A RHETOMCAL WYSIS OF SELECTED PUBLIC SPEECHES OF JAMEfi RU$SELL LOWELL Thanks for flu Dogma 0? pk. D. MICEEME STATE UHEYEREETE’ Arvin LeRoy Workman 1965 TH ESIS This is to certify that the thesis entitled A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED SPEECHES OF JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL presented by Arvin LeRoy Workman has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. Speech degree in [km July 22 0-169 ABSTRACT A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PUBLIC SPEECHES OF JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL by Arvin LeRoy Workman A Literary History 2: the United States pictured James Russell Lowell, along with Henry Wadsworth Longfellow and Oliver Wendell Holmes, as a "New England Triumvirate," with all three writers "as sure of their audience as a min- ister composing his Sunday sermon." Of the three, Lowell was the most versatile and would not "willingly accept any limitation, any discipline, or routine whatever." It was with this same versatility that he entered into speaking. He spoke for literary societies, public lecture audiences, commemoration and dedicationaudiences, college student bodies, congressional committees, political caucuses, and reform groups; and he gained a considerable reputation as an after-dinner speaker. An important and vital figure in his time, he con- sequently has become the object of many doctoral studies. His contemporaneous reputation, his criticism, his American- ism, and his religious ideas have been explored. Studies have been made of his New England rustic pronunciation; his reviews of American belles-lettres; the classical in— fluences on his writing; his appraisal of American life Arvin LeRoy Workman and thought; his literary theory and political ideas; and his social attitudes and convictions. Yet none of the studies has dealt directly with his speaking in spite of the impact it had on his life and career. This study of James Russell Lowell's speaking attempts to fill this gap in Lowell scholar- ship. Lowell's speaking was highly regarded by the American people, as evidenced by the fig! X2£5.Commercial Advertiser's article which stated: "If Englishmen are ever to acquire again their lost art of speaking it will be by the study of such consummate masters of that art as was Mr. James Russell Lowell." Aside from the reputation he gained, the signif- icance of speaking as an influence in Lowell's life can be in part measured by the extent to which it contributed to his total literary output. Approximately one-fifth of Lowell's total published works and about three-fourths of that published after 1880 are lectures and public addresses. When one considers that Lowell had been publishing for al- most sixteen years before he began lecturing, the impact of speaking on his literary output looms even larger. The study is organized in the following manner: Chapter I, the introduction, consists of a brief description of his first speaking experience, a statement of purpose, a listing of goals to be accomplished by the dissertation, a discussion of the significance of the study, the available materials, the limitations of the study, and the method of study. Arvin LeRoy Workman Chapter II is a biographical consideration of Lowell, the man, with special emphasis on the factors which pertain to his speaking deve10pment. His ancestry and education are touched upon briefly, followed by the events of his life particularly pertinent to his speaking. Chapter III involves a study of Lowell, the speaker; in this context attention is centered on his contemporaneous reputation, the speaking situation, his preparation, his delivery, and the responses to his speaking. Chapter IV discusses textual problems, corrects several current bibliographical discrepancies, and presents the criteria for selecting the four representative texts which were analyzed. One chapter is devoted to analysis of each of the following speeches: "The Old Ballads," the fourth lecture in the Lowell Institute Lectures of 1855; a speech delivered before a congressional sub-committee on copyright in 1886; the "Harvard Address," delivered in 1886; and an after- dinner speech delivered in England in 1888 before the In- corporated Society of Authors. Included in the textual analysis is a discussion of the availability of materials and the collation of the texts. The rhetorical analysis includes an examination of ethical, logical, and emotional proofs, arrangement, and style. The final chapter outlines the findings of the study, ~the ten most important of which are as follows: Arvin LeRoy Workman l. The study has shown that speaking played a major part in Lowell's total literary output, even though Lowell was reluctant to publish his speeches. 2. It has cast doubt on the belief that he was involved in anti-slavery speaking. 3. It has reconstructed Lowell's Western Tour from three published letters and one unpublished letter. 4. It has provided insights into Lowell's dislike for speaking and his "shyness” toward the platform. It also examines his difficulty with speech preparation. 5. It has found that Lowell's chief accomplishment as a public speaker lay in the reputation he attained as an after-dinner speaker in England. 6. It has found Lowell's speaking reputation to depend more heavily upon his reading audience than upon his listening public. 7. It has listed previously unlisted speech texts and has corrected several current errors in bibliographies of his speeches. 8. It has found that Lowell's use of humor was a strong factor in his logical and ethical proofs. His logical proof was also enhanced by reasoning through ex- ample and analogy, and by his use of example, literary al- lusion, and quotation as evidence. 9. It has discovered that Lowell's most frequently used rhetorical device was the similitude. Arvin LeRoy Workman 10. It was concluded that Lowell's style was an important factor in his effectiveness as a speaker; however, he displayed some tendencies that detracted from the clarity and flow of his speeches: (a) his parenthetical expressions, especially in his extemporaneous speeches; (b) his vague literary allusions which may have mystified his listeners; and (c) his occasional long, involved sentences in his written speeches. These were minor faults, causing only momentary vagueness or confusion in his generally clear, forceful, and entertaining style. A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED PUBLIC SPEECHES OF JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL By Arvin LeRoy Workman A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Communication Arts Department of Speech 1965 Copyright by ARVIN LEROY WORKMAN 1966 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS As for my indebtedness to the persons who have assisted in the preparation of this thesis, I would first gratefully acknowledge Dr. Gordon L. Thomas for his generous help with all stages of the research and for serving as the major professor. To the other members of my committee for reviewing the manuscript and offering helpful suggestions, I express my sincere appreciation. Special thanks goes to Dr. Kenneth G. Hance, Dr. C. David Mead, and Dr. David C. Ralph. For substantial assistance in the preparation of the manuscript, the author enters this word of appreciation to his wife, Wilma. CHAPTER I. II. III. IV. JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL, THE SPEAKER TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Significance of the Study. . . . Materials Available. . . . . . . Limitations of the Study . . Method of Study and Organization LOWELL : THE MN 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Early Educational Influences . . . . . . Study of Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lowell's Attitude towards Himself. . . Americanism, Ancestry, and Family Influence Literary Reputation. . . . . . . . First Journey to Europe. . . . . . Beginning of Speaking Career . . . Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . Political Writing. . . . . . . . . New Political Activity and Resumpti no TeaChing O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Spanish Mission. . . . . . . . . English Mission. . . . . . . . . 000000. cool-ho... Introduction . . . . Speaking Occasions . Early Speaking . Later Speaking . Speaking Practice and Theory Attitude towards Speaking. Motivation for Speaking. . Physical Appearance. . . . Creativeness and Preparation Audience . . . . . . . . . Structure. . . Logic. . . . . Style. . . . . Delivery . . . After-Dinner Speech Theory . . . . O O O O O TEXTUAL CONSIDERATIONS. . . . . . . . . . PAGE 10 ll 13 13 17 20 23 3O 37 37 38 44 46 48 49 56 56 58 58 73 77 77 8O 81 83 9O 95 96 97 98 105 108 109 CHAPTER V. VI. VII. VIII. Introduction . LOWELL INSTITUTE LECTURES, 1855 THE OLD BALLADS Factors Influencing Rhetoric Common Elements of Rhetoric. Analysis of "The Old Ballads". Setting and Audience . . Textual Consideration. Arrangement. Logical Proof. . Ethical Proof. . Source of Ideas. Style. . . Effect . . Setting and Audience Arrangement. . Delivery . . . Arguments. . . Ethical Proof. Logical Proof. Style. . . . . Effect . . . . TWO HUNDRED AND FOUNDATION OF HARVARD ADDRESS . Setting and Audience . Textual Considerations ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL O O O O O O O O O O O O COPYRIGHT SPEECH. FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF Emotional Proof. Ethical Proof. Logical Proof. Arrangement. . Source of Ideas Delivery . . . Style. . . . . Effect . . . . setting 0 O O 0 Audience . . . Textual Considerations Arrangement. . Logical Proof. Style. . . . . SPEECH BEFORE THE AUTHORS . . . . a E INCORPORATED SOCIETY OF PAGE 123 123 123 125 132 132 134 139 142 147 147 149 152 154 154 158 161 162 168 170 171 171 173 173 175 176 177 178 180 181 184 185 187 188 188 188 190 192 195 196 CHAPTER Ethical Proof. . Source of Ideas. Effect . . . . . IX. CONCLUSIONS . . . BIBIJIOGRAPHY O O O O O O 0 APPENDIX A O O 0 O O O O 0 APPENDIX B. . . . . . . . PAGE 197 198 201 204 209 216 227 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In January and February of 1855 at the Lowell In- stitute Lectures in Boston a young author attracted an overflow crowd for his first lecture series. In the audi- ence were such notable figures as Charles Sumner and Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. Longfellow, who was Smith Professor of Modern Languages at Harvard College, was astonished at the powerful lecturing of the thirty-six-year-old poet and immediately set about making arrangements for James Russell Lowell to be his replacement, since he had made plans to resign his professorship at the end of the 1855 school year. Six men had already made application for the position, but upon Longfellow's request the Corporation of Harvard Col- lege added James Russell Lowell's name to the list of can- didates; and he was offered the professorship without seek- ing the position.1 Lowell accepted and changed the course of his life. He passed from the insecure freedom of freelance writing to the secure classroom. His selection over the other can- didates was certainly influenced by his local reputation, 1Horace E. Scudder, James Russell Lowell: A_Biog- raphy (Boston: Houghton Mifflin & Co., 19015, I, 372-77. his good name, and his former accomplishments as a poet, critic, essayist, editor and humorist, but the primary reason his name was added to the list of candidates for the professorship was the impression his speaking had made on Longfellow and other influential men of Cambridge. For eighteen years, with ascending prominence, Lowell had gained fame as a writer. He considerably influenced public opinion against slavery with his periodical writing and against im- perialism in the Mexican War with his first series of Biglow Papers. He had also critically considered the merits of his contemporary writers and himself in A_§§§lg.