∞∞∞∞∞∞∞
Unpublished Letters of Edgar Allan Poe
BY JAMES SOUTHALL WILSON
DURING the summer of 1835, between the dates July 20 and August 20, Edgar A. Poe — so he signed his name — left Baltimore to accept an assistant's position on the “Southern Literary Messenger,” in Richmond. The “Messenger” was a struggling local magazine, less than a year old, with a small circulation, without a permanent editor, and dependent upon unpaid contributors for its contents. Thomas W. White, the owner, was a practical printer of sturdy character, but possessed of only moderate business ability and almost no education. The young assistant was scarcely better known than the publication which he was to help edit. Brilliant as Poe's work was, it had been published obscurely and had attracted little, if any, attention. There was startling originality in some of this work, but none the less when J. P. Kennedy “discovered” Poe in 1833, as the result of having read his stories in the Baltimore “Saturday Visiter's” prize contest, Poe was in such poverty that he was unable to accept Kennedy's dinner invitation for lack of presentable clothes, and when in 1835, through the same friend's recommendation to White, he received a tentative offer from the “Messenger,” he replied that he “would gladly accept it, were the salary even the merest trifle.” He [column 2:] was seeking the opportunity for the reputation that he was confident he could make. By December, though it seems there was a brief period during which, because of Poe's habits, he and Mr. White had separated, he had been put in editorial charge of the “Messenger.” The fire of his criticisms had already kindled a blaze of interest throughout the South.
It was at this period that Judge Beverley Tucker began the correspondence of which Poe's part can now be printed for the first time. Carefully preserved among the Tucker papers, these letters have been brought to light by Mr. George Preston Coleman, late highway commissioner of Virginia, the grandson of Judge Tucker.
Judge Tucker himself invited the letter which began the correspondence. From Williamsburg, on November 29, he wrote to White: “I am much flattered by Mr. Poe's opinion of my lines. His history, as I have heard it, reminds me of Coleridge's. Without the tithe of his genius, I am old enough to be his father (if I do not mistake his filiation, I remember his beautiful mother when a girl), and I presume I have had advantages the want of which he feels.” He wrote his criticisms at length of “MS Found in a Bottle,” objecting especially to “the mere physique of the horrible.” The invitation came at the end of the [page 653:] letter. “If Mr. Poe takes well what I have said, he shall have as much more of it whenever occasion calls for it. If not, his silence alone will effectually rebuke my impertinence.”
Poe had no choice but to reply, and his answer, now published for the first time, is beyond question the most interesting letter, intrinsically, of all that have been printed of his personal correspondence. His contention that the whole of a work of art may be original, though the parts are not, his defense of his levity in his reviews, his confidence that he has creative power and that his next story will be better than “Morella,” his latest, his theories of verse, and his delicate, but sincere, response to the reference to his mother, are all significant in themselves, and characteristic of Poe at his best.
The letter is given as Poe wrote it, except for the exquisite penmanship of it.
“Richmond
“Dec: 1.35.
“Dear Sir,
“Mr. White was so kind as to read me some portions of your letter to himself, dated Nov 29, and I feel impelled, as much by gratitude for your many friendly expressions of interest in my behalf, as by a desire to make some little explanations, to answer, personally, the passages alluded to.
“And firstly — in relation to your own verses. That they are not poetry I will not allow, even when judging them by your own rules. A very cursory perusal enabled me, when I first saw them, to point out many instances of the [[Greek text]] you mention. Had I the lines before me now I would particularize them. But is there not a more lofty species of originality than originality of individual thoughts or individual [column 2:] passages? I doubt very much whether a composition may not even be full of original things, and still be pure imitation as a whole. On the other hand I have seen writings, devoid of any new thought, and frequently destitute of any new expression — writings which I could not help considering as full of creative power. But I have no wish to refine, and I dare say that you have little desire that I should do What is, or is not, poetry must not be told in a mere epistle. I sincerely think your lines excellent. So.
