyst t o d i s c o v e r anything
 new t h a t h a s n o t b e e n k n o w b e f o r e by
some c r e a t i v e w r i t e r . '

h l i l e t h e t o n e o f s u c h a s t a t e m e n t a p p e a r s complimentary

when t a k e n i n i s o l a t i o n , t h e i m p r e s s i o n f a d e s when o n e
p l a c e s it i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e d e f i n i t i v e p a s s a r e o n
a r t and n e u r o s i s i n I n t r o d u c t o r y L e c t u r e s on
P~ychoanalysis -- it i s b e s t q u o t e d i n f u l l :

B e f o r e I l e t you go t o d a y , however, I
should l i k e t o d i r e c t your a t t e n t i o n a l i t t l e
l o n g e r t o a s i d e o f t h e l i f e o f p h a n t a s y which
d e s e r v e s t h e most ~ ~ n e i rn t ~e r m l s t . For t h e r e
i s a p a t h t h a t l e a d s back from p h a n t a s y t o
reality -- t h e p a t h , t h a t i s , o f a r t . An
a r t i s t i s o n c e more i n m d i n ~ e n t sa n i n t r o v e r t ,
n o t f a r removed from n e u r o s i s . He i s o p p r e s s e d
by e x c e s s i v e l y p o w e r f u l i n s t i n c t u a l n e e d s . He
d e s i r p s t o win h o n o u r , power, w e a l t h , famv and
t h e l o v e o f women; h u t h e l a c k s t h e means f o r
achieving t h e s e s a t i s f n c t i o n s . Consequently,
l i k e any o t h e r u n s a t i s f i e d man, h e t u r n s away
from r e a l i t y and t r a n s f e r s a l l h i s i n t e r ~ s t ,
and h i s l i b i d o t o o , t o t h e w i s h f u l c o n s t r ~ ~ c t i o n s
o f h i s l i f e o f p h a n t a s y , whence t h e p a t h might
l e a d t o n e u r o s i s . T h e r e must be, no d o u b t , a
convergence o f a l l k i n d s o f t h i n g s i f t h i s i s
n o t t o be t h e c o m p l e t e outcome o f h i s development;

1. F r e u d , The P s y c h o p a t h o l o ~ yo f Everyday L i f e , t r a n s .
Alan Tyson, ed. James S t r a c h e y , The P e l i c a n Freud
L i b r a r y , vo1.5 ( ~ n ~ l a n d :Penguin Books, 19751, p.262.
i t i s w e l l known, i n d e e d , how o f t e n a r t i s t s
i n p a r t i c u l a r s u f f e r from a p a r t i a l i n h i b i t i o n
o f t h e i r e f f i c i e n c y owing t o n e u r o s i s . T h e i r
c o n s t i t u t i o n probably includes a strong
c a p a c i t y f o r s u b l i m a t i o n and a c e r t a i n d e g r e e
o f l a x i t y i n t h e r e p r e s s i o n s which a r e d e c i s i v e
f o r a c o n f l i c t . An a r t i s t , however, f i n d s a
p a t h back t o r e a l i t y i n t h e f o l l o w i n g manner.
To b e s u r e , h e i s n o t t h e o n l y one who can l e a d
a l i f e o f phantasy. Access t o t h e half-way
r e g i o n o f p h a n t a s y i s p e r m i t t e d by t h e u n i v e r s a l
a s s e n t o f mankind, and everyone s u f f e r i n g from
p r i v a t i o n e x p e c t s t o d e r i v e a l l e v i a t i o n and
c o n s o l a t i o n from it. But f o r t h o s e who - r e n o t
a r t i s t s t h e y i e l d of p l e a s u r e t o b e d e r i v e d
from t h e s o u r c e s o f p h a n t a s y i s v e r y l i m i t e d .
The m t h l e s s n e s s of t h e i r r e p r e s s i o n s f o r c e s
them t o b e c o n t e n t w i t h s u c h meagre day-dreams
a s a r e a l l o w e d t o become c o n s c i o u s . A man who
i s a t r u e a r t i s t h a s more a t h i s d i s p o s a l . I n
t h e f i r s t p l a c e , h e u n d e r s t a n d s how t o work
o v e r h i s day-dreams i n s u c h a way a s t o make
them l o s e what i s t o o p e r s o n a l a b o u t them and
r e p e l s s t r a n g e r s , and t o make it p o s s i b l e f o r
o t h e r s t o s h a r e i n t h e enjovment o f them. He
u n d e r s t a n d s , t o o , how t o t o n e them down s o
t h a t t h e y do n o t e a s i l y b e t r a y t h e i r o r i g i n
from p r o s c r i b e d s o u r c e s . F u r t h e r m o r e , h e
p o s s e s s e s t h e m y s t e r i o u s power o f s h a p i n g some
p a r t i c u l a r m a t e r i a l u n t i l it h a s become a
f a i t h f u l image o f h i s p h a n t a s y ; and h e knows,
moreover, how t o l i n k s o l a r g e a y i e l d O f
p l e a s u r e t o t h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of h i s
 unconscious phantasy tiitit, f o r t h e t i n ~ e
b e i n g a t l e a s t , r e p r e s s i o n s a r e outweighed
and l i f t e d by it. If he i s a b l e t o accomplish
a l l t h i s , h e makes i t p o s s i b l e f o r o t h e r
p e o p l e once more t o d e r i v e consolation and
a l l e v i a t i o n from t h e i r . own s o u r c e s o f p l e a s u r e
i n t h e i r unconscious which have become
i n a c c e s r i h l e t o then^; he earn? t h e i r r r a t i t u d e
and a d m i r a t i o n anti he h a s t h u s a r h i e v e d t h m u ~ h
h i s phantasy what o r i g i n a l l y h e had a c h i e v e d
only h i s phantasy -- honour, power and t h e
l o v e o f women.'