£2£_Critics and had ventured criticism on his poetical forerunners in Conversations _o_rl £933 of £132 913 29353. At the time he gave his first series of lectures he was thirty-six years old and was exactly half way through his life span. He was also six years past his most success- ful publishing year of 1848, and there is sufficient indica- tion in his letters of the early 1850's to indicate that he was beginning to suspect that his creative powers were on the decline. In a letter to Briggs he wrote, "Authors ought . . . to be as sensible as shopkeepers . . . that if the public does not want their wares, it will not buy them any the sooner for°being called fool and blockhead."1 His answer for public rejection was to "close up the shop; and 1James Russell Lowell, Letters of James Russell Lowell, ed. Charles E. Norton (New York?_'Harper & Bros., 1894), p. 201. go westward."l Speaking provided Lowell an escape and what he called a ”west" from the uncertainty he felt in his flag- ging creative powers and from a public who was currently rejecting his poetry. He wrote: My 'West' is to be found in a course of lectures, which I have already been paid for, and which I am to deliver before the Lowell Institute next winter. I dare say they will be all the better for my hav- ing some of my conceit knocked out of me, and I can revenge myself on the dead poets for the injuries received by one whom the public won't allow among the living.2 With a few years of lecturing, editing, and crit- icism, Lowell was able to regain the spotlight and to fin- ish his years in a blaze of public adulation. A Literary HistOry'g§,the‘United States pictures Lowell, along with Longfellow and Oliver Wendell Holmes, as a ”New England Triumvirate," with all three writers "as sure of their audience as a minister composing his Sunday sermon."3 Of the three, Lowell was the most versatile and would not "willingly accept any limitation, any discipline, or routine whatever."4 It was with this same versatility and popularity that he entered into speaking. He spoke for literary societies, public lecture audiences, college 1Ibid. 2Ibid. 3Robert E. Spiller g£;al, (eds.), Literary History of the United States (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1959 , p. 588. 41bid., p. 601. student bodies, commemoration and dedication ceremonies, congressional committees, political caucuses, and reform groups; and he gained a considerable reputation as an after- dinner speaker.l An important and vital figure in his time, he con- sequently has become the object of many scholarly studies. - His contemporaneous reputation,2 his criticism, his Ameri- canism, and his religious ideas have been explored. Studies have been made of his New England rustic pronunciation; his reviews of American belles-lettres; the classical in- fluences on his writing; his appraisal of American life and thought; his literary theory and political ideas; and his social attitudes and convictions.3 Yet none of the studies has dealt directly with his speaking, in spite of the impact it had on his life and career. For this reason, a study of the speaking of James Russell Lowell will be unique and will serve to fill a gap in Lowell scholarship. The purposes of this study will be to examine James Russell Lowell's theories of speech making and his practices as a speaker in terms of his public addresses and lectures. It is anticipated that the following will be accomplished: l. Lowell's speech theory will be gathered from 1A. Lawrence Lowell, "Memoir of James Russell Lowell" (reprinted from the Proceeding§_of the Massachusetts His- torical Societ , June, 1896779p. 99. 2Infra, p. 6, n. 3. BInfra, bibliography, pp. 214-15. his letters and addresses and presented. 2. A bibliographical listing of available speech texts and their locations will be included. (This listing will be unique since present bibliographies have been found to be incomplete and inaccurate.) 3. An analysis of historical facts will be made to determine what factors contributed to Lowell's renown as a speaker. 4. By analysis, interpretation, and evaluation of available historical information, answers to the follow- ing questions will be sought: a. What was the intellectual and social climate in which the analyzed speeches took place? b. What persons constituted his immediate audiences and why was he talking to them? c. To whom, besides his immediate audiences, were his speeches directed? Who was able to read and hear his speeches? d. What were characteristics of his delivery? e. What effect did his speeches have? 5. By collation, analysis, interpretation, and evaluation of four speech texts in the representative sam- ple, answers to the following questions will be sought: a. How reliable is each text? b. What are the ideas in his speeches? c. What lines of argument did he pursue? d. What ethical, logical, and emotional proofs did he use? e. What type of arrangement did he use? f. What were the characteristics of his style? Significance 2£DEgg_§£ugy_ James Russell Lowell, in the more than fifty years that elapsed between his first publication in 1839 and his death in 1891, contributed greatly to the shaping of public opinion and the general climate of thought of his time as a poet, essayist, critic, satirist, humorist, editor, pro- fessor, scholar, man of letters, and diplomat. Walter Fuller Taylor, in.A History 2; American Letters, summed up Lowell's accomplishments in this way: "Lowell was a Jack-of-all- trades, and contrary to the old maxim, he was good at all. But [he goes on to qualify] supreme at none."1 While Taylor was, in part, using the test of time-~and by this scale Lowell's accomplishments are not supreme--certainly during his lifetime, in the setting of his speeches, his reputa- tion was supreme.2 For example, after publication of the Biglow Papers, Eirst Series in England, he was acknowledged by Eninsh critics to be America's foremost humorist,3 and referring to his speaking during the 1880's, James Bryce, later England's Minister to America, stated that as an after— 1Walter Fuller Taylor, A Histor g§_American Letters (Boston: American Book Co., 19365, pp. 205-206. 2Infra, chap. ii, p. 54. 3Alvan R. McFadyen, "The Contemporaneous Reputation of James Russell Lowell" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Literature, Florida University, 1954-55), p. 8. dinner speaker, he had no equal.1 Lowell's unsurpassed speaking reputation was a great satisfaction to the American people. In a scrapbook among Lowell's papers in the Houghton Library is a clipping from an unidentified newspaper. It represents an example of Lowell's reputation and indicates the nation's pride in him: "Who listens to an Englishman's speech?" This is the clever way the New York 29mmercial Advertiser pays back an old score for "Who reads an American book?" and it adds, "If Englishmen are ever to ac- quire again their lost art of speaking it will be by the study of such consummate masters of that art as was Mr. James Russell Lowell."2 Aside from the reputation he gained, the signifi— cance of speaking as an influence in Lowell's life can be in part measured by the extent to which it affected his total literary output. Approximately one-fifth of Lowell's total published works and about three-fourths of that pub- lished after 1880 are lectures and public addresses. When one considers that Lowell had been publishing for almost sixteen years before he began lecturing, the influence of speaking on his literary output and on his life looms even larger. This dissertation will add to the knowledge of nine- teenth century public speaking; and, as it was noted earlier, lJames Bryce, University and Historical Addresses (New York: Macmillan Co., 1913), pp. 270u7l. 2Houghton Library, James Russell Lowell Scrapbook Vol. I, Harvard University, AC85, L9515, Y89ls, p. 53. it will fill an existing gap in Lowell scholarship. It will further add to the general knowledge of the speaking of literary men and will serve as a companion study to dis- sertations written on Ralph Waldo Emerson, Mark Twain, Oliver Wendell Holmes, William Cullen Bryant, and Walt Whitman. Materials Available Because of Lowell's early fame and continued success through a long and varied life several collections of pri- mary source material have been accumulated. The largest of these is located in the Houghton Library Treasure Room at Harvard University, where it was placed after the death of Charles E. Norton, Lowell's literary executor. Most of Lowell's correspondence, many early poems, drafts of essays and lectures, commonplace books, journals, notebooks, mis- cellaneous papers, and scrapbooks are in this collection. During the past sixty years the Houghton Library has acquired from members of the Lowell family four additional collec- tions: the James B. Lowell and the Rantoul in 1944, the Cunningham in 1948, and the Burnett in 1962. In addition to the Norton and the family collections, the Horace E. Scudder papers are also available in the Treas- ure Room. They contain Scudder's notes and correspondence, several copies of speeches and addresses made by Lowell, and State Papers from Madrid and London, which Scudder cola lected for the Lowell biography. Besides the Lowell material found in the Treasure Room, the Houghton Library contains school records, publications, college catalogs, and other background mate- rial for the years when Lowell attended the school. There are approximately 150 letters written by Lowell in the Henry E. Huntington Library in San Marino, California. These include the Field Collection of sixty-five letters and approximately eighty-five miscellaneous letters to Eng- lish and American friends. Several rare copies of Lowell's addresses, toasts, after-dinner speeches, lectures, and readings are also located in the Huntington Rare Book Room. In addition to these primary source materials, Charles Eliot Norton collected, edited, and published two volumes of Lowell's letters shortly after the poet's death.l Later M. A. DeWolfe Howe edited and published an additional volume of unpublished letters.2 In 1936 Hope Jillson Vernon published the poems of Maria Lowell and included several formerly unpublished letters of Lowell's and a biographical sketch of his courtship and marriage.3 The Michigan State University Library provides an excellent collection of nineteenth century periodicals, facsimile copies of Lowell's Pioneer, microfilms of the figwflZggk,Eimg§, and, through inter-library loan, microfilms of the London Times, research studies on Lowell, and c0pies lNorton, Letters. 2M. A. DeWolfe Howe (ed.), New Letters of James Russell Lowell (New York: Harper & Bros., 193277 3Hope Jillson Vernon, The Poems of Maria Lowell with Unpublished Letters and a_BiographyITProvidence: Brown University, 1936). 