“The distinction you make between levity, and wit or humour (that which produces a smile) I perfectly understand; but that levity is unbecoming the chair of the critic, must be taken, I think, cum grano salis. Moreover — are you sure Jeffrey was never jocular or frivolous in his critical opinions? I think I can call to mind some instances of the purest grotesque in his Reviews downright horse-laughter. Did you ever see a critique in Blackwood's Mag: upon an Epic Poem by a cockney tailor? Its chief witticisms were aimed not at the poem, but at the goose, and bandy legs of the author, and the notice ended, after innumerable oddities in — ‘ha! ha! ha! — he! he! he! — hi! hi! hi! — ho! ho! ho! — hu! hu! hu’!. Yet it was, without exception, the most annihilating, and altogether the most effective Review I remember to have read. Of course I do not mean to palliate such indecency. The reviewer should have been horse whipped. Still I cannot help thinking levity here was indispensable. Indeed how otherwise the subject could have been treated I do not perceive. To treat a tailor's Epic seriously, (and such an Epic too!) would have defeated the ends of the critic, in weakening [page 654:] his own authority by making himself ridiculous.
“Your opinion of “The MS. found in a Bottle’ is just. The Tale was written some years ago, and was one among the first I ever wrote. I have met with no one, with the exception of yourself & P. P. Cooke of Winchester, whose judgment concerning these Tales I place any value upon. Generally, people praise extravagantly those of which I am ashamed, and pass in silence what I fancy to be praise worthy. The last tale I wrote was Morella and it was my best. When I write again it will be something better than Morella. At present, having no time upon my hands, from my editorial duties, I can write nothing worth reading. What articles I have published since Morella were all written some time ago. I mention this to account for the ‘mere physique’ of the horrible which prevails in the ‘MS. found in a Bottle’. I do not think I would be guilty of a similar absurdity now. One or two words more of Egotism.
“I do not entirely acquiesce in your strictures on the versification of my Drama. I find that versification is a point on which, very frequently, persons who agree in all important particulars, differ very essentially. I do not remember to have known any two persons agree, thoroughly, about metre. I have been puzzled to assign a reason for this — but can find none more satisfactory than that music is a most indefinite conception. I have made prosody, in all languages which I have studied, a particular subject of inquiry. I have written many verses, and read more than you would be inclined to imagine. In short — I especially pride myself upon the accuracy of my ear — and have established [column 2:] the fact of its accuracy — to my own satisfaction at least, by some odd chromatic experiments. I was therefore astonished to find you objecting to the melody of my lines. Had I time just now, and were I not afraid of tiring you, I would like to discuss this point more fully. There is much room for speculation here. Your own verses (I remarked this, upon first reading them, to Mr. White) are absolutely faultless, if considered as ‘pure harmony’ — I mean to speak technically — ‘without the intervention of any discords’. I was formerly accustomed to write thus, and it would be an easy thing to convince you of the accuracy of my ear by writing such at present — but imperceptibly the love of these discords grew upon me as my love of music grew stronger, and I at length came to feel all the melody of Pope's later versification, and that of the present T. Moore. I should like to hear from you on this subject. The Dream was admitted solely thro’ necessity. I know not the author.
“In speaking of my mother you have touched a string to which my heart fully responds. To have known her is to be an object of great interest in my eyes. I myself never knew her — and never knew the affection of a father. Both died (as you may remember) within a few weeks of each other. I have many occasional dealings with Adversity — but the want of parental affection has been the heaviest of my trials.
“I would be proud if you would honor me frequently with your criticism. Believe me when I say that I value it. I would be gratified, also, if you write me in reply to this letter. It will assure me that [page 655:] you have excused my impertinence in addressing you without a previous acquaintance.
“Very resp & sincerely
“Y. ob. st.
“EDGAR A. POE
“Judge Beverly Tucker.”
Judge Tucker's interesting reply covers three pages in Harrison's Virginia Edition of Poe's works. He congratulates himself upon the success of his “attempt to draw” him “into correspondence,” and then takes up Poe's theory of discords, and presents a view closely like Lanier's as developed in “The Science of English Verse,” that “such irregularities are like rests and grace-notes. The time of the bar must be the same, no matter how many notes are in it.” His own lines, he says, are “Faulty because, as you say they are faultless.”
