I see

Created by kduglin. Last edited by kduglin 2379 days ago. Viewed 914 times.

[google] [daypop] [edit]

This poem by Felicia Hemans appears to contain a similar tone to the Sonnets of Charlotte Smith - the dramatization of the melancholy. Unlike Smith, however, Hemans does not provide a compelling illustration or explication of this delicate theme.

This poem Second Sight begins: "A mournful gift is mine, oh friends!/A mournful gift is mine!," and unfortunately, these two ineffectively, melancholy lines serve as the poems chorus in the eighth stanza. Hemans' direct address to her audience as "oh friends!" appears to be a bit too comfortably stated - I, as a member of Hemans' audience for one, do not think of her as a friend and reflexively, do not wish to be addressed as such. The poem further deteriorates as Hemans aligns the soul with "the flow of song and wine" and compares its "woe" to "the faded flower/Midst the rich summer's glow." This cliched imagery does not provide a compelling dramatization of the melancholy - rather, it exponentially cultivates the artificial emotionalism of Hemans' initial lines.

The most disenchanting aspect of Hemans' poem, however, is her consistent and obvious use of sensory description. The phrase "I see" is used three times and the phrase "I hear" is used twice - the poem is only 40 lines long, and therefore, appears to the critical reader to be completely dominated by these juvenile devices. Hemans appears to be unable to sophistically portray imagery and emotions through independent description (like her Romantic contemporaries Coleridge in particular), in which, the poet uses methaphors to combine imagery and emotion. Hemans' notions of grieving, sadness,and shadows are not successfully illustrated through melancholy dramatic devices, but rather, appear shallow and juvenile in their transmission.

One is led to ask: is Felicia Hemans one of the female Romantics whose poetry has been recently criticized for lacking any profound structure or substance? From this critic's perspective, Hemans' poetry contains only one aspect that literary critics are attracted to - the mere fact that its author is a woman.

cgurall, 2378 days ago.

I enjoyed looking into the question you entertained us with at the end of your snip. Just a quick search on Felicia Hemans reveals that there is much modern day criticism out there that dares to question how profound Heman’s poetry actually is. It seems many contemporary critics believe that Heman’s poetry contains, “‘

too many flowers’ and ‘too little fruit’.” What I found interesting is that contemporary critics seem compelled to be nice about getting this kind of a point across. They are not overtly critical, and they do not announce that her poetry is garbage, but there is the feeling that they do not believe that Heman’s belongs in the same league the Wordsworth’s and the Byron’s of the English romantic period. Critics tend to praise her poetry’s aesthetics but at the end of their praises I see a reoccurring trend of a, but, followed by a comment which through various phrasing reads, “

but not of a commanding intellect or very complex or subtle nature.” Taking this into account I think your question changes a bit. Yes, modern day critics are willing to say that Henam’s poems lack profound structure and substance. The new question is… are critics nice to Hemans and let her down easy because she is a woman? From this critics perspective I would also answer yes.

If I were a woman’s studies professor I do think that I could use Felicia Hemans as an example of an interesting figure in woman’s history. This would not have anything to do with the content of her poetry. Rather, I could use Hemans to show an example of a woman who lived in the early 1800s and was able to make a living for her and her family through her publication income. Her biography is surely profound and interesting in this regard.

rfenning, 2378 days ago.

I think it is also important to remember that Hemans sold a whole lot of books, and that though we might not appreciate her work like her contemporary readers apparently did, there is something in the simple fact that she probably outsold many of our male Romantics (or at least some of them). Why exactly was Hemans' poetry so popular? What audience was buying her work?

My guess would be a literate middle class womanhood, the same women who would buy books like Susan Warner's uber-sentimental novel The Wide Wide World during the 1850s, which surpasses Hemans in monumentality (its long), sentimentality (believe it or not) and possibly popularity (it was one of the top top sellers of its time, right after the Bible). Or the women who went to weepy melodrama films in the 1940s and 50s. Though maybe of a questionable artistic/intellectual quality, there has to be something in these works that would make audiences flock to them in droves.

This might not make Hemans good, but it at least makes it more interesting than it would be were you just reading herfor her words. Maybe this also suits Hemans more for a women's studies course, as cgurall says, but also makes her appropriate for us too, because perhaps her audience of Romantic (and romantic with a little r too) readers is a slightly different one that the Romantic Audience we have been looking at all along.

kmasters, 2378 days ago.

Hemans seemingly senseless repetition of "I see" and "I hear" seems to be her attempt to paint herself as a visionary and prophet. As her melodramatic opening lines indicate, this "mournful gift" is quite a burden to her. Hemans vision is a vague, but apocalyptic one; she writes: "I see the blood-red future stain." Her short poem is peppered with terms like "thunder," "shriek," "warriors," and "forsaken," all adding to the feeling of dread and doom. The apocalyptic fervor with which she writes seems to be an attempt at self aggrandization. By coloring her vision as something vital to humanity that only she can see and predict, Hemans self identifies as not only prophet, but also potential savior. For the lines: "with every breeze a spirit sends/To me some warning sign -- " further implicate Hemans desire to somehow avert the impending doom. She manages to assert herself as incredibly powerful, but simultaneously as one who should be pitied:"Oh prophet heart, thy grief, thy power,To all deep souls belong."
The poem concludes in the same self pitying tone. Hemans essentially concludes that there is no place on earth for such a type as herself, for prophet's "sight is all too sadly clear… their piercing thoughts repose not here,/ Their home is but in heaven." For all her grand overtones, Hemans cannot escape the mire of her own self pity. As Kduglin notes, "Hemans appears to be unable to sophistically portray imagery and emotions." The reader remains unconvinced of both her suffering and her own power as a visionary.

Please login to post a comment.

Starting points:

About this website
Index of entries
RAP2

Recent demos:

CCNMTL demo
Wide Open demo

Assignments:

Weekly posting
E1 index
E2 index
Project index

Users: (1)

Googlebot

… and 17 Guests

Author pages:

Lyrical Ballads
William Blake
Elizabeth Barrett Browning
Lord Byron
John Clare
Samuel Taylor Coleridge
Felicia Hemans
John Keats
Caroline Lamb
L.E.L.
Mary Robinson
Percy Bysshe Shelley
Charlotte Smith
Dorothy Wordsworth
William Wordsworth

Total number of entries

644