10 of several addresses. Also in the Michigan State Univer- sity Library are Lowell's complete works, which include three volumes of addresses and lectures. Texts of thirty-six addresses have been located, along with twenty literary lectures and several fragments of Lowell's college lectures. Printed proceedings of vari- ous organizations to which Lowell spoke and newspaper ac- counts of his speaking are available. In addition, Lowell's letters add many of his own comments to his speech experi- ences 0 Limitations 93: the _S_tu_dy At the time of the Lowell Institute Lectures in 1855 Lowell wrote to W. J. Stillman, the owner-editor of the Cra on, that the series constituted his first public appearance as a lecturer.1 His letters2 reveal, however, that he had spoken on two earlier occasions. Since in these two cases source material is limited to Lowell's letters with no texts available, this dissertation will not include Lowell's speaking prior to 1855. Lowell's college lectures as Smith Professor will not be considered as representative public speeches. These lectures, without doubt, affected his style and furnished him with almost twenty years of speaking experience; but the fragments that remain carry no dates, are incomplete, 1Norton, 22, cit., p. 220. 2Ibid., pp. 36-37; see also pp. 68-69. 11 and give no hint of other than student attendance. The college lectures, therefore, will be used for reference only, and will not be included in the representative sampn ling to be used for analysis. It is common for speech studies to include detailed biographies when no sufficient biography exists. In the case of Lowell, however, several good biographies are avail- able, and for this reason, only those events which the writer feels influenced his speaking development will be presented. Four representative speeches will be selected for detailed analysis. Selection will be partially by a process of elimination, those addresses and lectures which offer reliable texts and sufficient setting and audience infor- mation being given primary consideration. Method 2£_Study and Organization This study will be organized in the following fashion: Chapter I, the introduction, consists of a brief description of his first speaking experience, a statement of purpose, a listing of items to be accomplished by the dissertation, a discussion of the significance of the study, the available materials, the limitations of the study, the Inethod of study, and the type of organization. Chapter II is a biographical consideration of Lowell, tile man, with special emphasis on the factors which pertain tC> his speaking development. ~His ancestry and education are touched upon briefly, followed by the events of his llifeparticularly pertinent to his speaking. t. 12 Chapter III involves a study of Lowell, the speaker; in this context attention will be paid to his contemporanen ous reputation, the speaking situation, his preparation, his delivery, and the responses to his speaking. Chapter IV lists the available texts of Lowell's speeches and discusses textual problems. It will correct several current bibliographical discrepancies and will pre- sent the criteria for selection of the representative texts to be analyzed. One chapter is devoted to each of the four speeches selected in Chapter IV. Included in the textual analyses will be a discussion of available materials and the colla- tion of the texts. The rhetorical analysis will include ethical, logical, and emotional proofs, arrangement, and style. A final chapter will consist of conclusions and recommendations for further studies. CHAPTER II LOWELL: THE MAN By the time James Russell Lowell was born, on Feb- ruary 22, 1819, a blueprint for the "good" life was well established in New England. Cambridge men were "built" according to specifications drawn by patriarchs already four generations dead. The blueprint specified that young men from better families would be taught to read early in their own homes, be sent to dame and Latin Schools, take the Harvard entrance examination between the ages of four- teen and seventeen, receive Bachelor of Arts degrees in a standard four year course, travel in EurOpe for two years, settle on a profession in the ministry, medicine, law, or business; then marry someone from a good family and settle down to raise the next generation to follow the same blue- print.1 Early Educational Influences James Russell Lowell's early education followed the Ellen.to the last detail. He learned to read early and at- tfanded four private schools before he was eight years old. . 1The "blueprint" Concept is a generalization of the “”rlLter, gained from researching the Lowell family records gllci from noting the educational patterns of other families 1? the same period. 13 14 In the fourth school, Fay House, he began to study Latin and gained "a pretty thorough knowledge of French."1 At William Wells' school, which was praised for its Latin scholarship, he studied Greek and Latin for the next six years. At fourteen, Lowell spent a year at Mr. Ingraham's highly successful classical school in Boston; and he entered Harvard in 1834.2 Lowell fancied himself a poet from his early col- lege days and demonstrated his ability as Secretary of the Hasty Pudding Club, where the minutes were kept in verse, and in Harvardiana, the school periodical, which he edited during his senior year. His election as Class Poet in his senior year won him the only crown for which he had really strived through college. As his writing prowess became better known and as he pursued his extra-curricular writing and reading, his studies fell off, and what his father had recognized as a brilliant mind turned away from scholastic attainment and manifested itself in immature but promising pmetry. Since even the most successful writers of the period had difficulty supporting themselves with their pens, Lowell's inclination in this direction could only be interpreted by .his father as folly. Perturbed as the Reverend Charles 1Ethel Golann, "A Lowell Autobiography," The New EElS$222.Quarterlx. VII (June, 1934), 357. """" 2Ibid., p. 360. See also Scudder, o . cit., I, 52727; Leon Howard, Victorian Knight-Errant Berkeley: Ilirversity of California Press, 1952), pp. 9-10. 15 Lowell was with his "impractical" son, the elder Lowell's broken health1 did not allow him to supervise his youngest son as he would have liked. With some misgivings, the Rev- erend Charles Lowell left James in the charge of an older brother, Charles, promised him two hundred dollars if he graduated first or second scholar,2 and sailed for Europe with Mrs. Lowell and his daughter, Rebecca. James Russell Lowell developed a high absence rate from lectures and recitation in his first three years at Harvard, but he kept his grades high. The senior year was different; the absence rate remained high, but his recita- tion marks did not, and his poor showing resulted in a rus- 3 The tication to Concord at the request of his family. enforced punishment came as a cruel blow. He lost his sum- mer vacation, and he was prohibited from returning to Cam- bridge, preventing him from performing as Class Poet on Class Day.4 He failed to see the rustication as the result of his actions and bitterly headed for his confinement in Concord ”damning everybody" but himself. Despite his poor scholastic output during his senior year, he was graduated 1Dr. Lowell was the senior minister at West Church, Boston, for fifty-six years. In 1837, after thirty—one Chansecutive years, he suffered a minor breakdown, a junior Iniruster was installed, and Dr. Lowell was given three years' leave to recover his health. 2Howard, 22, cit., p. 1. 3Ibid., p. 368. 4Ibid., p. 16. ‘I 16 thirtyafourth in a class of sixty-three.l The Harvard curriculum during his stay was not much different from the curriculum in the preparatory schools which Lowell had attended. There were lessons to learn and recite; the text- book was the rule, and the fixed curriculum suggested no break from the ordinary course of formal instruc- tion. Except in the senior year, there was a steady attention to Greek, Latin, and Mathematics. In the first year Tytler's History was studied; in the sec- ond year English grammar and modern languages were added; in the third year, besides Greek and Latin and modern languages, Paley's Evidences, Butler's Analogy, and chemistry appeared on the list, and themes and forensics were introduced. In the senior year the ancient languages were dropped, and natural philosophy, intellectual philOSOphy, astronomy, and political economy took their place, with lectures on rhetoric, criticism, theology, Story on the Con- stitution of the United States, mineralogy, and anatomy-a somewhat confused jumble on paper in the catalogue of the time, which it is to be hoped was reduced to some sort of order, though it looks as if the senior were suddenly released from too monotonous a course and hidden take a rapid survey of a wide range of intellectual pursuits. Howard found that Lowell got little from his studies at Harvard generally, but that the ancient and modern languages "were, by all odds, the most valuable of his acquisitions from college."3 Howard contends that the formal rhetoric of Richard Whately which Lowell studied in the Elements of . . . . . 4 . Rhetoric was ignored in Lowell's early writings while 1George P. Clark, "Classical Influences and Back- glf‘ound in the Writings of James Russell Lowell" (unpublished ers" (from Dixon Wecter) which contained materials not Ibid. Lowell fell in love with Hannah Jackson, a sister He apparently wanted to marry available to this writer. 4Norton, Letters, I, 375. 20 with the business world, quickly wrote it off his list of future employment possibilities. He renewed his resolve to study law and began to apply some diligence to his preparation. In the next year, 1840, he took a law degree and a Master's degree, after which he continued to attend lectures while he worked in the Loring Law Office. With little apparent effort he passed his bar examination in 1842. By this time he had published enough poetry to encourage him to choose writing as a pro- fession, and he never practiced law. Lowell's Attitude towards Himself Lowell's attitude through these early years was one of apparent overconfidence followed by a period of soul searching and despair. During his undergraduate years at Harvard he displayed an air of flamboyancy. He had culti- vated a reputation for revolting against authority and ap- parently took considerable pride in his wayward accomplishm ments. His autobiography in the 1838 Classbook shows his attitude and the image he wanted his college friends to have of him, and perhaps the image he had of himself. He was prone to excessive use of allusion in referring to books he had read, and the autobiography begins: After carefully consulting Tacitus's life of Agricola [sic], Fox's booke of Martyrs [sic], Johnson's lives of the Poets [sic], his own life by Bozzy, and Lockhart's Scott, I have come to the conclusion that there is a radical defect in the 21 whole system of biographies.l His desire to appear incorrigible is seen in the emphasis he places on his numerous chastisements. His early educa- tion concluded with a "drawer full of rewards of merit" and a ”disagreeable nervousness" in his rear caused by a school mistress "who swayed the birch" over that part of him. Of his third school he wrote, "I did not do much here except that I made a good deal of proficiency in deviltry of all descriptions."2 And while he remained there he "did not experience a tithe of the castigations" he deserved.3 Of his years at Harvard he wrote: During the Freshman year, I did nothing, during the Sophomore year I did nothing, during the Junior year I did nothing, and during the Senior year I have thus far done nothing in the way of college studies. I have undergone with the patience of a martyr "privates" and "publics" without number, and three threats of dismissal.4 The projected image is of a wayward genius, who without studying gets passing grades, who copiously reads books not required of him, who flaunts authority and glories in the punishment and threats of punishment his acts bring about. He successfully projected his image to the extent that George F. Hoar wrote that he believed that James Russell Lowell was the Lord High Admiral of his class, a dubious Golann, 22, cit., p. 357. Ibid., p. 358. Ibid., p. 360. 