THE SYMBOLISTS.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 19622, 18 May 1929, Page 15

THE SYMBOLISTS.

ALL MASTERS AND NO DISCIPLES. M. Andre Fontainas tells us. in a charming volume, his "Souvenirs du Symbolisme " (writes M. j. J auJ Souday in the "New York Times"), that, nineteen th-century French poetry ia divided into three periods.

First came the Romanticists, then the Parnassians, and, finally, the Symbolists. Fundamentally, however, the century is dominated by romanticism, which lies at the root of all the movements that followed it. Romanticism marked a true revolution in literature, one whose importance equalled that of the political French Revolution. For about a hundred and fifty years the continuity of the movement of French poetry has been emphasised by very evident transitions. The connecting link between the old classicism and the new romanticism is found in Andr6 Che ' more of a humanist than any classicist, as much of a philosopher and a liberal as any encyclopedist, and as lyrical as the purest of the poets who succeed him. After the Romanticists, properly speaking (Victor Hugo, Lamartine, Vignv, Musset), comes the generation of ThSophile Gautier, Baudelaire, Leconte de Lisle and Theodore de Banville, who form the bridge that leads to Le Parnesse; these, while still romantic, are so only to a limited extent, and not completely. Victor Hugo remains the father, the master, Jupiter on Olympus in eyes of all. But Lamartine and Musset have, despite their genius, some weak points and moments of negligence. The important thing is a return to a more compact and more perfect mode of composition. This is the programme of Le Parnasse, whose members—direct heirs of Thdophile Gautier, Leconte de Lisle and Banville—include Jose-Maria de Heridia. Sully Prudhomme, CoppSc, etc., as well as Paul Verlaine and St£phane MallarmS. The two last-named, however, although officially Parnassians, become, with Baudelaire, the outstanding leaders of Symbolism. Thus you see the continuous development of the entire series.

It is between ISSS and IS9O that the new school, tho third of the century, asserts itself, claiming, at the same time, that it is no school at all. Everyone would be a master; no one wants to be a disciple. M. Andre Fontainas lays great stress upon this point, so dear to the hearts of modern authors, |nsioas as they are to present themsfetves aa absolutely original creators. But if originality were to be found at every street corner it, too, would become quite commonplace, and would no longer afford us any great pleasure. As a matter of fact, there arose, about 1885-90, a number of young poets, all of whom were, of cpurse, innovators, independent and of strong personality; but they had some traits in common j, so "that they greatly resembled one another and differed a little from their predecessors. They considered the Parnassians too observant of rules, and al3o too purely visual or plastic. Profoundly impressed by Wagner, they sought analogies with music; they preferred dreams to reality directly described, and enveloped their ideas with misty suggestions—sometimes even with true fog. They were not afraid of appearing obscure. And they claimed a great deal of liberty, even in prosody. It is they who invented free verse, which is, on the whole, intermediate between verse properly speaking and simple prose, thus disposing of the famous dilemma of "Le bougeous gentilhommebut it does have a raison d 'etre, and provides language with & new instrument. It was foolish, however, to think for an instant that free verse would ever supplant the regular forms of verse. After Verlaine and MallarmS, who led the column, the Symbolist carav an consisted chiefly of Jean Moreas, Henri de Regnier, Maurice du Plessys, Gus-. tave Kahn, Francis Vielfe-Oriffin, Stuart Merrill (these two being Americans by birth), the Belgians Yerhaeren and Maeterlinck, etc. ... It was a large company. Others who became connected with it are Paul Val6ry (who, after his brilliant beginning, was to retire into his tent for twenty years, until he came back bo magnificently with "La jeune parque" in 1017) and Paul Claudel, Andr6 Gide, Francis Jammes, etc. Thus you see that Symbolism is not dead—far from it. For it is this school —I beg your pardon! this group—l beg your pardon! this period, methodi' cftllv" undisciplined and anarchistic by obligation, that has given us the most famous of our living authors.