Before p r o c e e d i n g t o a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e c o n t e n t s
o f t h i s p a s s a g e , one must pause t o n o t e t h a t i t i s i t s e l f
a b e a u t i f u l piece o f prose revealing t h e sens* of
a e s t h e t i c form t h a t one c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y a s s o c i a t e s
with a r t i s t s . I t i s a p o i n t we w i l l r e t u r n t o l a t r r on.

That a p o r t , t h e p o s s a e e makes i t c l e w t h a t ,
f a r from b e m e a p o s i t i v e and comrrendable power o f
o b s e r v a t i o n , t h e a r t i s t ' s i n c i p h t i r ~ t ot h r u r ~ ( o n r c i o u n
is part of a pattern of illness. From being t h e s e e r --
"vates" -- t h e p o e t becomes a s i c k individual. The
c h a r g e o f i n s a n i t y no l o n g e r i s a n o p i n i o n o f f e r e d , b u t

a f a c t t h a t can be proved r e p e a t e d l y by t h e a p r l i c a t i o n

2. Freud, I n t r o d u c t o r y L e c t u r e s on F s y c h o a n a l v s i s , t r a n s . &
ed. James S t r a c h e y , The P e l i c a n Freud L i b r a r y , v o l . 1
( ~ n ~ l a n d Penguin
: Books, 19751, p.423-4.
of a s e t Of t e s t s Of P e r s o n a l i t y . Lionel T r i l l i n g
s a y s t h a t " e v e n t u a l l y Preud speaks o f a r t with what

we must indeed c a l l ~ o n t e r n p t . " ~It i s t h e contempt

of a therapist for, ironically, the very patients
who g i v e him h i s i d e n t i t y and s o c i a l s t a n d i n g . While
t h i s contempt might i t s e l f be a s u b j e c t f o r
psychoanalysis, a l l t h a t we can n o t e h e r e i n connection
with t h e t o p i c i n hand i s t h a t by e q u a t i n g t h e a r t i s t
with t h e n e u r o t i c , Freud succeeds i n s t r i p p i n g t h e
a r t i s t o f a l l t h a t he has gained throuph t h e p r a c t i c e
of h i s a r t -- "honour, power and t h e l o v e of women."4
The p o e t ' s ( o r w r i t e r ' s ) p e r c e p t i o n s s t a n d devalued i n
a c e r t a i n s e n s e , even a s t h e i r v a l u e f o r t h e
psychoanalyst i s acknowledged and demonstrated. This
q u e s t i o n of t h e s o c i a l v a l u e of p o e t i c p e r c e p t i o n s i s
one of t h e t h i n g s t h a t S h e l l e y d i s c u s s ~ si n t h e
"Defence of Poetry".

3 . Lionel T r i l l i n g , "Freud and L i t e r a t u r e , " The L i b e r a l

Irnaeination: Essays on L i t e r ~ t u r eand S o c i e t y ,
.
P e r e g r i n e Bcoks (1951; r p t England: Penguin Books,
~ m o ) ,p . 5 4 .
4 . Freud, I n t r o d u c t o m Lectures on Psychoanalysis,
op. c i t . , 0.424.
 One more p o i n t t h a t needs t o be noted about
Freud's passage a t t h e o u t s e t i s t h e f a c t t h a t he
g l o s s e s over t h e process by which t h e w r i t e r converts
neurosis into a r t . It i s a point t h a t has been
commented upon by Laurence Lerner i n h i s essay
"Psychoanalysis and Art", i n ternis of Freud's i n a b i l i t y
t o d e a l with t h e question of a e s t h e t i c f o m V 5 Although
t h i s does open up t h e i s s u e of t o what e x t e n t one can
s e p a r a t e content from form, t h i s does n o t a f f e c t t h e
p o i n t being discussed h e r e -- which i s t h a t Freud
seems t o g l o s s over t h e important question of t h e
d i f f e r e n c e between n e u r o t i c phantasy and a work of a r t ,
save f o r t h e f a c t t h a t while a r t earns fame, power and

5. According t o Lerner t h e Freudian theory of form

s u r f a c e s i n t h e d i s c u s s i o n on jokes, and can be
applied t o l i t e r a t u r e e s p e c i a l l y with raaard t o
rhyme. However, i n my opinion, t h i s s t i l l does
not adequately address i t s a l f t o t h e issue o f t h ?
d i f f e r e n c e between n e u r o t i c phantasy and a work
of a r t . Laurence Lerner, "Psychoanalysis and
Art," The L i t e r a r y Imap,ination: Essays on
L i t e r a t u r e and Soeiety (Sussex: The Harvester
Press, 1982), p.68-70.
t h e l o v e o f women, n e u r o t i c p h a n t a s y d o e s n o t . But
t h i s amounts t o o n l y d i s c u s s i n g t h e f r u i t s o f a r t i s t i c
a c t i v i t y versus neurotic a c t i v i t y without yielding
i n s i g h t i n t o t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e two i n t e r n s
o f e x p e r i e n c e , e x c e p t i n a v e r y s k e t c h y way. It
a p p e a r s t h a t f o r Freud, b o t h a r t and p h a n t a s y a r e t h e
same c a t e g o r y o f a c t i v i t y -- p a t h o l o g i c a l rather than
healthy.

