Dear Mr. Wordsworth...

Dear Mr. Wordsworth… 

Dear Mr. Wordsworth

Critical interpretation of Wordsworth’s definition of poetry

 

 

 

If you ask a question to any student of literature, “what is poetry?” you will get very simple and common answer – “Poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings.” Some exceptions will add “…feelings recollected in tranquillity”. 
Thanks to Mr. William Wordsworth, in easy words he has given this definition of poetry. Perhaps that’s why every literary student likes him much as he has made very complicated things (that is poetry and its definition both) simple and easy to understand. 

Wordsworth’s present definition of poetry is appreciated as well as criticized much. Wordsworth’s simplification must be appreciated. But here I want to criticize his definition. According to me, there is a very important element missing in Wordsworth’s definition of poetry. 

The important element is ‘idea’. Every art is connected with an idea. Without an idea, the creation of art is not possible. As a genre of literature, poetry is also an art and for that idea is the most important thing that is missing in Wordsworth’s well-known definition. 

The idea is the mother of art. The artist/poet always has an idea which he/she wants to present or express through a particular medium. Without an idea, the creation of art is not possible. Let me clear one thing that, inspiration and idea are different things… 

If we analyze Wordsworth’s definition, he talks about “powerful feelings” the very first thing is, powerful feelings and artistic ideas are very different from each other. Feelings can never create artistic work. Having feelings and having an idea to represent through the medium is very different. This can be explained in a better way with example. 

For example, I have feelings of happiness, exclamatory when I saw the sky, and I started speaking… 

“A blowing breeze and starry sky with moonlight, 
How can I escape from this beauty of Night?”

It’s only feelings, not an idea represented. If there is a poet instead of me, he/she will write with meters, rhymes and beautiful words, but we can call it description than poetry!! 

Having meters, rhymes or specific structures are not enough to make those expressions of feelings as poetry. Perhaps this is the central difference between rhyming lines and poetry. Even if the line has not meter or rhymes, it can be considered as poetry, only because it has an idea. It can be interpreted in many ways. That’s why Shakespeare’s dramatic lines have worth of poetry, Ghalib’s short shayri is considered as poetry. They are famous for their ideas. The following lines from Shakespeare’s sonnet will explain the value of the idea in a better way.

 “All days are nights to see till I see thee,
And nights bright days when dreams do show thee me.”

Meters, rhyme, use of words are important for beauty, especially in poetry, because poetry is meant to be beautiful and powerful with words. But the presentation of an idea or idea behind poetry is compulsory. The beauty of art/poetry lies in ideas and interpretations not in rhymes or even feelings. The idea of poetry raises feelings in the reader. The rhyming lines are not capable to do that.

Let me clear another thing, to reach to the poet’s idea through the medium of art is never possible for readers. Readers can only interpret as they want and form the idea/ ideas. 
 
If we take Wordsworth’s example, his definition is connected with his famous poem ‘Daffodils’. Now my first question to him is, without an idea, has he expressed feelings only in the poem??!! (If it is so…I need a critique to understand!) There was an idea in his mind which he has presented in the poem. (This is my interpretation because I cannot reach to Wordsworth’s mind.) It also can be possible that Wordsworth has written this poem to explain his definition of poetry because definition and poem are connected many times by critics. So, the idea is to explain the concept with an example (using past tense at the beginning, present tense at the end… in the poem). 

Moving back to Wordsworth’s definition, he has added feelings recollected in tranquillity. The first problematic matter is, how can powerful feelings be recollected? And if we are recollecting past feelings it will not remain ‘Powerful feelings’. I also want to add T. S. Eliot’s critical viewpoint that, if we are recollecting than it will not remain spontaneous overflow. The words ‘Spontaneous overflow’ and ‘Tranquillity’ are juxtaposing each other. 
The second problematic matter is, if we are recollecting some emotions which we have felt in the past, then there will be the reason behind it. Which and why some particular feelings are recollected is a matter of question. (As Rushdie said, ‘Selection is political’.) There must be an idea or a thought which leads to some particular feelings. It is in the poet’s hand to be partial with some emotions or feelings. So, what I want to say is, when the poet is recollecting his past feelings, there should be an idea in his mind in recollection, selection of feelings, and even in presenting these feelings. Without an idea, the poet can never recollect any powerful feelings, and never transfer them into poetry; they will be forgotten as feelings only. 

So, Wordsworth’s definition is well- written but not perfect. According to me, “Poetry is an idea presented through the medium of words, which are organized and beautified with a particular structure, meter, rhymes and can create musical effects.” 

Feelings expressed in words can be called description, if it has the beauty of words, it can touch the heart. But an idea expressed through words can touch the heart and also make us think. It is a fact that we don’t read literature/poems only to get pleasure, but our pleasure is connected with ideas, interpretations that we are getting from it. Even for some time, it makes us think something. Poetry is not only the beauty of words or emotions; it is the beauty of ideas that are emotional.