GEN MSS 664
Box 74, Folder 1821
Edwin J. Beinecke Collection of Robert Louis Stevenson
Series IV. Research Files
Volume II!
Documents
A Dialogue of Research Concerning
and Science ... I undated
the True in Art Poetry
A dialogue of Research concerning the True
in Art Poetry end Soienoe
Commonly but erroneously attributed to
Plato.
But eVidently the work of a muoh more modern
Hand.
Speakers.
st Bernard. end Angelioa
Southsea
1886.
st Bernard
Your suggestion dearest Angelioa that I should sometimes in our talks speak of SOienoe and History is
perhaps even more weloome to me than to yourself.
Nothing clarifies one's ideas 80 much 88 tryinq to
explain them to others.
But
I
need no pretext for
the pleasure of conversing with you.
Your presence
is enough to kindle my heart and mind.
Angelioa
do indeed dear st B think it would be very nice
if we oould talk now and then on SOienoe & history
whioh I value muoh but have not ti~e to study. Besides I love Poetry and Art so muoh more that I
have always oherished an inw~rd thought that all the
deepest end greatest truths were to be found in the
really great Poets; and they are much pleasanter
reading than Men of Soienoe or Philosophers However
I am qUite willing to hear you plead the cause cf
the latter.
st B.
wish they had a better advooate. But to begin at
onoe. I think a broad distinotion should be drawn
between the Trutha taught by Art and Poetry on the
one hand and by soienoe on the other. I am not sure
indeed if it is a right use of language to speak of
the TruthS of Art and Poetry. Truth ie a property
of propositions lin the logical and teohnical meaning of the word) and of propositions only. For instanoe "I. st B. love Angelioa" or "Angelioa is the
loveliest of women" are true propositions; as true
as the statement that the augle in a semicirole is
a right angle !lIldthat similar trianglea ara to eacn
I
I
(Dialorrue between st. Bernard and Angelica
-2)
other as the duplioate ratio of their homologoua
sides (see Euolid Books 3.6). Now how can one say
of a poem or a picture that it is true in this
sense?
When so used the word has a metaphorioal
meaning and we mean "true to Nature".
as we say
a "true" portrait of ~ne Which is like the originsl.
But ycu know that a portrait may be like and have
no true value as a pioture. Nothing so degrades the
oonoeption of Art as to represent it as a literal
oopy of Nature. True Art is oreation - something
whioh the world never held til! the Artist made it
as the Greeks said. Hamlet is as independent an
original as Mont-Bleno and I wd soruple as muoh to
apply the word "true" to the one as to the other.
Angelioa
surely you refine too muoh and let the truth of the
metter slip through your dialetioal fingers. I
know - taught by !tuskin and my OWn observation that
the better s pioture or a poem is, the more fact
it contains.
You remember hie passage on MOdern
Painters on Shakespere's cliff? Or take Keats's
Nightinga.le, Every line represents an acourate
faot: The Whole poem is abla.e With faots - faots
grand as the Heavens Where
"The Queen Moon 1s on her throne.
n
and tacts as delicate and evanescent as gossamer
threads or the powder on the
"Tiger Moth's embroidered wings."
Just think of the crowd of faots suggested by the
stan' a bsginning
"I oannot see What flowera are at my feet: n
The epithets are all as true as EuClid,
"embalmed dar~essn. Wfast-tading Violets oovered
up in IesTes" "the musk rose full of daWY wineli•
These
seem to me as worthy
to be oal1e
true as
propositions about triangles.
30 muoh for poetry
and its truth. But is the case different With the
~a1nter. Are there not endless trUths in Millais'
Autumn Leaves"? They are affirme4 not in words,
but in colours, but just as emphatioally it seems to
me.
St B.
Ignoratio
Elel'0hi
I dont know if you studied logio at ·OXford but you
are no novice in dialeotios,
By the way I think
you woUld look bewitohing in a Master's cap and
gown but I must not digress even to subjeots so attractiTe as your darling little self. You have just
used in a masterly way the tallaoy known as Ignoratio
Eleuchi. You have proTed What I did not deny, I
admit fUlly that great poets and painters are tUll
ot taots. But they are not poets and painters for
that reason. They are great artists because out ot
(Dialogue between St. Bernard and Angelica -3)
-fBotB they produce beautz.. They do not Btop Bt
truth like the man of sctenoe but pass on to 10TelineBS sublimity & pathos. Without them you would
not care for their facts: From a botsnical point
of Tiew the fBCtS in the Ode to a Nightingale Bre
not very numeroUB or important.
SUob as they are,
they are true no doubt, but it is the exquisite
beauty in which they Bre robed Which mBkes them
more precious than gold and j~vels Art {Dichtungl
is infinitely above science BS a product of the
mind, Bnd a Dante or 0. Titian outweighs all the msn
or soienoe that eTer lived in mere intelleotual
power.
Keats was wrong
hen he said
that
"beauty
WBS truth". Beauty is-far greater than 'ruth and it
includes it. Beauty is divins Truth human. Truth
Can be defined. Beauty neTer has been or will be.
Angelica
(smiling)
It seems to me dear st B that I notice a Tery
strong personal likeness between you and the worthy
Jewish prophet Balam. "La you have bleased them altogether" When I understood you Vlsre going to perform
the contraIi operation After the fine things you
say about rt Bnd Poetry I don't Bee how We differ.
You admit all I contend for.
St B.
I don't mtnd being called a prophet if you will
let me oall you a Witch - as you surely are. But
to prooeed - The point to notioe is that whateTer
truth Art may possess it oan neTer take the plase
or serTe the purpose of soientifio truth. Art oan
lend no support or stability to society. Oan give
no help towards the solution of sooial probleme.
On the oontrary Art seems generally to reaoh its perfeotion just Vlhen society is emitten With deoay
and hastening towards its ruin. Witness the Ages or
Phsidias & of Raphael and think of the history of
Vsnioe. Art 1s the beautiful carTing on the capital
of the column to whioh it giTes no strength and it
oontributes no support to the fabrio of society.
But to deTelope this side of the-subjeot would prolong unduly our disoussion. About theories of beauty
I feel I have talked enough. I prefer for the moment
enjoying it by looking at you. Yes, your chain ie
very pretty and I am delighted that you Bre pleased
With it. But you oannot expect me to Bamire much
anything When I Bee your darling little feet peeping out from beneath your skirt. I mat go. st.
Anthony could not Btand this. But do let us hBTS
another talk soon.