I n t h e opening p a r a g r a p h o f t h e "Defence o f
P o e t r y " S h e l l e y c l a s s i f i e s "mental a c t i o n " i n t o two
main c a t e g o r i e s -- r e a s o n and i m a g i n a t i o n . Reason
c o n t e m p l a t e s t h e " r e l a t i o n s b o r n e by one t h o u g h t t o
a n o t h e r , however p r o d u c e d , " and i m a g i n a t i o n a c t s upon
t h o u c h t s t h e m s e l v e s and composes, " a s from elempnts,
o t h e r t h o u g h t s , each c o n t a i n i n g w i t h i n i t p e l f t h e
p r i n c i p l e o f i t s own i n t e g r i t y . ~ ~Reason i s
a n a l y t i c a l , while imagination i s s y n t h e t i c a l . Reason

6 . S h e l l e y , "A Defence of P o e t r y , " "Essays ... etc.,"

The P o e t i c a l Works o f Percy Bysshe S h e l l e y .. ,to
which a r e added His Essays and Frap,ments ...
L e t t e r s from Abroad e t c . e t c . , ed. Mary W o l l s t o n e c r a f t
S h e l l e y (London: Ward, Lock and Co., 1880), p.1.
A l l q u o t a t i o n s from S h e l l e y ' s p r o s e and l e t t e r s i n
t h i s c h a p t e r a r e from t h e same s o u r c e .
s e p a r a t e s e x p e r i e n c e i n t o u n i t s , while imagination

forms p a t t e r n s out of experience: "Reason r e s p e c t s

t h e d i f f e r e n c e s , and i m a g i n a t i o n t h e s i m i l i t u d e s o f

things." I n a g e n e r a l s e n s e , poptry i s t h e a c t i v i t y
of t h e i m a g i n a t i v e f a c u l t y and i s "connate with t h e

o r i g i n o f man." The s p e c i a l i t v of reason i s

o b s e r v a t i o n , and t h a t of imagination i s c r e a t i o n .
Reason r e c o r d s , and imar.inetion i n t e r p r e t s .

For S h e l l e y , t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i v e f a c u l t y l e a d s
on t o t h e p e r c e p t i o n of beauty and t r u t h . The poet

is a person l a v i s h l y endowed with t h e c a p a c i t y t o

p e r c e i v e p a t t e r n s of beauty and harmony i n t h e
experiences t h a t come h i s way, He i s a l s o g l f t e d with
t h e a b i l i t y t o reproduce t h e s e p a t t e r n s throuch a
chosen medium, be i t words of shapes o r even t h e
framing of codes o f behaviour:

But p o e t s , o r t h o s r who imogine and

express t h i s i n d e s t r u c t i b l e o r d e r , arc2 not
only t h e a u t h o r s of languape and o f music,
of t h e dance, and a r c h i t e c t u r e , and
s t a t u a r y , and p a i n t i n g ; they a r e t h e
i n s t i t u t o r s of laws, and t h e founders of
c i v i l s o c i e t y , and t h e i n v e n t o r s o f t h e
a r t s of l i f e , and t h e t e l c h e r c , who draw
 i n t o a c e r t a i n propinquity with t h e
b e a u t i f u l and t h e t r u e , t h a t p a r t i a l
a p p r e h e n s i o n o f t h e a ~ e n c i e so f t h e
i n v i s i b l e world which i s c a l l e d r e ~ i g i o n . ~

F o r Freud t h e a n a l y s t t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i v e f a c u l t y
l e a d s on t o mental i l l n e s s :

A s t r i k i n g and g e n e r a l l y o b s r r v e d
f e a t u r e o f t h e behaviour o f paranoics i s
t h a t they a t t a c h t h e greatest significance
t o t h e minor d e t a i l s o f o t h e r p e o p l e ' s
b e h a v i o u r which we o r c i i n o r i l y n e g l e c t ,
i n t e r p r e t them and make them t h e b a s i s o f
f a r - r e a c h i n g conclusions.'

Paranoic delusions a r e t h e r-sult of over-interpretation

-- t h a t i s , t h e r e i s a c e r t a i n amount o f t r u t h i n t h e
p a r a n o i c ' s wild s t a t e m e n t s , b u t t h e s c o p e o f i t s
o p e r a t i o n h a s been over-extended, and hence t h e
delusiveness. de come h e r e t o a c e r t a i n f a l l a c y t h a t
seems t o l i e a t t h e ba e o f t h e F r e u d i a n e q u a t i o n o f
c r e a t i v e w r i t e r s with t h e mentally s i c k . Freud t o o ,
o v e r - e x t e n d s t h e s c o p e of t h e a p l l l i c a t i o n o f an i d e a
that is basically true. S p e a k i n g o f symptomatic a c t s
he says:

7. Ibicl., p.2.
8. Freud, The P s y c h o p a t h o l o ~ y of Everyday L i f e , op. c i t . ,
p.317.
 O f a l l t h e w r i t e r s who h a v e from
t i m e t o t i m e p a s s e d comment o n o u r minor
symptomatic a c t s and p a r a p r a x e s , o r who
h a v e made u s e o f them, none h a s u n d e r s t o o d
t h e i r secret nature so clearly o r exhibited
them i n s o u n c a n n i l y l i f e l i k e a manner a s
Strindberg -- a man whose g e n i u s i n
r e c o g n i z i n g s u c h t h i n g s was, i t i s t r u e ,
a s s i s t e d by g r a v e m e n t a l a b n o r m a l i t y .

The a b n o r m a l i t y r e f e r r e d t o h e r e i s t h e p a r a n o i c
a b i l i t y t o i d e n t i f y symptomatic a c t s i n o t l i e r p e o p l e
From t h i s , and from t h e f a c t t h a t p a r a n o i c s over-
i n t e r p r e t b e h a v i o u r , and t h a t a w r i t e r , S t r i n d b e r g ,
who p o r t r a y e d symptomatic a c t s i m p r e s s i v e l y i n h i s
w r i t i n g was h i m s e l f i n r e a l l i f e p a r a n o i d , Freud
constructs a p a t t e r n i n which p a r a n o i d and p o e t i c
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a r e g i v e n s i m i l a r forms. I t was
i n e v i t a b l e t h a t h e should u l t i m a t e l y a r r i v e a t t h e
c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e a r t i s t and t h e n e u r o t i c a r e two
forms o f o n e i l l n e s s . S h e l l e y ' s v e r s i o n o f how t h e

i n t e r p r e t a t i v e f a c u l t y works, ancl t h e forms o f i t s

e x p r e s s i o n which i n c l u d e n o t j u s t a r c h i t e c t u r e and

9. I b i d . , p.270.
t h e f i n e a r t s b u t a l s o law and r e l i g i o n , i s a f i t t i n e

reply t o t h e Freudian version of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .

S h e l l e y a l s o p o i n t s o u t how it i s n o t t h e

p r e s e n c e o f t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i v e f a c u l t y t h a t causes
decay i n human l i f e , b u t r a t h e r t h e absence o f i t .
The S h e l l e y a n v e r s i o n of t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i v e f a c u l t y
s e e s it a s a h e a l t h y and p o s i t i v e t h i n g , r e l a t e d t o
t h e c r e a t i v e imagination t h a t e x p r e s s e s i t s e l f n o t
o n l y through words o r c o l o u r s o r forms b u t a l s o
through s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and t h e
g e n e r a l behaviour of people. I t i s t h e absence o f
t h e l i g h t o f t h e c r e a t i v e imagination t h a t degrades
t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i v e f a c u l t y i n t o t h e form i n which i t
e x i s t s i n low q u a l i t y l i t ~ m t u r e . S h r l l e y i l l u s t r a t e s
t h i s with t h e example o f t h e e x c e l l e n c e of Athenian
drama which i s n o t t o be found i n Augustnn o r
R e s t o r a t i o n drama:

I n a drama of t h e h i g h e s t o r d e r t h e r e i s
l i t t l e food f o r censure o r h a t r e d ; it
t e a c h e s r a t h e r self-knowledge and s e l f -
r e s p e c t . Neither t h e eye nor t h e mind
can s e e i t s - l f , u n l e s s r ~ f l e c t e dupon t h a t
which i t resembles. The drama, s o long a s
it continues t o express p o e t r y , i s a s a
 p r i s m a t i c and many-sided m i r r o r , which
c o l l e c t s t h e b r i g h t e s t r a y s of human
n a t u r e and d i v i d e s and r e p r o d u c e s them
from t h e s i m p l i c i t y o f t h e s e e l e m e n t a w
forms, and t o u c h e s them with m a j e s t y
and b e a u t y , and m u l t i p l i e s a l l t h a t it
r e f l e c t s , and endows it w i t h t h e power
o f p r o p a g a t i n g i t s l i k e wherever it may
fall.''

But when drama c e a s e s t o e x p r e s s p o e t i c p e r c e p t i o n , it

f a l l s i n t o a c o r r u p t e d form o f what i t can be. The
absence o f p o e t i c p e r c e p t i o n i n drama i s n e v e r an
i s o l a t e d phenomenon b u t p a r t o f a g e n e r a l c o n d i t i o n i n
which p o e t i c p e r c e p t i o n h a s ceased t o e x i s t i n l i f e
and s o c i e t y . Poor l i t e r a t u r e i s n o t t h e c a u s e o f
s o c i a l decay, b u t one m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f a g e n e r a l
c o n d i t i o n of decay i n s o c i e t y . Poor l i t e r a t u r e i s
poor n o t because o f what i t h a s , b u t because o f what
it does n o t have. I t s i n f e r i o r i t y can be t r a c e d n o t
t o t h e c r e a t i v e i m a g i n a t i o n but t o t h e absence o f t h e
channels t h a t a l l o w t h e l i g h t of t h e c r e a t i v e
i m a g i n a t i o n t o flow i n t o t h e work o f a r t . When t h e s e
c h a n n e l s a r e open, a l l t h i n p s e x i s t i n harmony and
b a l a n c e , pruducing t h e e x p e r i e n c e of p l e a s u r e t h a t i s
n o t a weak s e n s u a l indulgence b u t a s t r o n g and
p o s i t i v e a f f i r m a t i o n of l i f e . The u l t i m a t e triumph

10. S h e l l e y , " A Defence of P o e t r y , " o p . c i t . , p.6.

of c o r r u p t i o n i s t o r e n d e r t h e human mind i n s e n s i t i v e
t o p o s i t i v e inputs, o r pleasure i n i t s b e s t sense,
which i s t h e a f f i r m a t i o n o f l i f e :

F o r t h e end o f s o c i a l c o r r u p t i o n is t o
d e s t m y a l l a e n s i b i l i t y t o p l e a s u r e ; and,
t h e r e f o r e , it i s a c o r r u n t i o n . I t begins
a t t h e imagination and t h e i n t e l l e c t a s a t
t h e c o r e , and d i s t r i b u t e s i t s e l f t h e n c e a s
a p a r a l y s i n g venom, through t h e a f f e c t i o n s
i n t o t h e v e r y a p p e t i t e s , u n t i l a l l become
a t o r p i d mass i n which h a r d l y s e n s e s u r v i v e s .
At t h e approach of such a p e r i o d , p o e t r y
ever addresses i t s e l f t o those f a c u l t i e s
which a r e t h e l a s t t o be d e s t r o y e d , and i t s
v o i c e i s heard, l i k e t h e f o o t s t e p s o f
Astraea, d e ~ a r t i n gfrom t h e world."

It i s p o s s i b l e t o a r g u e t h a t t h e a f f i r m a t i o n of
l i f e t h a t S h e l l e y speaks o f comes from t h e unconscicus.
But t o a s s e r t t h a t t h i s a f f i r m a t i o n i s t h e same t h i n g
a s t a k i n g t h e l i d o f f t h e unconscious i n a s o c i a l l y
a c c e p t a b l e form i s t o r e v e a l a f a i l u r e t o understand
what t h e c r e a t i v e p r o c e s s i s about. The t h e r a p e u t i c
v a l u e o f a r t i s an important f e a t u r e , b u t c e r t a i n l y
n o t i t s only d e f i n i t i v e one. The "mysterious power"
t h a t Freud c o n v e n i e n t l y g l o s s e s o v e r i s i n f a c t
a v e r y v i t a l and important p o i n t .

