William Blake: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "<div style="font-family:Calibri; width:700px; margin:auto;"> :''“Nirodbaran: We had once heard from you that Blake is greater than Shakespeare.<br> Sri Aurobindo: I didn...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<references /> | <references /> | ||
==See also== | |||
*[[Poetry]] | |||
Revision as of 11:24, 15 March 2018
- “Nirodbaran: We had once heard from you that Blake is greater than Shakespeare.
Sri Aurobindo: I didn't say that. It is Housman who says Blake has more pure poetry than Shakespeare.
- What does he mean by that?
He means that Blake's poetry is not vital or mental, it is not intellectual but comes from beyond the mind, expressing mystic or spiritual experiences.
- Can one really compare Blake and Shakespeare? They have two quite different spheres. But if Blake has more pure poetry, is he greater?
Shakespeare is greater in some ways, Blake in other ways. Shakespeare is greater in that he has a larger poetic power and more creative force, while Blake is more expressive.
- What difference do you intend to make between ‘creative’ and ‘expressive’?
‘Creative’ is something which brings up a convincing picture of life, sets before us a whole living situation of the Spirit. ‘Expressive’ is just that which communicates feeling, vision or experience. In Francis Thompson's “Hound of Heaven”, for instance, you get a true creative picture. Blake was often confused and was a failure when he tried to be creative in his prophetic poems.
- You wrote to X that where life is concerned, Shakespeare is everywhere and Blake nowhere.
Quite true.”[1]
- ↑ Talks with Sri Aurobindo, p.366, 18 January 1940