14.07.2013 Views

ENG LYRIC POETRY.pdf - STIBA Malang

ENG LYRIC POETRY.pdf - STIBA Malang

ENG LYRIC POETRY.pdf - STIBA Malang

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

FROM WROTH TO PHILIPS<br />

She owned a copy of Suckling’s Fragmenta Aurea, quoted Herrick in passing, 46<br />

and even attempted one of the earliest imitations of a Cowley “Pindaric” in “An<br />

ode upon retirement, made upon occasion of Mr. Cowley’s on that subject.”<br />

To describe Philips, even briefly, in light of her imitative versatility is to<br />

notice that she is singularly adroit among seventeenth-century female poets in<br />

assimilating—and centering herself within—those genres most prized by the<br />

dispersed court culture of the middle years of the seventeenth century; and in<br />

choosing to translate Corneille’s Pompey at the beginning of the Restoration, she<br />

showed herself equally in step with the turn toward Neoclassicism under Charles<br />

II. It is also to note, moreover, that while Philips’s emergence in print was<br />

ultimately framed and to a great degree controlled by men (like that of most<br />

women poets of this period), her ability to interpolate into her verse the<br />

conventional forms of male utterance helped to assure her a degree of<br />

acceptability within the dominant culture that no other female poet had yet<br />

experienced. Writing to people of both sexes, she spoke, as it were, “their”<br />

language: the established “poetic” language of the day.<br />

But with a twist, as recent criticism has increasingly sought to underscore.<br />

Whether Philips should be regarded as the author of “‘closet’ lesbian verse” or as<br />

a pre-eminent example in the seventeenth century of a female poet dilating on<br />

the traditional subject of “romantic friendship,” 47 she is a liminal figure in the<br />

history of same-sex love and stands alone among poets in this chapter in directing<br />

much amatory verse to specific female friends. Perhaps more than any other poetry<br />

of the period, Philips’s reminds us that amatory and amicable are cognates, the<br />

meaning of one experience crossing over and illuminating the other, as in the<br />

following opening lines from “On Rosania’s Apostacy, and Lucasia’s Friendship”:<br />

Great Soul of Friendship, whither art thou fled?<br />

Where dost thou now chuse to repose thy head?<br />

Is this friend to friend or lover to lover? Or take one of her most frequently<br />

anthologized lyrics, the precisely dated “To My excellent Lucasia, on our<br />

friendship. 17th. July 1651,” which is short enough to quote in full. The initial<br />

choice of “live” for “love” in the first line keeps the mode of address decorous<br />

without altogether eliminating a sense of passion between friends:<br />

I did not live untill this time<br />

Crown’d my felicity,<br />

When I could say without a crime,<br />

I am not Thine, but Thee.<br />

This Carkasse breath’d, and walk’d, and slept,<br />

So that the world believ’d<br />

There was a soule the motions kept;<br />

But they were all deceiv’d.<br />

248

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!