What t h e Freudian system l a c k s i s a concept

of a r t a s a healthy a c t i v i t y . The p o i n t i s not t h a t
works o f a r t a r e n o t t h e r a u e u t i c i n composition and
appreciation. The p o i n t i s t h a t works of a r t a r e
n o t t h i s , and t h o s e t h a t a r e , a r e o f t e n n o t merely o r
even e s s e n t i a l l y t h i s . Freud s l i p s i n a s s u n i n p t h a t
works o f a r t a r e i n v a r i a b l y and wholly p a t h o l o g i c a l
i n c r e a t i o n and a p ~ r e c i a t i o n . The p e r ~ o r ~ a l ~ t of
ies
t h e a r t i s t and t h e n e u r o t i c a r e f o r him aluays of a

type.

Within t h e f i e l d o f psycl~olof'yi t ~ e l ft h e r r
a r e f o r c e s t o c o u n t e r b a l ~ n c et h e e f f e c t o f t h e
Freudian equation o f H r t i s t h i l h n e u r o t i c . Chief Rmong
t h e s e i s t h e q u e ~ t i o n i n eo f t h e d e f i n i t i o r s o f " n e u r o t i c
and "normal" t t a t are u s u a l l y accepted, and t h e
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e s e s t a n d a r d s a s a s o c i a - p o l i t i c a l
a c t r a t h e r than a d i s i n t e r e s t e d d e f i n i t i o n . There i s
a l s o t h e rnovener~tt h a t a t t e m p t s t o defirie h e a l t h
p o s i t i v e l y r a t h e r than a s an "absence o f i l l n e s s "
s t a t e of b e i n e , and i n c l u d e s amone i t s c r i t e r i a f o r
mental h e a l t h t h e c a p a c i t y t o be c r e a t i v e . The
S h e l l e y e a n view o f p o e t i c ( i . e . c r e a t i v e ) a c t i v i t y
i n c l u d e s t a t e s o f h e a l t h and, a l o n g w i t h t h e t r e n d s
w i t h i n t h e f i e l d o f psychology i n d i c a t e d above,
c o n s t i t u t e s a counter-argument t o t h e age-old and
r a t h e r a t t r a c t i v e ttteory o f t i l e mad a r t i s t . 1 2

We t h e r e f o r e r e t u r n t o t i l e p o e t . Early i n
t h e e s s a y S h e l l e y s t a t e s t h a t nian i s "an i n s t r u m e n t
o v e r which a s e r i e s o f e x t e r n a l ant1 i n t e r n a l
i m p r e s s i o n s a r e d r i v e n , l i k e t h e a l t e r n a t i o n s o f an
ever-changing wind o v e r an Aeolian l y r e , which move
it by t h e i r motion t o e v e r - c h a ~ g i n g melody." aut
u n l i k e t h e l y r e , t h e hul~~all
bein5 also shapes the
i n f l u e n c e s r e c e i v e d t o compose them i n t o a harmonious
whole. Receptivity t o t h e environnirrt i s a c c o ~ ~ ~ p ~ r ~ l e d
by a n a b i l i t y t o g i v e back t o it something t h a t
increases i t s value.

This i n b r i e f c o n s t i t u t e s t h e Shelleyean
d e f i n i t i o n of c r e a t i v e (or p o e t i c ) a c t i v i t y . He
e n l a r g e s on t h i s i n t h e c o u r s e o f t h e e s s a y and
d e f i n e s i t s o t h e r dimensions. The p o e t ' s r e c e p t i v i t y

1 2 . F o r a more d e t a i l e d account of t h e q u a l i f y i n g
f a c t o r s i n t h i s n ~ s t t e r , s e e A ~ ~ e n d i3x.
combined with h i s own c r e a t i v e a b i l i t i e s opens up
f o r him a r e a s of e x p e r i e n c e normally n o t a c c e s s i b l e :
"A p o e t p a r t i c i p a t e s i n t h e e t e r n a l , t h e i n f i n i t e ,

and t h e one: a s f a r a s r e l a t e s t o h i s conceptions,

t i m e and p l a c e and number a r e n o t . " His capacity t o
i n t e r p r e t experience i n terms of t h e e v e r - r e l e v a n t
p r i n c i p l e s o f human e x i s t e n c e bestows upon him t h e
c h a r a c t e r o f a prophet i n tile p h i l o s o p h i c s e n s e .
He i s a b l e n o t o n l y t o e x p e r i e n c e moments of deep
i n s i r t i t but i s a l s o a b l e t o express them i n a
particular form, be i t i n words, o r shapes, o r c o l o u r s ,

o r institutions. His works e n r i c h t h e s o c i e t v h e

l i v e s i n by making s p e c i a l l y insightful experiences
a c c e s s i b l e t o t h o s e who, thourh n o t thrmselves p o e t s ,
can s h a r e i n p o e t i c e x p e r i e n c e when i t i s presented
t o them.

