500. RB to William Johnson Fox
As published in The Brownings’ Correspondence, 3, 130–132.
Camberwell.
March 27. 1835.
Dear Sir,
It is with much reluctance that I venture to trouble you on the present occasion,—not assuredly from any doubt of the kindest disposition on your part towards me,—but because I really have no right to bother you at all:– My peculiar condition, however, admits of no alternative, & ’tis an odd source of vexation to me, that having one acquaintance on whose judgment with respect to certain matters I fully rely & of whose sympathy I can, I think, make sure,—I am not able to testify my sense of his value by passing over some ‘troops of friends’ [1] decently gifted in the same qualities, in order to select him.– I beg then the great favour of your advice under the following circumstances.
I have been occupied the last six months by a work of a particular nature,—a sort of dramatic poem [2] made after rules of my own, on a subject of my own, in a manner of my own, & I have put forth my whole strength, such as it is: it is meant to be the first of a series of similar productions & I am very anxious that it should be fairly launched & fully attended to: I do think I have some right to ask people to listen this time. Now observe:—my last little book was undertaken by a respectable house, [3] certainly,—so much money was paid, so many copies stipulated for,—& from that time to this I have been unable to ascertain whether a dozen have been disposed of or two dozen really printed––but this I did ascertain, from more quarters than one, that several well-disposed folks actually sought copies & found none—& that so exorbitant a price was affixed to a trifle of a few pages, [4] as to keep it out of the hands of everybody but a critic intending to ‘show it up’: all which is of little importance in the case of ‘Pauline’ which is little worth,—but I have expended my best wit in the present work & am in no mood to see it stifled after this fashion. It thus appears that to present oneself to a bookseller piece in hand & purse in pocket—(setting aside the unreasonableness of the thing)—is to insure the suppression of the verse & perdition of the purse––which is grievous.
Now I would ascertain whether it is possible for you to procure me an introduction to a good publisher,—Moxon for instance, who seems a superlative fellow, [5] —who won’t frighten me, but will talk the matter over in a friendly way, will be at the pains of examining my poem, & will thereupon tell me candidly whether it can be brought out with any chance of success––& not look bilious at a man he cares nothing about, take his money of which there is no superfluity, & ruin his book: can you do this?
‘Pauline’ was never announced, advertised or helped forward [6] ––no one can be more ignorant of ‘the mystery’ [7] than I, nor less likely to be informed;—yet your generous critique [8] was followed by praises in the Athenæum, Atlas &c & blame in the Court Journal, Fraser & some more [9] .. & all this good was negatived by the policy of the publishers:—I do not doubt but this next will succeed to a certain degree, & I shall clench its luck by another for which I have been long collecting materials–
—As an additional kindness may I beg a speedy answer, as I wish to lose no time on many accounts–
Allow me to remain,
Dear Sir
Your’s most truly & obliged
Robt Browning–
Rev. W. J. Fox. &c &c &c
Publication: None traced.
Manuscript: Yale University.
1. Macbeth, V, 3, 25.
2. i.e., Paracelsus.
3. Pauline was published by Messrs. Saunders and Otley.
4. The text occupied only 67 pages. Despite a prolonged search, we have been unable to find the price of the volume.
5. As letter 501 shows, Fox did indeed give RB an introduction to Edward Moxon, although he declined to publish Paracelsus.
6. RB’s aunt, Christiana Matilda Silverthorne (née Wiedemann) had, unbeknown to RB’s parents, given him £30 to pay the costs of publication. According to DeVane (p. 39) £26 5s. covered the printing costs, the balance being spent on advertising. Again, a thorough search has failed to uncover any advertisement in the usual journals.
7. Cf. The Winter’s Tale, V, 2, 120.
8. In The Monthly Repository. See letter 476, note 1.
9. Apart from Fox’s review, notices of Pauline appeared in The Literary Gazette (23 March 1833, p. 183); The Athenæum (6 April 1833, p. 216); The Atlas (14 April 1833, p. 228); The Court Journal (11 May 1833, p. 334); Tait’s Edinburgh Magazine (August 1833, p. 668) and Fraser’s Magazine (December 1833, pp. 669–670). The first of these, in The Literary Gazette, dismissed it in four lines: “Somewhat mystical, somewhat poetical, somewhat sensual, and not a little unintelligible,—this is a dreamy volume, without an object, and unfit for publication.” The Athenæum found “not a little true poetry in this very little book … fine things abound: there is no difficulty in finding passages to vindicate our praise.” The Atlas, although critical of the language and construction, still found “many passages in the piece of considerable beauty, and a few of such positive excellence that we augur very favourably of the genius that produced them.” Tait’s dismissed it as “a piece of pure bewilderment.” Fraser’s opined that the poem must be “the production of one or all of the Whig ministers. The same folly, incoherence, and reckless assertion, which distinguish their pamphlet on the Reform Ministry and Parliament, is visible in each page of the book.” The Court Journal gave it only two lines: “With much of the elements of true poetry, this is a crude, wild, dreamy, mystical production, of the Shelley school.” (For the full text of these reviews, see pp. 340, 345–347.)
___________________
