B
0 0 K S
267
more than its abilities. His moral approach is religious; his aesthetic
leans on the idea of paradox as applied to the now fashionable 17th
century English poets.
For his religious interpretation he draws on the life as well as the
poetry of Baudelaire. Now it is possible to understand this life as a fall
from pride, a purgation and conversion. But this conversion (if it occur–
red) was coincident with the onset of hemiplegia and might be diagnosed
by a physician as well as by a priest. Secondly the conversion is placed
in 1862 when the work of Baudelaire, with the possible exception of two
wnnets, was completed. Hence it may be doubted that this questionable
phenomenon has any relevance to literary criticism. Actually if you
wish to view the life of Baudelaire in its religious aspect you must find
it a tragedy since in his case there is no effective emergence from the
dark night of the soul.
When Bennett comes
to
the poetry we find: "The opening poem
of
L es Fleu rs du Mal
broaches the central religious paradox : the ques–
tion of the joint existence of good and evil; the problem of sin." By a
liberal use of the figures of irony and paradox this can be found. But
the result is not particularly valuable. The critic is not keeping his eye
on the poem. The questions this opening poem,
Au Lecteur,
does broach
are the existence of evil, our willingness to sin and the pleasures we take
in remorse. The good in man is not mentioned.
To understand the achievement of Baudelaire one must be aware
of the work of Freud. By this I do not mean that the poems should be
considered as illustrations of Freudian theories. Nor do I believe that
a gloss of the poetry by psychoanalysis of the poet would lead us very
far in the right direction. This was done by Rene Laforguc in
The
Defeat of Baudelaire,
and the result was a stupid book.
What I do mean is that Baudelaire by his rigorous honesty in the
examination of his own emotions and by his terrifying insight was able
to give us truths about the heart which were rejected until Freud made
them plausible. How shocked people were when Freud wrote that chil–
dren have an active sexual life, that we hate those we love and wish
to injure them, that we commit crimes to satisfy our craving for re–
morse. But how well Baudelaire knew all this, how clearly it is set down
in
L es Vocations, A Celle Qui Est Trop Gaie, Au L ecteur
and many
others. This is not the only achievement of Baudelaire but it is an
example of the knowledge a
poe~
can reach long before the arrival of
the psychologists.
To return to Bennett: his analysis of
Au L ecteur
is an example of in–
terpolation of values instead of acceptance of those explicit in the poem.
On the other hand his interesting analysis of the sonnet
Spleen
(
Pluviose
irrite)
is based on a misunderstanding of what the French words mean.
In this case he translates the line, "Le beau valet de coeur et la dame de
pique" by "The dandy valet of the heart and the lady of pique," instead