The importance of p o e t i c experience i n t h e

l i f e o f both t h e i n d i v i d u a l arid s o c i e t y i s d e s c r i b e d
by S h e l l e y i n t h e essay. I t a l s o answers Peacock's
c o n t e n t i o n t h a t l i t e r a t u r e would become redundant
once t h e s c i e n c e s reached a c e r t a i n s t a g e of
development.
 S h e l l e y homes i n on t h e weakest p o i n t i n t h e
kind o f argument t h a t Peacock o f f e r s -- t h e sssumption
t h a t t h e i n c r e a s e o f knowledge goes hand i n hand with

i t s s u c c e s s f u l a s s i m i l a t i o n , e i t h e r by a n i n d i v i d u a l
o r by s o c i e t y . He s a y s :

We have more moral, p o l i t i c a l and

h i s t o r i c a l wisdom, t h a n we know how t o
r e d u c e i n t o p r a c t i c e ; we have more
s c i e n t i f i c and economical knowledee t h a n
can be accomodated t o t h e j u s t d i s t r i b u t i o n
o f t h e produce which i t n u l t i p l i e s . The
p o e t r y i n t h e s e systems o f t h o u g h t , i s
concealed by t h e accumulation o f f a c t s
and c a l c u l a t i n g p r o c e s s e s . There i s no
want o f knowledge r e s p e c t i n g what i s w i s e s t
and b e s t i n morals, government, arid p o l i t i c a l
economy, o r a t l e a s t , what i s w i s e r and
b e t t e r t h a n what men now p r a c t i s e and
endure. But we l e t "I d i r e n o t w a i t upon
I would, l i k e t h e poor c a t i n t h e adage."
We want t h e c r e a t i v e f a c u l t y t o imaginp
t h a t which we know; we want t h e eenerwus
impulse t o a c t t h a t which we imagine; we
want t h e p o e t r y of l i f e : Our c a l c u l a t i o n s
have o u t r u n conception; we have e a t e n more
t h a h we can d i g e s t . Thp c u l t i v a t i o n o f
t h o s e s c i e n c e s which have e n l a r g e d t h e
l i m i t s o f t h e empire of man o v e r t h e
e x t e r n a l world, h a s , f o r want o f t h e
poetical faculty, proportionally
 c i r c u m s c r i b e d t h o s e o f ti!e i n t e r n a l world;
and man, h a v i n g e n s l a v e d t h e e l e m e n t s ,
remains himself a slave,13

We c a n a p p r e c i a t e b e t t e r t h e t i m e l e s s r e l e v a n c e of
S h e l l e y ' s o b s e r v a t i o n s i f we g l a n c e a t t h e f o l l o w i n &
p a s s a g e from L a i n g ' s P o l i t i c s o f E x p e r i e n c e :

Our t i m e h a s been d i s t i n g u i s h e d , more

t h a n by a n y t h i n c e l s e , by n d t i v e t o c o n t r o l
t h e e x t e r n a l world, and by a n a l m o s t t o t a l
f o r g e t f u l n e s s o f t h e i n t e r n a l world. If
o n e e s t i m a t e s human e v o l u t i o n from t h e p o i n t
o f view o f knowledge o f t h e e x t e r n a l world,
t h e n we a r e i n many r d s p e c t s p r o f r e s s i n g .

I f o u r e s t i m a t e i s from t h e p o i n t o f
view o f t h e i n t e r n a l world, and o f oneness
o f i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l t h e n t h e j u d ~ e l n e n t
must be v e r y d i f f e r e n t .
14

Accumulation i s a v e r y d i f f e r e n t t h i n g from a s s i m i l a t i o n .
'While t h e s t u d y o f t h e s c i e n c e s promotes t h e former,

t h e r e i s n o t h i n g w i t h i n i t s framework t h a t f a c i l i t a t e s
the latter. F o r t h i s , one needs t h e c r e a t i v e i m a g i n a t i o n .

13. S h e l l e y , "A Defence o f F o e t r y , " o p . c i t . , p.12.

14. R.D. Laing, The P o l i t i c s o f E w e r i e n c e and The
B i r d of P a r a d i s e (England: Penguin b o k s , 197L),
p.115.
Poetic perception i s the function of t h e creative
i m a g i n a t i o n and, r a t h e r t h a n becoming i r r e l e v a n t
with t h e development o f t h e s c i e n c e s , becomes more
u r g e n t l y r e q u i r e d with i t :

The c u l t i v a t i o n o f p o e t r y i s n e v e r more
t o be d e s i r e d t h a n a t p e r i o d s when, from
an excess o f t h e s e l f i s h and c a l c ~ ~ l e t i n g
p r i n c i p l e , t h e accumulation o f t h e m a t e r i a l s
o f e x t e r n a l l i f e exceed t h e q u a n t i t y o f t h e
power o f a s s i r n i l a t i n n them t o t h e i n t e r n a l
laws o f human n a t u r e . The body h a s t h e n
become t o o unwieldy f o r t h a t which
a n i m t e s i t .15

The a c t i v e p r e s e n c e o f t h e c r e n t i v e i m a p i n a t i o n
i n t h e l i f e o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l end s o c i e t y i s e s s e n t i a l
n o t o n l y f o r p s y c h o l o g i c a l h e a l t h b u t a l s o f o r moral
h e a l t h , f o r " t h e e r e a t s e c r e t o f morals i s l o v e ; or
a going o u t o f o u r own n a t u r e , " s o t h a t t h e p a i n s and
p l e a s u r e s o f a n o t h e r becomes a s r r l e v a n t t o us a s o u r
own; and t h i s emotion of l o v e i s born o f t h e c r e a t i v e
imapination. Therefore, t h e " g r e a t i n s t r u - l e n t of
moral good i s t h e i m a g i n a t i o n ; and p o e t w a d m j n i s t e r s

15. S h e l l e y , " A Ddfence of f o e t r y , " op. c i t . , p.17.

t o t h e e f f e c t by a c t i n g upon t h e c a u s e , " namely, t h e
c r e a t i v e imagination. Poetry a s t h e expression of
t h e c r e a t i v e imagination i s necessary i n y e t a n o t h e r
way -- it promotes well-being i n t h e wider s e n s e
o f t h e word. The production of t h e n e c e s s i t i e s of
l i f e promotes well-being up t o t h e p o i n t of p h y s i c a l
h e a l t h and s e c u r i t y . For t h e promotion of f u r t h e r
well-being i n terms of p u r i f y i n g and s t r e n e t h e n i n g
t h e a f f e c t i o n s , e n l a r g i n g t h e imagination and
adding " s u i r i t t o sense", p o e t r y , o r t h e a c t i v i t y o f
p o e t i c perception, i s i n d i s p e n s a b l e .

