1129. EBB to Mary Russell Mitford
As published in The Brownings’ Correspondence, 6, 294–296.
[London]
Jan. 17. 1843–
My beloved friend as you honored me (unduly perhaps, for I know that my opinion is worth scarce a hair of Flushie’s tail on most practical matters) but as you did honor me by asking what my doxy was on the subject of the subscription, .. I venture to beg you to consider again before you consent to write those letters. Consider, my dearest friend, that your writing them quite changes your position in regard to this business– You had agreed to accept. But if you write them, you solicit. It will not only involve you personally in a manner very painful to your delicate feelings—but it will actually deprive your present position of something of its dignity & take away a grace & freedom from the gift itself. I write you see quite openly .. as the ‘genius of the ring’ [1] commands—& I may be open without being wise: therefore I only entreat you to consider my thoughts. Do not above all things, misunderstand me. If I were you, & in your circumstances, I wd accept the united gift of whatever friends find their pleasure & pride in accomplishing this right action:—to receive is the largest & most difficult part of generosity. But I would not write one word towards these necessary letters,—which are necessary indeed—but shd be written by anybody in the world but yourself. My dearest friend, if I am too late & you have written some, or even many, why shd you write more, or all? Consider if it is not better to pause here. Indeed, indeed I think so.
The application addressed to you was of a different character—& I wd not, if I were you, be forced into this new attitude. Tell them plainly that you will not do it. I am astonished at the want of delicacy towards you which cd have hazarded the suggestion of it. I call it want of delicacy— not ‘indolence’—not any other name. Lithographic circulars wd be a hundred times better medium—but Mr Dawson will write if you refuse—or Mr Hughes—why shd not Mr Hughes write the letters? [2] I wd rather do it than that you shd Properly, it shd come from the first movers in the affair–
And wd it not be better—I just whisper to your particular ear this suggestion,—to become aware before any other step, of the extent of the sum required? Will it not be desirable information for the letters to the various friends? I put the question—because Mr Kenyon has said to me once or twice—“But first we must know what the sum is– That is a preliminary”– Mr Kenyon heard of the intention in the earliest place from me, & then from Mrs Dupuy—therefore he has not the honor which I attributed to him in my fancy, of suggestor. Nevertheless he rejoiced when I told it to him, & said that he had always wished for the adoption of some such means, in order to relieve you from the possible pecuniary pressure. “Well’[’]—he continued, “we shall hear of course. When they have ascertained the sum required, we shall hear of course.”
I can write no more today—just now at least—my object being to try for some intermediate post at two oclock which may be or may’nt .. for anything certain that I know.
Only I thank you earnestly for your advice about the little book— only I am not sure that I shall take … that you will advise me, on reconsideration, to take .. the particular side of it which refers to republishing extracted poems from the previous volumes. [3] As to the Prometheus-poems, they are nearly everyone inferior to the Seraphim-poems—& the Seraphim-poems being just now in the course of circulation people wd scarcely thank me for pouring their wine (or water) from one glass into another .. they wd not thank me for the favor of such a superfluous ceremony– Remember my dearest friend, that Mr Tennyson’s case is altogether different. The poems he re-printed had been first published some ten & fifteen years previously, & not a copy was to be had by the public. Yet even in Mr Tennyson’s case, I have heard many complaining voices cry that people bought these two volumes for new poetry, & that one volume they had on their shelves before. Certainly I might print a new edition of revised & extracted poems, taking the two books of Prometheus & The Seraphim & revolving them into one—and one day, that shall be done. But now .. this five shilling book, shd be, I think (if at all) composed of new poems—that is, of poems not included in the former volumes—& indeed it will include many poems which are absolutely new, & innocent even of the magazines– I wish the vignettes may occur to Mr Whittaker—for they are more likely to sell a book with our most poetical of publics, than a committee of Muses is!–
As for our argument (mine rather!) coveting originality, I perceive that I mistook your meaning, & like Gratiano “spoke an infinite deal of nothing”. [4] Forgive me for my want of understanding– That you shd sigh Darleyisms [5] shd have appeared to me, on the face of it, an impossible thing. But hopelessness is a fashion of the day.
The rarity of original stories is a fact, & as much so in my eyes as in yours.
May God bless you my dear dear friend! Ah—do not think that I have taken a liberty in writing so boldly & openly the previous part of this letter– You are before me in the experience which is given by time & made available by wisdom,—& you are wiser, apart from the experience,—& there is no single practical point on which you shd not sooner trust your own judgment than the thing called mine. Still, by the Genius of the ring, I dared to speak—& pray to be forgiven, having spoken.
Your earnestly attached
EBB
Not to hear from you for a week—two weeks!– Why that proves the naughty tendency of the plan about your writing the letters! Yet I dont speak against it selfishly .. or malignly. Can you make out this staggering of the pen in its convulsions of “worse speed”—? [6]
Publication: EBB-MRM, II, 164–166.
Manuscript: Wellesley College.
1. A reference to Miss Mitford’s gift, genius being used in the sense of tutelary spirit or genie.
2. John Hughes, a friend of Miss Mitford, had contributed to the 1839 and 1840 editions of Findens’ Tableaux. He and Dawson were among the signatories to the notice of the subscription for Miss Mitford when it appeared in February.
3. Miss Mitford had obviously recommended that the volume of poetry EBB was planning to publish should include some of her previously-published work. As EBB indicates later in the paragraph, Tennyson had been criticized by some for filling the first volume of Poems (1842) with reprints of earlier compositions.
4. The Merchant of Venice, I, 1, 114.
5. George Darley had voiced a gloomy view of the state of English literature (see letter 927, note 3).
6. Erasmus, Apophthegmes (bk. I, no. 94 in Nicholas Udall’s 1564 edition).
___________________