Poe wrote again in the next month, but his letter has not come to light, if preserved; but from Judge Tucker's letter of January 26 to White it appears that Poe felt that White did not put as much confidence in his editorial capacity as was necessary for “mutual comfort”; and a misconstruction of one of Tucker's letters to White is considered by him in part the origin of this doubt. Tucker wrote his letter at Poe's request, but the qualified praise could scarcely have flattered the feelings of the young romancer. “That I have not admired all Mr. P's productions as much as I have some others, and that his writings are not so much to my taste as they would be, were I (as would to God I were!) as as young as he, I do not deny,” is not strong praise, however sympathetic we may be when we remember that “King Pest” was one of the productions; [column 2:] but Tucker declares that had he meant more he would have said more and reaffirms his sincerity in what he had formerly said in Poe's praise. Of a recent Poe review he speaks with enthusiasm as “a specimen of criticism which for niceness of discrimination, delicacy of expression, and all that shows familiarity with the art, may well compare with any I have ever seen.” Yet near the close he repeats, “Mr. Poe is young, and I thought him rash. I expressed this full as strongly as I thought it.”
When Poe addressed Tucker again it was at White's instance and in a tone of polite formality. The letter furnishes new material for students of Poe's life, chiefly as an indication of relations between Poe and the owner of the “Messenger” and for the light it throws upon the young Poe's methods as an editor. Its penmanship, though clear, is not of the same perfection as that of the earlier letter.
“Richmond
“May 2. 1836.
“Dear Sir,
“At Mr. White's request I write to apologize for the omission of your verses “To a Coquette’ in the present number of the Messenger. Upon making up the form containing them it was found impossible to get both the pieces in, and their connection one with the other rendered it desirable not to separate them — they were therefore left for the May number.
“I must also myself beg your pardon for making a few immaterial alterations in your article on Slavery, with a view of so condensing it as to get it in the space remaining at the end of the number. One very excellent passage in relation to the experience of a [page 656:] sick bed has been, necessarily, omitted altogether. “It would give me great pleasure to hear your opinion of the February, and of the April number of the Messenger -I mean of the Editorial articles. It is needless for me to say that I value your good opinion, and wish to profit by your counsel. “Please present my best respects to Professor Dew.
“With the highest esteem
“Yr. ob. st.
“EDGAR A. POE
“Will you ask Mr. Saunders what has become of the article he promised us?”
Thus closed this brief, but interesting, correspondence. As a pendant to these letters, a passage from a letter from White to Judge Tucker, found after a search through the unpublished Tucker manuscripts, should be read. The letter is dated December 27, 1836, and, unlike other letters from White, is marked “Private” and carried within it the caution that in making a requested appeal for aid, to certain professors in the College of William and Mary, “it shall be without however saying that I mean to dispense with Mr. Poe as my editor. This fact I wish to rest with yourself until you see my announcement of the fact in the Messenger or some of the papers.”
“My Dear Friend,” the letter begins, “Highly as I really think of Mr. Poe's talents, I shall be forced to give him notice in a week or so at farthest, that I can no longer recognize him as editor of my Messenger. Three months ago I felt it my duty to give him a similar notice, — and was afterwards over-persuaded to restore him [column 2:] to his situation on certain conditions — which conditions he has again forfeited.
“Added to all this, I am cramped by him in the exercise of my own judgment, as to what articles I shall or shall not admit into my work. It is true that I neither have his sagacity, nor his learning — but I do believe I know a handspike from a saw. Be that as it may, however, — and let me even be a jackass, as I dare say I am in his estimation, I will again throw myself on my own resources — and trust my little bark to the care of those friends who stood by me in my earlier, if not darker days. You, my friend, are my helmsman. And I again beg you to stand by the rudder.”
Whatever justice there may have been in the apparent reference in the first paragraph to Poe's habits, it is obvious that the real bitterness of feeling on White's part is caused by his resentment of the editor's lack of respect for his literary judgment. This is shown also in a letter White wrote on January 17, beginning curtly, “Mr. Poe,” in which he patronizingly doubts his ability to “get more than the first portion of Pym in,” declares an article accepted by Poe for the Messenger to be “bombast,” and apologizes for having himself published “Carey's piece” on the practical grounds that “gratitude to him for pecuniary assistance obliges me to insert it.”
Thus lightly did the “Messenger's” self-made publisher, though heavily burdened with debt, part with a poorly paid editor who had made himself and the magazine known from Maine to Florida in a short period of editorial management of only a few weeks over a year.
∞∞∞∞∞∞∞
Notes:
None.
∞∞∞∞∞∞∞
[S:0 - CM, 1925] - Edgar Allan Poe Society of Baltimore - Bookshelf - Unpublished Letters of Edgar Allan Poe (J. S. Wilson)