P o e t i c p e r c e p t i o n i s t h e f u n c t i o n of t h e
c r e a t i v e imagination. The r o l e o f t h e c r e a t i v e
imagination i n t h e l i f e o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l arld s o c i e t y
i s a very v i t a l one, f o r it f a c i l i t a t e s t h e a s s i m i l a t i o n
o f newly acquired knowledge and c a t e r s t o t h e
development of t h e moral and e t h i c a l f a c e t s of t h e
human p e r s o n a l i t y . It e n r i c h e s t h e i n n e r mental world
o f a person and thereby promotes a sense of well-being.

Such a defence was p o s s i b l e from S h e l l e y

because h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l System permitted t h e concept
of a r t i s t i c a c t i v i t y a s a h e a l t h y one. I t was
p o s s i b l e a l s o because S h e l l e y could p e n e t r i ~ t et o t h e
b a s i c p s y c t ~ o l o g i c a ln a t u r e 0 1 a r t i s t i c a c t i v i t y and
expand t h e s c o p e of t h e word " p o e t r y " t o d e s c r i b e
a mode o f p e r c e p t i o n which c o u l d m o t i v a t e e x p r e s s i o n s
of v a r i o u s k i n d s , and was n o t l i m i t e d t o t h e
composition o f v e r s e .

Through t h i s v i e w p o i n t , S h e l l e y i i i p h l i r ~ h t s a
v e r y i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t o f p o e t i c perception,
especially i n t h e F r e u d i a n c o n t e x t . Poetrv, h e says,
"turns a l l things t o loveliness; it exalts the
b e a u t y o f t h a t which i s most b e a u t i f u l , and i t odds
b e a u t y t o t h a t which i s most deformed; lt m a r r i e s
e x u l t a t i o n and h o r r o r , p r i e f and p l e a s u r e , e b e r n i t y
and change . . ." The c a t a l v t i c nature of t h e a r t i s t i c
p r o c e s s i s something t b i n t Freud seem- t o h a v e s e n s e d
b u t n o t been a b l e t o a c c e p t -- h r n c e h i q r e r e ~ r n c et o
t h e a r t i s t ' s " m y s t e r i o u s power" on which h e d i d n o t
dilate further. The p r o c e s s o f p o e t i c p e r c p r t i o n and
e x p r e s s i o n i s such t h s t a neurosis, a f t e r tiavinp been
p u t t h r o u g h i t , no l o n g e r r e t a i n s t h e c h p r a c t e r o f an
illness. I t s t r a n s f o r m o t i o n i n t o a work o f a r t
a f f e c t s i t s v e r y n a t u r e and i t becomes an e n t i t y t h a t
c a n n o t be c o n t a l n e d w i t h i n t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f a n e u r o s i s .
The alchemy o f po-try " t u r n s t o potable rol'i tile
poisonous w a t e r s which flow from d e a t h t h r o u r h l i f e ..
I t a l s o c o n v e r t s t h e p a t h o l o g i c a l mode o f experience
i n t o one t h a t c o n t a i n s w i t h i n i t s e l f t h e h e a l i n g
elements t h a t l i f t it o u t o f t h e realm o f n e u r o s i s ,

We come now t o t h e most c u r i o u s p a r t o f

S h e l l e y ' s "Defence", which p e r t a i n s t o t h e p e r s o n a l i t y
of t h e poet. Although he s a y s i n a l e t t e r o f 1821
t h a t t h e "poet and t h e man ? r e two d i f f e r e n t n l t u r e s ;
thoueh t h e y e x i s t together, they may be unconscious of
each o t h e r , " 1 6 and f u r t h e r a r e i n c a p a b l e of i n f l u e n c i n p
each o t h e r ' s "powers and e f f o r t s , " we f i n d him
a s s e r t i n g almost e x a c t l y t h e r e v e r s e i n t h e "Defence".
tle says:

A poet, a s he i s t h e a u t h o r t o o t h a r s
o f t h e h i g h e s t wisdom, p l e a s u r e , v i r t u e and
g l o r y , s o he ought p e r s o n a l l y t o be tile
h a p p i e s t , t h e b e s t , t h e w i s e s t , and t h e
most i l l u s t r i o u s of men.17

Despite t h e a s s e r t i v e t o n e t h e r e i s a d i s t i n c t n o t e o f
u n c e r t a i n t y i n t h e s e l i n e s , almost a s i f S h e l l e y i s

16. S h e l l e y , " L e t t e r s from Ahroad," o p . c i t . , p.149.

17. S h e l l e y , " A Defence of F'oetry," op. c i t . , 0.13.

t r y i n g t o convince h i m s e l f t h a t it i s indeed true.''
He m o d i f i e s h i s s t a n c e somewhat by s a y i n g f u r t h e r on
t h a t t h e p o e t i s t h e b e s t and h a p p i e s t o f nen
"inasmuch a s h e i s a p o e t , " and a g a i n , f u r t l i e r o n ,
s t a t e s t h a t i n t h e p e r i o d s i n between e p i s o d e s o f
p o e t i c i n s p i r e t i o n t h e p o e t "br~comesa nnn, and i s
abandoned t o t h e sudden r e f l u x of t h e i n f l u e n c e s under
which o t h e r s h a b i t u a l l y l i v e . " But t h e u n c e r t a i n i t y
p e r s i s t s u n t i l t h e t i d a l wave o f t h e c l o s i n g l i n e s
submerges i t .

