1037. EBB to Mary Russell Mitford
As published in The Brownings’ Correspondence, 6, 127–131.
[London]
Oct. 31. 1842.
Mr Tulk, to go on with my story, [1] —& yet (‘story!—I have none to tell Sir![’]) [2] was in Parliament for many years, & is an active Westminster magistrate, a grand committee man in every sort of committee, a general improvement man, a Lunatic assylum man, & a universal education man above all & through all. There seems to be no end to his activities. He is a general information-man, & enters into the circle of the sciences & can talk sensibly of acids & alcohols & politics & steam engines,—& praises Carlyle .. and supports the London university,—and was a friend of Coleridge’s—& believes in Mesmer, [3] —& in Swedenborg, [4] —& studied all the professions of all his sons,—and is loved most tenderly by his daughters,—and is called ‘Papa’ by his son in law,—and is considered ‘the oracle’ by the whole family & by their reflex & conflex connections in & out of sight. You will have thought you understood exactly the sort of man—and then, that you did’nt—because there is something anomalous in Mesmer & the alcohols, & Swedenborg & general education. Nevertheless he does consist of these different powers & activities– A clever man I do not doubt,—but probably of no great depth—which I dont in the least say on account of Mesmer,—no, nor even of Swedenborg—but these universal men cant be deep—it is out of the nature of things. And then altho’ I have not unfrequently been in Mr Tulke’s company, I never observed an individuality in him .. nothing fresh and selforiginated. In religion he is an absolute Swedenborgian, & preaches & prays & administers the sacrament to all his family in his own house—not one of them ever entering any place of public worship,—and Mr Gordon the barrister, [5] embraced all these opinions with his fair wife. Do you know anything of Swedenborgianism? Swedenborg was a mad genius—there are beautiful things in his writings, but manifold absurdities,—and more darkness I do assure you though you may scarcely find it credible, than in mine. Anthropomorphism, universal in application, is the principal doctrine. God is man in form & spirit,—incarnate essentially in Christ, a manifestation of God as He is—only one Person being recognized. Moreover all the angels are men in form & spirit,—and Heaven itself is in the shape of a man—that being the perfect form. The text insisted on is of course “Let us make man in our image” [6] —and then Scripture is preached away, dreamed away, fancied away into thin air—only, you know, Swedenbourg was inspired himself, & when a man says that he’s inspired, what can anybody else say? But poor Mr Tulk!– He was a man of fortune, and his second son had some eighty thousand pounds independent of him the day he became of age,—and all his sons went into different businesses & partnerships to his satisfaction. And then, came wildnesses in the young men, & misfortunes in commerce,—& one after the other, from faults of their own or of those associated with them they all returned to him for help—and he gave it as a tender generous father which he is, most surely,—and now I do fear that he is embarrassed himself; for the house in Duke Street is to be sold—and I fear I fear, it is from no love of the country. And then this parting with his dearest daughter! [7] I am very sorry for poor Mr Tulk.
My beloved friend, your most touching letter suggests much cause for thankfulness in all its deep sadness; & I thank God for you that such things shd be .. softening & sweetening to you His dispensation. When I was a child I had fits of fearfulness sometimes. I used to be frightened of the dark, and could not go to sleep unless the nurse sate there with a candle; and I well remember how I used to think .. “I shall not like to be grown up because then I shall have nobody to take care of me,—nobody to trust to”. Distinct, very distinct, is my recollection of that feeling. It is pleasant, yes, necessary to trust—and to trust what is above us: and the strongest & wisest of us stand before that great eternity & among the secrets of life & death, like children in the dark– How delightful, how consoling, that your own beloved sufferer shd trust, before he sleeps! and that you who are in a more painful situation, shd trust too through the pain!– I am glad he likes in particular the apostle John—because I myself do delight in that part of Scripture beyond all the rest. I have a notion too that altho’ Paul is more difficult, John is more deep. There is a depth of Love everywhere—serene thro’ its profundity. What can there be in language more divine than the seventeenth chapter of John’s gospel? We hear in it the last beating while on earth of the heart of the Redeemer,—holy, tender pathetic,—distinct as the murmur of pure rivers, from the complex & contrarious uproar of creeds & controversies,—& we, learning so the full loving nature of that Heart, learn also the sufficiency of what we trust. That seventeenth chapter of John’s gospel is my system of divinity. [8] Nobody learns from it when to wear a surplice & when a gown, or when to light the church candles & when to put them out, [9] —but the divine love in the Saviour, & the believer’s safety through it, are as clearly there as the sun & moon in Heaven, & are enough! “My peace I give you. Not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid”. [10]
And in regard to the wanderings, my beloved friend, distressing as they must be to you sometimes, remember that your pain is felt then, instead of his pain. When he talks so, he cannot suffer. He does not moan when he talks so! he has ceased to be conscious of his feeblenesses & infirmity. It is an abbreviation of this long agony. And considering this & the gentle cheerful features of the delirium which you describe, I am almost inclined to count it among the blessings. Try to do so, my beloved friend, yourself! And above all things, do not stand by his side when he cannot recognize you. Keep yourself from the unnecessary exhaustion, & catch all “the sunshine” (not much indeed!) between the drenching “showers.”
And now let me stand in the sun for a moment before I say ‘goodbye’. I shall come to the rescue of poor Mr Browning,—‘out of the spirit of contradiction’, [11] you will be of opinion. But consider! He is very fond of his Mother & his sisters! [12] And instead of accounting it effeminacy that he shd fear their “taking his horse away from him”, I call it affectionateness that he shd not bear to do what wd occasion them anxiety. If he had been afraid himself, he wd himself have abjured the horse—and that we might have called effeminacy—but love, love, .. who dares say a word against the influence of love? [13] It is strongest, be sure, with the strongest.
And then again .. Mr Kenyon! Nay, but you shd take his part against Mrs Leslie, [14] & prove to her that if the fault she selects for animadversion be his only fault indeed, he has’nt one in the world. Nay, but he who has married two wives, surely has done enough in honor of matrimony: & I think we must acquit him, though he shd never marry the third—& even that remains uncertain. Yr Mrs Leslie is hypercritical.
Mr Wordsworth says most kindly [15] “The conception of your sonnet is in full accordance with the painter’s intended work, and the expression vigorous; yet the word “ebb” though I do not myself object to it nor wish it altered, will I fear prove obscure to nine readers out of ten.
A vision free
And noble, Haydon, hath thine art releast.
Owing to the want of inflexions in our language, the construction here is obscure. Would it not be better thus?– I was going to make a small change in the order of the words but I find it wd not remove the objection. The sense as I take it, wd be somewhat clearer thus, if you cd tolerate the redundant syllable.
By a vision free
And noble, Haydon, is thine art releast.”
I quite agree with you my dearest friend, as to the honor done by the candor. That he shd stoop to criticise a verse of mine is felt by me as if he praised it. He says besides that he has received “much pleasure” from other of my writings, & speaks of his wish to have come to see me last year, very kindly indeed. I am touched & charmed by all of it—and in making up ‘my bills’, [16] calculate that I owe it indirectly to you. Now, do you not see? Through you came my knowledge of Mr Haydon—through Mr Haydon the sonnet-making & sending & rewarding! To you clearly!
Ever & gratefully your attached
EBB–
Publication: EBB-MRM, II, 62–65.
Manuscript: Wellesley College.
1. i.e., that commenced at the end of letter 1034 and cut short by post-time.
2. “The Friend of Humanity and the Knife-Grinder” (1797), line 21, by George Canning (1770–1827).
3. Franz Anton Mesmer (1734–1815) developed a system of treatment by manipulating the magnetic fluid supposedly contained in the body. Originally termed “animal magnetism,” this form of hypnosis was later known as mesmerism.
4. Emanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772), the Swedish theologian, philosopher and mystic, in whose teachings EBB maintained a life-long interest.
5. Tulk’s son-in-law.
6. Genesis, 1:26.
7. She had gone to Australia with her husband (see letter 1034, note 6).
8. The quotation at the end of the paragraph suggests that EBB meant the fourteenth chapter of St. John.
9. A reference to the Bishop of London’s comments on various ceremonial observances (see letter 1025, note 7).
10. John, 14:27.
11. Bickerstaffe, The Hypocrite (1768), act I, sc. 2.
12. RB, of course, had only one sister.
13. Miss Mitford never entirely overcame her adverse reaction on meeting RB in 1836. Recalling the occasion in a letter to Charles Boner of 22 February 1847, after the marriage of RB and EBB, she said: “I saw Mr. Browning once.... I suppose he is an accomplished man, and if he makes his angelic wife happy, I shall of course learn to like him.” She said RB “resembled a girl drest in boy’s clothes” with “long ringlets … Femmelette is a word made for him” (Mary Russell Mitford: Correspondence with Charles Boner & John Ruskin, ed. Elizabeth Lee, [1914], p. 67).
14. Kenyon had introduced Mrs. Leslie to Miss Mitford (see letter 959). Letter 1044 makes clear that Mrs. Leslie’s criticism of Kenyon related to his views on marriage.
15. EBB now quotes from letter 1033. The following paragraphs appear on a separate leaf, and the editors of EBB-MRM treat them as the conclusion of letter 1034. The page size and numbering sequence also fit this letter, and EBB’s comment in 1034, “the post is imperious,” leads us to conclude that they fall here, rather than interrupting her account of Mr. Tulk and his family.
16. Cf. A Midsummer Night’s Dream, I, 2, 105.
___________________