05me Ibid., pp. 360—610 22 honor that was bestowed on the worst scholar, and one who had been rusticated at least twice if possible.1 Lowell, with his middle of the class standing, was not the Lord High Admiral but boasted an ”honorary" membership, which probably means that his conduct qualified him for member- ship but that his scholarship did not. The important aspect of the image cast during these college years is the part he retained and used in his speak- ing. His allusion to books and use of quotation in his speeches he continued throughout his life. The revolt against authority in college was easily transferred to a revolt against the wrongs of society. . The disdain he held for authority easily shielded him against adverse public opinion. As the editor of his own publica- tion, The Pioneer, his revolution was against ”namby-pamby, thrice-diluted” literature, while later, as a teacher, he revolted against pedantry in the classroom; still later his revolutionary spirit fought against the party system and corruption in politics. He used his influence against anti-Americanism in England, unfair tariffs, and unfair American copyright practices. His writing and speaking, when examined in the light of the Clark and Foerster outline of his life, show an in- teresting development.2 They designate his writing from 1Ibid., p. 362, n. 21. 2Harry H. Clark and Norman Foerster, James Russell vggflggl (New York: American Book Company, 1947), pp. xv~c 23 its beginning until 1850 as his "humanitarian" period, when he focused on abolitionism, using poetry, essays, literary criticism, and satire as his chief modes of expression. His "nationalist" period, from 1850 to 1867, elevated his allegiance from abolitionism to a ”preservation of the union" theme. The "nationalist" period included less poetry and more essay and editorial expression; and his literary crit- icism shifted from written to oral presentation with the Lowell Institute Lectures of 1855, his Western Tour, and his college lecturing. During his "natural aristocrat" period, from 1867 until his death, his poetry writing was minimal, the subject matter of his college lectures was re-written in essay form, and the greatest part of his ex- pression was in the form of lectures and addresses. During this period, or more accurately, for the last eleven years of it, the occasional address was the dominant form of plat- form expression used by him. Americanism, Ancestry, and Family Influence Through all three periods of his life-~as a reformer, as a nationalist, and as a natural aristocrat--he was guided by a predominant theme of avid ”Americanism," which was the result of his pioneer ancestry. He wrote to Leslie Stephens, an Englishman, in 1846: They [the English] seem to forget that more than passim. The outline and dates are Clark's and Foerster's; the modes of expression are supplied by the writer from examination of Lowell's entire works. 24 half the people in the North have roots, as I have, that run down more than two hundred years deep into this new-world soil--that we have not a thought nor hope that is not American. . . . [The English] may make up their minds that it is not what Mr. Disraeli calls a "territorial democracy," but democ- racy itself, that makes us strong. His two-hundred-year roots dated back to his paternal an- cestor, Percival ”Lowle," who arrived in Boston in 1639, and a maternal ancestor, Robert Cutt, who arrived prior to 1646. Old Percival Lowle was sixty-eight years old when he settled in Newberry in the Territory of Massachusetts with his sixteen children and grandchildren, and he lived to the advanced age of ninety-three.2 His son, John, was a freeman and his grandson, John, was a cooper. Grandson John inherited some of the older man's constitution and outlived three wives, contributing nineteen children to the new world population. His fifteenth child, Ebenezer, carried the family name through the fourth generation with his son John being the first of the Lowells to enter Har- vard University. Matriculating at thirteen, he stayed seven years and graduated with an M.A. degree. He settled down to the ministry, and to the confusion of some biographers, Minister John Lowell named his son John, making him the 1Norton, Letters, I, 360—61. 2This information concerning Lowell's ancestry is compiled from a number of sources. Ferris Greenslet, The Lowells and Their Seven Worlds (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 19465. Scudder, 22, cit., Appendix, pp. 409-418. The Critic, October 10, 1891, pp. 189-90; September 26, ‘I891, p. 157; September 19, 1891, p. 144. The Lowell papers in the Houghton Library, Harvard University. 25 fourth John Lowell in six generations. John chose law as his profession and represented the second generation of Lowells to attend Harvard. After graduation he became ac- tive in Massachusetts politics as a jurist and legislator, he became known as the "Old Judge,” and he was reputed to be the author of the anti-slavery clause in the Massachu— setts Constitution. This is a dubious honor, since "free and equal" clauses had appeared earlier in the Virginia and Pennsylvania Declarations, but regardless of the orig- inality of the action, the family took pride in it. The Old Judge holds the key to understanding the Lowell family tree, because his three marriages divided the family into three distinct lines. His first wife, Sarah Higginson, gave birth to a son, John, who later mar- ried Rebecca Amory and became the head of the Higginson- Amory line. His second wife, Susan Cabot, gave birth to a son, Francis Cabot, who later married Hannah Jackson, and became the head of the Jackson-Cabot line. The Old Judge's third wife, Rebecca Russell Tyng, gave birth to a son, Charles, James Russell Lowell's father, who married Harriet Spence, and became the head of the Russell-Spence line. Including the Old Judge, there are no less than eleven members of these lines listed in the Dictionary 2;,American Biography. Though the Russell-Spence line never accumulated the fortunes that the other two lines did, James Russell Lowell shared a common name with them, and in Boston, at 26 least, it made him one of the foremost citizens by associa- tion. His early reputation as a writer was certainly im- portant to his platform success, but in Boston, where he began his lecturing career, it was also greatly in his favor that he carried a socially-prominent name. Charles Lowell, James Russell Lowell's father, had been guided towards law, but after a year in an older brothn er's law office, he was allowed to go to Edinburgh to study for the ministry. Upon his return to America in 1806, he married Harriet Bracket Spence and was ordained as a min- ister at West Church, Boston, where he remained the senior minister until 1861. The Reverend Charles Lowell was considered an elo- quent speaker, but not an elocutionist, and according to Ralph Waldo Emerson, "the best extemporaneous speaker he had ever heard."1 He was an "undeniably serious and solemn man,"2 but he had a great tendency for humor when he felt some good could be accomplished by using it.3 Evidence indicates that James Russell Lowell and his father were alike in many aspects of their speaking, lJames Russell Lowell, "Address of James Russell Lowell,” Commemoration Services a; West Church Boston 1737- 1887 (Boston: Damrell and Upham, 18875, p. 58. 2Cyrus A. Bartol, "Address on January 24, 1861," Proceedings i2_th§ West Church gg_the Occasion of the 227 cease 9£_Char1es Lowell 0.0., Its Senior Pastor'TEoston: Walker, Wise, and Company, 18615, p. 24. 3Ibid. 27 but it is doubtful that his father's speaking affected his style or delivery. James Russell Lowell was sent to board- ing school at eight years of age and by his own admission never returned to his father's congregation and apparently seldom heard his father preach.1 Perhaps the most important gifts that Dr. Lowell passed along to his son were his love for books, a large and well-stocked library, conservative Christian convictions,2 1James Russell Lowell, Commemoration Services a; West Church, p. 61. "My immediate connection with the church ceased more than sixty years ago, when I was sent to board- ing school." 2Lowell's father did not go along with the transcend- ental movement that took place in Boston during his ministry. Emerson, Parker, and Channing were all involved, and there was a great deal of pressure for Dr. Lowell to change his Christian views, which he resolutely refused to do. Bartol, 22, cit., pp. 20-21. Scudder says Dr. Lowell hated slavery in the abstract, but shrank back when it became a question of meddling with it. Scudder, 22, git,, I, 9. To his or- derly nature abolitionism was harsh, dogmatic, uncharitable, and unChristian. Ibid. At first glance it would appear that the radical young James Russell Lowell was the opposite of his father, with his strong abolitionist views and supposed transcend- ental leanings. His abolitionism was not in opposition to, as much as it was more practical than his father's. In a sense, Lowell retained the same views as his father, but where his father disliked and ignored abolitionism and transcendentalism, James disliked and condemned them. In his class poem Lowell scorned the transcendentalism of Emerson's Divinity School Address: Invite a man their Christian Zeal to crown By preaching earnestly the gospel-down. Applaud him when he calls of earthly make That One who spake as never man has spake, And tamely hear the annointed Son of God Made like themselves an animated clod: Scudder, 22, cit., I, 58. Six years later he dedicated his Conversations on Sggg,9§ the Old Poets to his father, and in one of the conversations 28 and a good name. His mother was a woman of great force of character. Her physician is said to have remarked, "Had it pleased the Lord to drop her spirit into the pantaloon, she would have been a great general."1 Her American ancestry dated back to 1636 through her maternal side, and her paternal ancestors emigrated from the Orkney Islands. From her Ork- ney ancestry she was said to have gained mystical qualities which she transmitted to her son. She supposedly contrib- uted to Lowell's poetic nature by singing ballads and ex- cited his imagination by vaguely tracing her forebears back to the legendary Sir Patrick Spens. At least one of her contributions, whether real or imagined, haunted Lowell throughout his life. Accord- ing to family gossip, Harriet Spence Lowell's mystical he wrote: "The Church needs reforming now as much as in Luther's time, and sells her indulgences as readily." Scudder, 92, git,, I, 144. This was not a move on Lowell's part to flaunt transcendental ideas in his father's face, but rather to show his agreement with his father. "The devil might listen to some preaching I have heard without getting his appetite spoiled. There is a great deal of money expended to make men believe that this one or that one will be damned, and to scare or wheedle them into good Calvinists or Episcopalians; but very little pain is taken to make them good Christians." Scudder, 223'git., I, 142. "Religion has come to be esteemed synonymous with the Church; there are few minds clear enough to separate it from the building erected for its convenience and shelter. It is this which has made our Christianity external, a task- ceremony to be gone through and not a principle of life itself." Scudder, 92, cit., I, 143. "The church has cor- rupted Christianity." IEId. lThe Critic, August 29, 1891, p. 109. 29 quality made her slow to react to everyday situations.1 This was referred to in family circles as the "Spence neg~ ligence." When James Russell Lowell failed to apply him- self or to put forth the effort that his elders felt he should, his indolence was blamed on his "Spence negligence." After his rustication to Concord in his senior year, he received the following letter from his sister-in-law, Anna Cabot Jackson Lowell: Aunt S. was here last evening and depicted in a lively manner the grief of Scates for your idle courses. She says he went to you with tears in his eyes to implore you to persevere, and that he told his friends in faltering accents that you had but one fault in the world. . . . I asked her what the fault was. She said "indolence for sure; in- dolence and the Spence Negligence. . . ." My opin- ion of the case is that it proceeds more from neg- ligence than indolence, and more from a blind conu 2 fidence in your powers and your destiny than either. This admonition from Anna Lowell provoked him to write, "Damn everybody, because everybody damns me."3 The effect, probably from much reminding, was that Lowell in later years often referred to his own indolence. Even when he was under heavy editing and teaching burdens, he sometimes felt that he was indolent if he was unable to write a requested ar~ ticle or poem or to find time to prepare an address. 1In later years, Mrs. Lowell became mentally ill and was confined to a rest home for a time. An account of her condition is contained in a letter from her physician to Horace E. Scudder, located in the Scudder papers in the Houghton Library. 2Scudder, pp, cit., I, 52. 3Ibid. 30 His pride in ancestry showed itself in still another way. He regretted that he had not been named Percival after the first Lowell to come to America. The name had been con— sidered for him, but since it was not chosen, he adOpted it as his pen name and wrote much of his early poetry as Hugh Perceval. Literary_Reputation During these years of literary striving his income was small, and he sometimes considered lecturing as a means of support, but he never actually contracted for a series until 1853.1 This was a period when his revolt against authority in college redirected itself into a radicalism against the wrongs of mankind, and he quickly became a writer to be reckoned with in the anti-slavery ranks. "Whittier said, 'the world-wide laugh' caused by Hosea Biglow was alone enough to 'have shaken half the walls of Slavery down.”2 This writer believes that Lowell's ultimate speaking success was in part based on this early literary reputation which he gained during the period from 1839 to 1855. His reform writing was fused in such a way with his early reputation that these two aspects of his early development would be difficult, if not impossible, to separate. Some historians believe that his reform writ- ing and early reputation led to speaking engagements in 1Howard, 22, cit., pp. 165, 176, 318. 2Clark and Foerster, op, cit., p. xxxii. 31 the anti-slavery cause. Clark and Foersterl and Vernon Parrington2 wrote that he supported the anti-slavery cause with his speaking, as well as with his writing, but no evi— dence is offered by these historians to support their claim related to his speaking. Horace Scudder3 and Samuel Mays, on the other hand, contend that Lowell never did any anti- slavery speaking. In compiling the Lowell biography, Scudder consulted many of Lowell's friends concerning his activities, which makes his statement more reliable than those of Clark, Foerster, and Parrington, who were of a different genera- tion and had to rely for the most part on historical evi- dence. Samuel Mays, an abolitionist, wrote in 1869, "James RussellzLowell was never, I believe, a member of the Anti- Slavery Society. He was seldom seen at our meetings. But his muse rendered us essential services.“4 In addition, other factors support the assumption that he was not an anti-slavery speaker. Lowell's letters, which furnish chronicles of his speaking activities during and after 1855, are strangely silent concerning speaking before this period. His notebooks, journals, and manuscripts are also void of any evidence such as outlines, notes, or speech texts for this period, and, if further substantiation is 1Ibid., p. xvii. 2Vernon L. Parrington, Main Currents g£.American Thought (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 19275, II, 457. 3Scudder, 22, cit., II, 212. 4Samuel J. Mays, Some Recollections g£_9u. ‘5 Slavegy Co.f1ict (Boston: Fields, Osgood, and Co., 1869), 262. I 11> ’3 H" '0 32 necessary, a letter from Lowell to W. Stillman in 1854 stated that the Lowell Institute Lectures were his first attempt at public speaking.1 Beginning with his first writing efforts, his mate— rial was readily acceptable to editors; but, unfortunately, literature in his day paid more in fame than in cash. Den termined to earn his livelihood by writing and to make a name for himself, and subject to visions in which he saw 2 he himself with "the world in his hand like an orange," began to see the dream come true with publication of poems in the Boston Eggg'and the Knickerbocker Magazine in 1838. During the next year twelve poems were published in the Southern Literary Messen er, and his publication steadily increased until 1841, when he published his first book, A Year's Lifg, This first volume was largely autobiographical love poetry and was greatly lauded by his critic friends, lead- ing N. P. Willis to observe that James Russell Lowell was the "best launched poet of his day."3 Lowell had fallen in love with Maria White, the sister of a Harvard classmate, and the poetry was written to her. She is reputed to have greatly influenced his life and to have directed him toward active abolition and temperance reforms. Different biographers 1Norton, Letters, I, 220. 2Scudder, 22, cit., I, 15. 3Howard, 22, cit., p. 103. 33 and scholars attribute varying amounts of influence to her, ranging from complete responsibility for his participation in the reform movements to almost none. Alfred H. Grommon, who studied Lowell's writing on liberty, abolition and pubn lic affairs, presented a strong argument for limited influ- ence on her part. He pointed out that Lowell was in sympathy with abolition before he met Maria White and stopped writing for the movement three years before she died.1 Whatever her influence actually was on his reform writing, it was never negative. Even when she became appre- hensive concerning his reform of periodical literature, she made no effort to dissuade him. He and Robert Carter founded The Pioneer, which promised relief from "thrice-diluted trash in the form of namby-pamby love tales and sketches" and promised to produce articles in the form of "healthy and manly periodical literature."2 It was to be a magazine dedicated to reform of all types. lAlfred H. Grommon, "James Russell Lowell's Writing on Liberty, Abolition and Public Affairs, 1836-1861" (un- published dissertation, Cornell University, 1944), p. 284. After carefully examining Lowell's writings and life, Grommcn concluded that "for almost four years before he met Maria White he had been demonstrating an interest in securing liberty for mankind." Howard, gp, git,, feels that Maria White had a stronger influence. He writes, "After his en- gagement to Maria White, however, Lowell's interest in re- form movements became less casual.” (p. 183.) Howard as- serts that Lowell never really became actively involved in the anti-slavery cause until 1844 when he finally broke his silence to speak out against the annexation of Texas. Howard, 22, gi£,, p. 183. 2James Russell Lowell (ed.), The Pioneer (New York: Scholars' Facsimiles and Reprints, 19475, inside flyleaf of January issue. 34 Lowell proved an excellent editor but a poor pub- lisher. As Howard pointed out, "His contract provided that he should do all the work, take all the risk, and still publish their periodical without any likelihood of profit."1 Shortly after the second issue was published, Lowell devel~ oped eye trouble and had to go to New York for treatment. Alone, Carter was not able to handle the many aspects of publishing and editing, and The Pioneer died after its third issue, leaving Lowell approximately 1,800 dollars in debt.2 In 1844 he published Eggmg, in which some of his abolitionist poetry appeared. He had begun some criticism on the Old English Poets in 222 Pioneer and had transferred the series to the Boston Miscellany after his own period- ical failed. When the Miscellany failed, he was left with the series partially unpublished. He combined these arti- cles and ”a series of lectures he was writing to deliver in Philadelphia" to publish Conversations 92 S2 2 2£.£EE Old Poets.3 The book was completed shortly before he was married to Maria White in December of 1844. Determined to be independent, they set out for Philadelphia, where, soon after his arrival, he became a corresponding editor for the Pennsylvania Freeman. He con— tinued in this capacity even after his return to Cambridge 1Howard, 9p. cit., p. 123. 2George E. Woodberry, "Lowell's Letters to Poe," Scribner's Magazine, August, 1894, p. 171. 3Howard, 22. cit., pp. 165~l68. 35 in the summer of 1845. By the end of the next year he had contributed to many of the widely distributed periodicals and had formed a connection with the National Anti-Slavery Standard in New York, becoming the corresponding editor in 1848. Lowell's first child, Blanche, died in March of 1847 at the age of fifteen months, and his sorrow over her death resulted in the bestvknown of his shorter poems, "The First Snowfall," "The Changeling," and "She Came and Went.” Mabel, the only Lowell child to survive infancy, was born the following September. Rose was born in 1849 and died at the age of six months, and Walter was born in December of 1850 and died in April of 1852. In spite of his grief over the death of his first- born, 1848 proved to be his most prolific year for book publishing. His Poems in two volumes, §_Fab1e for Critics, Biglow Papers, First Series, and Vision 2: Sir Launfal were products of 1848. The year of the Great Compromise, 1850, brought the death of his mother and daughter Rose, a further deter- ioration of his wife's health, and a second cut in salary from the National éppifSlavegy Standard. Lowell must have been further discouraged when, after his own ten-year fight against slavery, he read Webster's speech of compromise. He poured out his discouragement in an article on Webster in the Standard: ”Shall not the Recording Angel write Ichabod after the name of this man in the Great Book of 36 Doom?"1 Besides feeling that Webster had "sold out" to slavery forces, he had become increasingly dissatisfied with abolitionist disunion and non—voting theories which had disturbed the Executive Committee of the Standard. The abolitionists wanted immediate action, while Lowell felt the "world better healed by degrees."2 He wanted to "work in his own way"; and when he tried to work as the Com- mittee would have him, he found that he "had failed to work in either."3 In 1850 he resigned as corresponding editor with the comment to Sidney Gay, editor of the Standard: "The farther I can get from 'American' slavery the better I shall feel. Such enormities as the Slave Law weigh me down without rebound, make me unhappy, and too restless to work well in my own special vineyard."4 Lowell was caught in the middle. He disliked slavery, but he could not go along with the methods of the abolitionists. With the ac- tion of Webster and the passage of the Slave Law, he felt that the government had gone over to the slave powers. Partly to escape from his wretchedness of spirit over the slavery issue, and partly because of Maria's health, the Lowells made plans to visit Europe. Maria had inherited some land, and they put it up for sale to finance the trip. Howard, gp. cit., p. 220. Scudder, pp, cit., I, 233. Norton, Letters, I, 156. wal-J Ibid., p. 188. 37 First Journey £2 Europe The 1851 excursion proved ill-fated, for shortly after their arrival in Italy, they received word that Lowell's father had suffered a stroke. This news was soon followed by the death of their infant son, Walter. The loss of three children in five years broke Maria's health and spirit com— pletely, and she died in 1853, a year after their return to America. Her death, added to the others, dealt Lowell a devastating blow, and left him at Elmwood with a six-year- old daughter to raise, an invalid father, and a mentally- ill older sister. Beginning g£_§peaking_Career Just three months before his wife's death in 1853, he was commissioned to give a series of lectures for the Lowell Institute in Boston. As previously stated, the de- livery of the lectures in January and February of 1855 proved the turning point in his life by leading to his election to a Harvard professorship as Smith Professor of French and Spanish Languages and Literatures, and Professor of Belles Lettres. He accepted the position with the proviso that he be allowed to spend the next year in language prep— aration. He chose Germany for his study and spent the last half of 1855 and the first half of 1856 in Dresden. Upon his return in the fall of 1856, he assumed his teaching duties. .A "v. Q. 'v 38 Teaching For sixteen years teaching became Lowell's primary occupation, but not his only one. He edited the Atlantic 1 and later shared the editorship of the North Amer- Monthly, iggp Review with Charles Norton for ten years, thus keeping in contact with American writers and having a great deal to do with the shaping and direction of American literature.2 It can be seen that even during his teaching years his inn fluence in literature was not confined to the classroom. The labor he expended editing, coupled with his college lecturing, often worked him fifteen hours a day and forced him sometimes "to sit up till the birds sang."3 Though his ideas of teaching did not necessarily conform to the teaching ideas of the day, they were appar- ently effective. A former student of his, Barrett Wendell, noted that he cared little for grammar, grading, testing, and other mundane duties of the classroom, but instead de- voted himself to the literature, preferring to teach ideas 1Jeanette Beveridge, "James Russell Lowell's Edi- torship of the Atlantic Monthly" (unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Literature, Michigan State University, 1937). Lowell became the first editor of the Atlantic Monthl , and, along with his teaching duties, editing oc- cupied most of his time until 1861, when, with the death of the publisher and the sale of the magazine, he was re- placed as editor. He continued to write articles for the Atlantic Monthly until he became joint editor of the North American Review in association with Charles Eliot Norton in 1863. 2Fred L. Pattee, The Development gf'the American Short Story (New York: Appleton-Century Co., 19355, p. 168. 3Scudder, 2p, cit., I, 444. 39 and literary appreciation rather than the details and me- chanics.1 One of the basic tenets of his teaching philosophy included his belief in the merit of a basic education in the classics.2 To Lowell the study of Greek and Latin was vital to proper scholarly development, and there was great virtue in digging at the "sanskrit roots." He believed translation to English from other languages made one learn English better, and to read about the Greeks and to under— stand the simplicity of their culture helped one to live life better with higher aims and a better attitude. Lowell held the Greek and Roman cultures up as examples merely to show the right direction, for he urged, "We should not blindly follow the lead of Greece and Rome, surrendering what is genuine in us to what.pg§'genuine in them."3 Lowell was not free from criticism as a teacher. He felt that the classroom work dried him out and sapped his creative powers,4 and Barrett Wendell suggested that this attitude was transmitted to his students. "His pupils sometimes complained that he came into the recitation room 1Barrett Wendell, Stelligeri and Other Essays (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1893), pp. 206-207. 2For a more detailed idea of Lowell's teaching phi- losophy, see "250th Anniversary of Harvard Address," "Modern Language Ass'n Address," and a lecture on Dr. Wales, located in Scudder, pp, cit., II, 403-406. 3James Russell Lowell, The Writings ggyJames Russell Lowell (Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1890-925, p. 177. 4Norton, Letters, I, 278. 40 yawning and their parents complained that he put.a little cynicism into his interpretation of the great historic leg- ends.“l Lowell may have been bored with recitation and prob- ably showed it, but he certainly did not give half-measure to his duties. By permitting his students to read with him in his study,2 he brought an intimacy to his teaching that had a lasting effect on several of his pupils. Henry Adams, who did not speak in a very complimentary way about his Harvard education, reserved a kind word for reading in the Elmwood study and his talks with Lowell, noting that they provided the only thing of value that he gained at Harvard.3 Barrett Wendell and Julian Hawthorne were also among former students who attested to the value of reading in Lowell's study.4 ”When the classes were small, and whenever his pipes would go around, . . . he would summon the boys to him at Elmwood and begin the task of the day only after the smoke began to curl."5 In his larger classes he would sound their shallows--”which did not take long. Then he would begin and roll out the cantos in a rich round tone . . . 1The Critic, August 22, 1891, p. 94. 2James Herbert Morse, The Critic, February 23, 1889, p. 88. 3Henry Adams, The Education gf_Henry Adams (New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 19185, pp. 61-63. 4Julian Hawthorne, ”Lowell in a Chatty Mood," New York World, October 24, 1886. 5Morse, loc. cit. 41 accompanying the reading with the happiest stories and com- ments.” A fusion of impressions of Lowell, the teacher, rem veals him as somewhat distant in his classroom relationship with most of his students, non-academic in his actions and attitude, and a bit eccentric, possibly accounting for the shock registered by some of the Harvard students when he was appointed Minister to England. Elbert Hubbard wrote, "Yet I remember when the papers announced that our plain Harvard professor had been appointed Minister to England. We boys thought of that shaggy dog that tagged him through the streets, of the briar-wood pipe, and the dusty suit of gray, and we were struck dumb with amazement."2 Perhaps Col. Higginson's statement that "Lowell was at home-even in his own country"3 did not include the Harvard campus, where undergraduates probably judged him by his outward appearance. His unorthodox teaching methods and his plain dress were noted by most of his students who wrote about him as a teacher, but each in turn was awed by Lowell's wealth of knowledge, and he left a lasting impression. As one lIbid. 2E. Hubbard, Little Journeys to the Homes of Amer- ican Authors (New York: G. P. Putnam' 5 Sons, 18967- 3Brander Matthews, Speech, Commemoration of £22. Centenary of Epg_Birth of James Russell Lowell (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 19195, p. 25. Held in February, 19- 22, 1919, under the auspices of the American Academy Of Arts and Letters. 42 student put it, “His lectures smelled of the lamp, but he read them admirably; some of them stay with me after near half a hundred years."1 Lowell's interest in students and Harvard did not end in the classroom. When he was in Europe, he spent hun— dreds of dollars of his own money purchasing rare books to fill out the Harvard Library collection.2 During his term of service in the Smith Profes- sorship, the late Professor James Russell Lowell made a large collection of books in the Romance Languages, mainly in Old French and Spanish. From this collection, such books as were not already to be found on the shelves of the Harvard College Library were left to it by Professor Lowell's will; but the greater part of the collection remained in the hands of his heirs. This part consists of seven hundred volumes more or less. It contains many books of the highest value to the scholars of the Romance Languages, and many also now difficult to procure. The value of these books is increased by the fact that a large proportion of them contain notes of Professor Lowell's which illustrate his wide reading and thorough scholarship. Besides allowing Harvard to have the pick of his collection and to take any book that he owned that the Li- brary did not possess, he gave 688 volumes and 113 pamph- lets that he had gathered in Madrid to the Library in 1885.4 lNathaniel Southgate Shaler, The Autobiography_2£’ Nathaniel Southgate Shaler, with §_Su221ementary Memoir 21 His Wife Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Co., 19095, pp. 111-112. 2Norton, Letters, II, 212, 215. 3Frances M. Rogers, "The Libraries for Romance Lan— guages and Literature," Harvard Library Bulletin, IV, No. 2 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Library, Spring, 1950), 272. These books are now in the Harvard Library. 4ghid. 43 Besides this inestimable contribution to the Romance Language Library, he showed a genuine interest in other aspects of the college. In a letter to Judge Hoar he dis— cussed at great length the campus architecture, summing up his ideas with this thought: "A building outlasts many generations of Professors, and gives its silent lecture on aesthetics to class after class of students. Consider what you spend in ornament as the endowment of a perpetual lec- turer on the principles of good taste."1 He wrote to Samuel Eliot, an overseer of the col- lege, about the deficiencies of the Harvard Library, and he exhibited a knowledge of the Boston Public Library, where he sometimes gathered material to prepare his lectures.2 In another letter he mentioned to Judge Hoar a rec- ommendation that Charles w. Eliot be considered for a higher college position,3 showing his perpetual concern for the welfare of the school. The varied interest which he con- tinued to display in Harvard College-~its library, its archi— tecture, its administration--emphasizes the kind of man Lowell was and thus sheds light on him as a teacher. The year 1857 proved eventful. He married Frances Dunlap, the governess of his remaining child, and, after seven years of teaching and editing, he published Fireside 1Howe, New Letters, pp. 107-111. 2Ibid., pp. 117-119. 31bido, pp. 112-1130 44 Travels, marking his first book publication since 1849, an interval of fourteen years. Political Writing During the Civil War years and after, from 1861 to 1866, Lowell became more actively engaged in politics, with many articles and poems appearing in the Atlantic Monthly and the North American Review.1 With the end of the war in 1865, Lowell was asked to deliver a poem com- memorating the living and dead soldiers of Harvard. The occasion held strong implication for Lowell since he had lost three nephews in the conflict. His emotional involve- ment made it a difficult poem to write, and he completed it only by working the entire night prior to the ceremony. The "Commemoration Ode" rates among his best works, though the delivery of it was greatly overshadowed on the day it was given by Phillips Brooks' prayer. Although "his usu- ally cold delivery“2 displayed emotion and was reported to have drawn tears,3 it was not until its publication that it received due credit for its excellence. Before publish- ing the ode, Lowell added the Lincoln strophe, which became the first acknowledgment of the President's greatness by a major writer. 1These essays were collected into a volume and pub- lished as Political Essays in 1888. 2A. Lawrence Lowell, 22, cit., p. 86. 3Ibid. See also Scudder, 22, cit., II, 64. 45 When his surge of political writing diminished after 1866, he briefly returned to poetry as a form of expression with beauty as his theme. In 1869 he published 2293;.Ehg. Willows and in 1870, The Cathedral. Literary criticism reappeared later in the year with a volume of essays entitled £9229.fl1.§22£§3 Teaching literature, no doubt, inspired My Study Windows in 1871 and Among My Books, Second Series, in 1876. Three Memorial Poems was also published in 1876, while his next volume of poetry, Heartease and Rue, trailed twelve years later in 1888, becoming the last volume pub- lished during his lifetime. Lowell journeyed to Europe a third time in 1872, resigning his positions as editor and professor to make a two-year tour of Ireland, England, and the Contineht. The sale of some property and investment of the money pro- vided him with an income large enough to allow him to give up his professorship. He rented his home, concluded his teaching duties,1 and journeyed to Europe, from whence he wrote: Ring, ring school bell, ring. I am in Paris having my fling. The "fling” was short lived, or at least shorter than Lowell had planned it to be. His investments did not prove as lHarvard refused Lowell's resignation; later, in 1873, he learned that Charles Norton was being considered as his replacement, so he resigned a second time in order that he would not stand in Norton's way; his resignation gas refused a second time. See Howe, New Letters, pp. 201, 5. 2Ibid., p. 171. 46 sound as he had hoped, and he was forced to return to his Harvard professorship, cutting his planned retirement at age sixty-three to just two years. While Lowell was in Europe during this period, Ox— ford University expressed a desire to bestow the degree of D.C.L. upon him.1 Lowell accepted, travelled from France to England, and the ceremonies were performed on June 19, 1873. The following spring Cambridge University conferred a second doctorate on him before his return to America in 1874.2 New Political Activity and Resumption 2: Teaching In the fall of 1874 Lowell resumed his teaching duties at Harvard, and while continuing there for the next three years, he renewed his interest in politics. He was appalled by the corruption in the post-Civil War adminis— tration of President Grant; and immediately upon his return to the United States, he responded with two scathingly satirical poems, "The World's Fair" and "Tempora Mutantur." He took considerable abuse from the press in some quarters, but to many who were also disturbed by the corruption, his resolute stand became a rallying point, and in 1876 he was lHowe, New Letters, p. 195. 2Quinguenial Catalogue of Harvard University for 1895, p. 145— Lowell received a _total of six honorary de- grees: Doctor of Civil Laws, 1873, from Oxford, LLD's from Harvard, 1884; Cambridge, 1874; Saint Andrews, 1884; Edin- burgh, 1884; and Bologna University in 1888. 47 approached by a group of Cambridge men who were interested in reforming the Republican Party. Lowell helped to organ- ize the group of about forty men, and they were successful in gaining control in the Cambridge area and defeating the Blaine forces. As a result of their victory, Lowell was elected a delegate to the national convention in Cincinnati, where he and the anti-Blaine faction were again successful in blocking Blaine's nomination as the Republican candidate.1 Lowell's reputation, coupled with his political activity, led many to suggest that he should run for Con- gress; but, despite a great deal of urging, he steadfastly refused.2 He wrote to C. E. Norton: I received a deputation this evening to persuade me to reconsider my refusal to stand for Congress. They tell me I am the only candidate with whom the Republicans can carry the district, that they have thoroughly canvassed it and are sure that I should be elected without the need of any effort, that no one else could get the nomination . . . but that I should have it by acclamation.3 And in a later letter to Miss Norton he mentioned that he had again been urged to stand for Congress, comparing him— self to Caesar and Cromwell "and the other historical ex- amples, who only put aside the offered crown thrice, and 1Republican Party National Conventions, Proceedings lst-llth, 1856-1896 Tmicrofilm, Michigan State University LibraryT. Lowell represented District 8 from Massachusetts, but, according to the record, he never spoke from the floor. Of the 26 delegates from Massachusetts only Dr. Loring, George Hoar, John Forbes, and Richard Henry Dana spoke. 2Norton, Letters, II, 160-61, 169-178, 180-81. See also Howe, New Letters, p. 221. 3Norton, Letters, II, 180-181. 48 this is my half-dozenth self-denial."l Lowell's refusal to run for Congress did not completely remove him from pol- itics, for he became a presidential elector and cast his vote for Hayes. An aftermath of the political campaign was Lowell's being considered for a Cabinet post,2 but a prominent cabu inet member was sure he would not accept, and as a reward for his support he was offered a choice of several ambassa— dorships instead. Not feeling competent with the languages, he refused Berlin, Vienna, and Russia, but he let it be known that he was interested in Spain. As a result, the man who had been selected for Spain agreed to take the Aus- trian post, and Lowell was assigned to Spain. As his earlier literary speaking had opened the door to a Harvard professor- ship in 1855, his political activity and speaking opened the diplomatic door in 1877. Spanish Mission The Spanish Mission provided Lowell with a compre- hension of protocol and administrative duties but offered little speaking experience. He proved his mettle as a dip- lomat and after two and one-half years was ordered to Eng— land as Minister to the Court of Saint James. 1Ibid., p. 181. 2Rollo Ogden, Life and Letters 2: Edwin Lawrence Godkin (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1907), pp. 1, 29. 49 English Mission Lowell proved an immediate success with the English people,1 and shortly after his arrival he found that he was in great demand as a speaker. Although Horwill did not discount the part speaking played in the process, he declared Lowell to be popular for a second reason: he saw Lowell as a prophet and felt that the English people recognized this aspect of his writ- ing through exposure in the English press by a devoted jour- nalist, W. T. Stead. Stead often quoted him in his "six— a-week" articles and gave Lowell wide publicity by publishn ing his poetry in cheap reprints, Pengnyoets for School Egg_§gmg, which sold for a modest price and had a large volume of sales. Public exposure caused Lowell's name to be mentioned from the English pulpit, where his poetry was often quoted by the clergy.2 A third reason for his success is suggested by this writer. Lowell's anti-imperialistic writing of 1848 was pertinent in England in 1882 because of her imperialism in Egypt. What had been timely in America thirty years earlier was now vital and current in England. Through a quirk of historical fate, the times had come around to fit Lowell's writing, whereas thirty years earlier the poetry 1Encyclopedia Americana, XVII (New York: Encyclo- pedia Americana Corporation, 1954), 665. 2Herbert W. Horwill, New England Magazine, October, 1902, pp. 321-324. 50 and essays had been written to fit the times. Lowell found it difficult to understand his popu— larity, but he recognized and joked about it. "As for me I continue to be the greatest orator in England (next to Mr. Gladstone) and might speak almost every day in the week 1 reads a letter to his daughter on if I were fool enough,” the first of January, 1882. That he had become the American lion of English society is attested to by Smalley's estimate that Lowell "had seen the inside of more country houses in England than any other American who ever lived."2 Actually, Lowell's acceptance in England was not as sudden as it might at first appear. It should be noted that Oxford and Cambridge Universities had conferred honor- ary doctorates on him a full decade before Harvard gave him an LL.D. in June of 1884. Even the University of Edin- burgh preceded Harvard by a month in bestowing a third doc- torate on him in May of 1884, giving him three English uni— versity recognitions before his first in America.3 Besides the doctorates an offer of the Merton Pro- fessorship at Oxford University4 and his election to the 1Howe, New Letters, p. 263. 2Scudder, gp, cit., II, 262. 3Norton, Letters, II, 278. Supra, chap. iii, p. 46. In the Harvard Quinquintenial Catalogue of 1895 a fourth English doctorate is listed for Lowell from St. Andrews in 1884, but since no mention of this degree is made in any other source, it is not known if it preceded the Harvard degree. 4Scudder, gp. cit., II, 318. 