The q u e s t i o n a r i s e s why, when t h e p o e t i c

p r o c e s s i s a b l e t o t r a n s f o r m a l l t h a t goes tt!rouch
i t , t h e p o s s e s s o r of t h i s process should be l p s s than

18. Raymond i i l l i a m s , i n C u l t u r e and S o c i p t v 1780-1950

mentions, while d i s c u s s i n g S h e l l e y ' s "Defence" t h a t
t h e " o b s t r u c t i o n of a c e r t a i n kind o f experience
was s i m p l i f i e d t o t h e o b s t r u c t i o n of p o e t r y , which
was t h e n i d e n t i f i e d with it and even made t o stand
f o r i t a s a whole," a s a r e s u l t of which, when
S h e l l e y s t a t e s t h a t t h e poet ''ought p e r s o n a l l y t o
be t h e h a p p i e s t , t h e b e s t , t h e w i s e s t and t h e most
i l l u s t r i o u s o f men," t h e emphasis t e n d s t o f a l l
on "ought." Raymond Williams, "The Romlntic
A r t i s t , " C u l t u r e and S o c i e t y 1780-1950 (Eneland:
Penguin Books, 1961). p.63.
t h e b e s t and h a p p i e s t of men a t a l l times. The
answer i s t h a t t h e poet i s n o t a b l e t o i n f u s e t h e
p o e t i c p r o c e s s i n t o a l l p a r t s of h i s p e r s o n a l i t y .
As long a s h e is t h e p o e t , h e is indeed t h e best and

h a p p i e s t o f men. The p r o b l e a a r i s e s w h ~ nhe drops

t h e p o e t i c mantle. I f h e were a b l e t o s u s t a i n t h e
c a t a l y s i s o f t h e p o e t i c p r o c e s s , h e might well be
t h e b e s t and h a p p i e s t of men a t a l l t i m e s .

It i s important a t t h i s p o i n t t o n o t e t h a t t h e
admission t h a t t h e p o e t i s n o t always t h e b e s t and
h a p p i e s t of men does n o t amount t o a g r e e i n g with
Freud t h a t h e i s a n e u r o t i c . A f t e r a l l , hetween
n e u r o s i s and t h e c o n d i t i o n of p o e t i c f e l i c i t y t h e r e
a r e s e v e r e l p l a n e s o f e x i s t e n c e where a poet may t a k e

up r e s i d e n c e a s a man.

I n conclusion, we may t a k e a look a t "To a

Skylark" where a l s o S h e l l e y s p ~ a k sof p o p t i c
inspiration. While he s t a t e s t h a t "our sweetest
songs a r e t h o s e t h a t t e l l / o f s a d d e s t t h o u ~ h t , " ' ~
h e a l s o t e l l s t h e skylark:

19. S h e l l e y , Shelley: F o e t i c a l Works, ed. Thomas

Hutchinson, 2nd e d i t i o n (London: Oxford Univ-rsity
Press, l970), p . 6 3 3 .
 T e a c h me h a l f t h e g l a d n e s s
T h a t t h y b r a i n must know,

S u c h h a r m o n i o u s madness

From my l i p s would f l o w
The w o r l d s h o u l d l i s t e n t h e n -- a s I am
l i s t e n i n g now."

U n l i k e F r e u d , S h e l l e y i s a b l e t o s e e t h a t w h i l e some
works of a r t a r e r o o t e d i n p a i n , t h i s i s n o t t h e o n l y
source of creativity. Pure j o y , such a s t h e s k y l a r k
possesses, can a l s o give r i s p t o a r t . de must n o t
f o r g e t h i s own 'Witch o f A t l a s which Mary found
u n s a t i s f a c t o r y b e c a u s e i t was s o p l a y f u l , and t o
which S h e l l e y responded t h u s :

h h a t , though no mice a r e c a u g h t by a young k i t t e n ,

Kay i t n o t l e a p and p l a y a s Erown c a t s d o ,
T i l l i t s c l a w s come? F r i t h e e , f o r t h i s one time,
C o n t e n t t h e e w i t h a v i s i o n a r y rhynle."

Knile t h e croative imapination has a serious r o l e t o nlay

i n t h e l i f e o f a n i n d i v i d u a l and s o c i e t y , i t can a l s o
t a k e t i m e o f f froir, s e r i o u s n e s : . and e x p r e s s ti]? : l u r i j o y
and e x u b e r a n c e o f l i f ' ~t h a t i s i ~ t e g r a lt o i t . Prtistic

20. Ibid.
21. S h e l l e y , S h e l l e y : . F o e t i c a l 'A'ork~, o p . c i t . , p.371.
a c t i v i t y i s n o t a l w a y s and o n l y p a t h o l o g i c a l -- it
is also healthy.

F i n a l l y , we come back t o a p o i n t made e a r l y i n

t h i s c h a p t e r , a b o u t F r e u d ' s p a s s a g e on t h a~r t i s t
being i t s e l f a f i n e piece o f prose. P l a t o , it i s
s a i d , d i d n o t r e a l i s e when banishing p o e t s from h i s
r e n u b l i c t h a t h e h i m s e l f was o n e . According t o
S h e l l e y ' s d e f i n i t i o n of p o e t r v , Freud i s a p o e t
b e c a u s e h e h a s i n s i g h t s i n t o t h e t r u t h s o f nan and
nature. W h ~ nwe s o t Freud i n t h e frarnphork o f ~ l i ~ l l e v ' s

"Defence", we s e e him a b s o r b e d i n v e r y scientifically

and s u c c e s s f u l l y i m p a l i n p h l m s e l f on h i s own s p e a r ! 2 2

2 2 . F r e u d ' s o v e r - s t a t e m e n t s must n o t , however, b e

a l l o w e d t o h i d e from v i e d t h e t r u t h s t h a t h e
e x p r e s s e s , Eloreover, it i s known t h a t he
c o n s t a n t l y r e v i s e d h i s t h e o r i e s anti c o r r ~ c t e d
them t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t f r e s h p e r c e r ~ t i o r l r ;
permitted.