Page 166 - DENG502_PROSE

Prose

Notes censure of his writing in The Spirit of the Age: “he perhaps takes too little pains, and indulges in
too much wayward caprice.” This applies to much of Hunt’s vast production as a literary journalist,
and it has been made the occasion for critical abuse and ridicule. But we need to focus on his best
work, as we do for the greater geniuses of his age. A “balanced” judgment of Wordsworth would
reveal that the volume of his mediocre verse exceeds that of his irreplaceable poetry by a
considerable margin. And the same proportion would exist for Byron and many other writers.
lndeed Hunt himself remarks on this general fact in his discussion of Middleton, Dekker, and
Webster in In Imagination and Fancy (1844): “When about to speak of these and other extraordinary
men of the days of Shakespeare... I wasted a good deal of time in trying to find out how it was
that, possessing, as most of them did, such a pure vein of poetry... they wrote so much that is not
worth reading, sometimes not fit to be read. I might have considered that, either from self-love, or
necessity, or both, too much writing is the fault of all ages and of every author.’’ This is not the
only place in Hunt’s writings where he intimates a shortcoming of his own in this regard. But
there are many examples where the trenchancy of his style and the vigor of his common sense
combine with delightful effect.
The example we turn to, recalling Hazlitt’s distinction between common sense and vulgar opinion,
is Hunt’s defense of the unconventional genius of Byron’s Don Juan against its canring, hypocritically
moral detractors. In The Examiner of October 31, 1819, he writes, “Don Juan is accused of being an
‘immoral’ work, which we cannot discover.” He describes the situation in Canto I leading to the
mutual seduction of Juan and Julia. “This, it is said, has tendency to corrupt the minds of ‘us
youth,’ and to make us think lightly of breaking the matrimonial contract. But if to do this be
immoral, we can only say that Nature is immoral.” He goes on, “Lord Byron does no more than
relate the consequences of certain absurdities. If he speaks slightingly of the ties between a girl
and a husband old enough for her father, it is because the ties themselves are slight. He does not
ridicule the bonds of Marriage generally, or where they are formed as they should be: he merely
shows the folly and wickedness of setting forms and opinions against nature.” Clearly Hunt is
speaking with the insight of unblemished common sense, as Hazlitt discussed it, and from this
base is opening to his readers the opportunity to respond justly to the work against the
conventionally antisexual morality that was already forming this early in the nineteenth century.
In fact, with a clearheaded awareness of powerful forces within human nature that William Blake
would not have disdained, Hunt wittily attacks the moralists straight on.
There are a set of prudish and very suspicious moralists who endeavor to make vice appear to
inexperienced eyes much more hateful than it really is. They would correct Nature ;— and they
always overreach themselves .... Now the said prudes ... are constantly declaiming on the deformity
of vice, and its almost, total want of attraction. The consequence is, that when they are found to
have deceived (as they always are) and immoral indulgence is discovered to be not without its
charms.— the minds of young persons are apt to confound their true with their false maxims.
Because Hunt’s stand here —for common sense and for human nature — links him with several of
the great geniuses of his age, notably Shelley and William Blake as well as Byron, it is worth
quoting a little further from this review. Lacking an independent income, having many children
to feed, entirely dependent on an accepting public for his maintenance, Hunt shows courageous
fidelity to the standards of common sense as well as a keen, “prescient” anticipation of the long-
running history and resolution of this issue. Discussing Canto II, Hunt says, We suppose there has
been some sermonizing on the description of the delight arising from the “illicit intercourse” of
Juan and Haidee. People who talk in this way can perceive no distinctions.
He goes on to describe briefly the circumstance of those lovers, removed from the artificial
constraints of society. Then, But what is there to blame in a beautiful and affectionate girl who
gives way to a passion for a young shipwrecked human creature bound to her by gratitude as well
as love? ... Does she not receive, as well as bestow, more real pleasure (for that is the question) in

160 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY