80 The Poetry of Mary Robinsonpoem. Poetry became, for a time, hyperlyrical thanks to the irregu-
lar ode, and thus the subsequent appeal later in the period of a fixed
form such as the sonnet. This hyperlyricism is due to the example
of Abraham Cowley’s irregular “Pindaric” odes from the previous
century. Cowley adapted Pindar’s heterostrophic stanzas for English.
Considered by Dryden to be a major innovation, Cowley’s odes gave
license to poets who went on to practice what Norman Maclean calls
“ ‘the free verse’ of the neoclassical period” (424).^9 Naturally, a debate
ensued over, among other things, stanzaic regularity, metrical varia-
tion, and the legitimacy of odes that do not follow the classical strophe-
antistrophe- epode formula. Classically educated readers and writers
objected to the increasing disregard for fixed form. In his edition of
Thomas Gray’s works, William Mason reiterated the adage “easy writ-
ing is no easy reading” to assert the value of the “extreme difficulty”
in the legitimate, regular ode (3: 156–7). Mason points out that the
irregular ode is “so extremely easy, that it gives the writer an opening
to every kind of poetical licentiousness” (1: 137). Gray’s “Ode for
Music,” Mason points out, is the only irregular ode Gray wrote, add-
ing that “its being written occasionally, and for music, is a sufficient
apology for the defect” (1: 136). This likely speaks to the irregular
quality of Robinson’s irregular odes as well; she may have imagined
melodies or rhythms for each of her variegated stanzas. Other simi-
larly legitimate poets, such as Collins or Akenside, earn the occasional
irregular ode by demonstrating their ability to write regular ones: the
odes of both Collins and Akenside include pieces that are demonstra-
bly regular, either through established stanza forms or through the
strophe- antistrophe- epode pattern, often with stanzas clearly labeled
as such that justify the apparent stanzaic variations. Like legitimate
sonneteers, as we shall see, legitimate odists are an elite group.
When Merry entered the scene as Della Crusca, his practice invited
comparisons to Cowley’s because of his interest in varied line lengths,
stanzaic experimentation, and metrical effects, which his critics com-
plained subordinated sense to sound. In his preface to Diversity, Merry,
as Della Crusca, contradicts Mason, asserting that he has found “the
irregular ode to have been susceptible of the greatest beauties, and
to have been employed with peculiar success by the best writers in
the best languages” (viii). A long unclassifiable poem itself, Diversity
partakes of this inf luence and gives Merry an opportunity to show-
case his metrical variety.^10 Similarly, in revising “Lines on Beauty” as
“Ode to Beauty” for her 1791 volume, Robinson clearly wanted to
embellish the poem formally, expanding it from twenty- four to sixty-
four lines and extending the parade of allegorical figures (1: 99–100).
In so doing, she edits out the shift to the subjective lyric perspective9780230100251_04_ch02.indd 809780230100251_04_ch02.indd 80 12/28/2010 11:08:28 AM12/28/2010 11:08:28 AM
10.1057/9780230118034 - The Poetry of Mary Robinson, Daniel RobinsonCopyright material from www.palgraveconnect.com - licensed to Universitetsbiblioteket iTr
omso - PalgraveConnect - 2011-04-13