51 Rectorship at Saint Andrews are tributes to the esteem in which the British held Lowell's scholarship and to his pop- ularity. His nomination and election to the Saint Andrews Rectorship provided a humorous incident to Lowell's stay in England, as well as illustrating his popularity and ap- peal to the English people: It is a time-honored custom at the ancient and sturdy little University of St. Andrews for the student body to elect once a year a Lord Rector of the Uni- versity whose duties are limited to a single address. There is a tacit understanding that politics shall not enter into the election, and that the choice shall be the students' own, without interference from the officers of the faculty.1 In 1883 Lowell was nominated for this position, but a pro- test was lodged on the ground that he was an alien. Scudder wrote: The whole business created a lively discussion in and out of print. . . . The excitement ran high, and Lowell was elected by a considerable majority. But his opponents pushed the matter further, and demonstrated that he was ineligible by reason of his extra-territoriality. As Lowell put it in writ» ing to Professor Child: "My extra-territoriality will, perhaps, prevent my being Rector of St. An- drews, because it puts me beyond the reach of the Scottish Courts in case of malversation in office. Lowell settled the humorous crisis by resigning his elected office.3 Although no major conflicts in the diplomatic field took place, Lowell ran headlong into the Irish problem which 1Ibid., pp. 299-300. 2Ibid. 3Ibid. 52 resulted from an insurrection of the Irish against the Eng- lish. Irish-Americans, after becoming United States citi- zens, were going back to their homeland to fight the Eng- lish. When incarcerated by the English for their rebellious actions, they declared their American citizenship and de- manded release. Lowell was caught in the middle. The Eng- lish wanted to prosecute the IrisheAmericans but could not risk straining relations with the United States. The Amer- ican press supported the "Americans imprisoned in English jails," and Lowell was in a dilemma; if he had supported the English viewpoint, he would have incurred the wrath of his countrymen; if he had opposed the English in their right to prosecute Irishquerican agitators, his stand would have encouraged more agitation and would have strained Enga lishquerican relations. In spite of the newspaper pres- sure Lowell handled the situation admirably, stating that they could not be "Irishmen and American at the same time, as they seem to suppose," and that they were subject to the laws of the country in which they chose to live.1 It should be remembered that in earlier years Lowell's Americanism had manifested itself in a hatred of the English for their condescending manner2 and later for their support of the South during the Civil War. Dur» ing his residency as Minister to England, he developed a 1Richmond Croom Beatty, James Russell Lowell (Nash- ville: Vanderbilt University Press, 19425, . 263. 2Scudder, gp, cit., I, 328-329. 53 theme of conciliation. He felt that the bitterness that existed between the two countries had lasted too long and that it was time to bring about a feeling of mutual respect. In adapting this theme to his English audience, Lowell claimed that he was as much an Englishman as they were, and indeed, he could trace his maternal and paternal ancestry back to the British Isles. Yet, in claiming his British ancestry, he never once slighted his irrepressible Americanism, and the English never dared to joke about the United States or to make derogatory remarks in his presence for he took immediate offense to any such remark.1 1Robert Charles Leclair, "Three American Travelers in England: James Russell Lowell, Henry Adams, Henry James" (unpublished dissertation, Pennsylvania University, 1944), pp. 3-57. The first section of this dissertation deals historically with Lowell's contact with the English people and examines his early hostile attitude toward them with his later attitude of conciliation. Leclair concluded that "both as a public official and as a private citizen, James Russell Lowell looked at England as a protagonist of the American people. For this reason the English loved him; for the English people like Americans to be American, and they felt that Lowell, in this respect, belonged to that group of American writers who were most popular in England because of their Americanism: Hawthorne, Emerson, Longfellow, Holmes, Dana, Mark Twain and Walt Whitman. Thus, Lowell's impressions of England are the reactions of a man who ap— proached the British Isles deeply rooted, in thought and feeling, to his own country; and at the end of his life, after many trips abroad over a period of nearly four dec~ ades, he retained his staunch Americanism while enriched by the infinite number of contacts he had made with England and the English people.” See also George W. Smalley, Anglo- American Memories (New York and London: G. P. Putnam's Sons, The Knickerbocker Press, 1911), pp. 206-7. Smalley notes a characteristic saying of an English host as Lowell drove away from his door: "I need not tell you how much I like Lowell and how delighted I am to have him here as often as he will come. But from the moment he enters my house till he is gone I am in a panic." The panic into which the genial host fell was due to Lowell's fighting spirit; not the spirit of a diplomatist. 54 When the Cleveland administration took office in 1885, Lowell's ministry was terminated, and he returned to America. During the next six years, until his death on August 12, 1891, he enjoyed a position of supreme popular— ity and contemporary eminence. During his lifetime, in his assaults against unfairness, corruptions, and political sham, he used his influence, his pen, and his speaking in efforts to defeat slavery, imperialism, disunion, post Civil War corruption, pedantry, literary incompetence, anti-Amer- icanism, inefficiency in civil service, unfair tariffs, and unfairness in copyright. As so often happens, historical perspective vindi— cated Lowell's youthful radicalism and elevated him in 1889 to a position of national adulation. He had become "the foremost citizen of the Republic,"1 and along with General Sherman, Lowell was said to be one of the six most interest- ing men alive.2 He was pictured as a man of great versa- tility ”whose speech at a public dinner“ was "a beacon of hope in the sight of one political party and a brand of destruction in that of another."3 He was also a man who could "turn aside from the burning question of the day to lThe Critic, February 23, 1889, p. 85. 2The Critic, February 21, 1891, pp. 98-99. 3The Critic, February 18, 1888, p. 75. 55 publish a poem such as 'Endymion,'" in the Atlantic. By recognizing Lowell as a prominent figure of his time and by listing his accomplishments in many fields, the writer has attempted to depict Lowell, the man, emphasizing major influences that helped to shape his life, and to dem» onstrate that speaking was a major force which gave consider- able direction to the course of his life. Ibid. CHAPTER III JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL, THE SPEAKER Introduction Although James Russell Lowell attained some reputa- tion as a speaker during his lifetime, he differed from most literary speakers of the day. While the others- Emerson, Twain, Whittier—~relied on speaking as a major source of income and toured the circuit regularly, Lowell's speaking remained a secondary pursuit; and his dislike for the circuit became so pronounced during his first tour that he vowed never again to subject himself to it. This had the effect of further suppressing his speaking reputation, since it resulted in his speeches being heard by fewer people. It was common for speakers on tour to have a small reper- toire of addresses, one of which was repeated at each stop.1 Walt Whitman, for instance, was known to have given his Lincoln address several times each year over a period of thirteen years,2 while Lowell, speaking only for specific lWilliam Norwood Brigance, History and Criticism g£_American Public Address (New York: Russell and Russell, 1960), I, 124-25. See also Spiller gt_gl,, 22, cit., p. 801. 2Henry Seidel Canby, Walt Whitman, §2_American (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1943), p. 291. 56 57 occasions, in all probability never exceeded two or three readings of any of his public lectures, excepting, of course, during his Western Tour and in his college classes. Possibly another deterrent to the growth of Lowell's reputation was the size of his audiences. He preferred speaking to small groups, and most of his audiences prob» ably did not exceed two hundred persons. Therefore, while speakers like John B. Gough could estimate a lifetime audi- ence of nine million persons in forty-four years,l Lowell, by the most optimistic estimate, might have spoken to eighty or a hundred thousand in his thirty-four years of speaking.2 Although his lifetime audience was small (by comm parison with other literary speakers of his day), he pre- sumably had a reading audience which far exceeded his lis- tening audience, since many of his addresses were given lBrigance, loc. cit. 2Based on existing audience accounts in newspapers, the size of the rooms in which he spoke, and the occasions at which he spoke, Lowell's lifetime audience has been es~ timated by the writer. (His college classes were estimated as one audience for the whole term rather than a different audience each time the class met.) Using this general estim mate of his listening audience and comparing it with his reading audience, one is able to see that his reading puba lic, most of whom never heard him, was an important factor in the reputation Lowell gained as a speaker. Couple the 40,000 who read the Atlantic Monthly in which his Harvard Address was published, with the circulation of the Critic, which boasted world-wide circulation, and also carried the address; add the fact that it was published in Democragy_ and Other Addresses, and the reading audience of this one speech probably exceeded the number of persons who heard him deliver all of his other lectures and addresses during his lifetime. 58 widespread publication.l Inasmuch as his speeches were more widely circulated through the medium of the press than from the platform, it can be assumed that his reputation as a speaker was more dependent upon his reading audience than on his listening audience. Speaking_0ccasions Early Speaking Lowell Institute Lectures, 1855 One of the surest signs of the opening of the cul- tural season in Boston during the mid-eighteen hundreds was the Symphony Concert, quickly followed by the Lowell Institute Lectures. The lectures were not what one would call distinctly fashionable, but they were regarded as a main feature of the Boston winter. The course was free for those who would stand in line at the Cadet Armory on the Saturday preceding its opening.2 Only one ticket was allotted to each person, and this entitled him to a seat during the entire course, provided that he reached the hall before 7:43 p.m. After 7:43 p.m. all unoccupied seats were opened to those who held admission tickets, which were 1Public Opinion, V (Washington and New York, April 21, 1888), 25, 26. This weekly magazine printed an abstract of one of Lowell's speeches, along with press comments about it from eight newspapers throughout the country. 2Scudder, pp. cit., pp. 371-378. Additional in- formation concerning the Lowell Lectures was obtained from The Critic, November 12, 1887, p. 249. 59 distributed after reserve—seat tickets had been exhausted. Lowell faced this audience on January 9, 1855, for his first public appearance, beginning a series of twelve lectures on the English Poets. Ticket distribution had been brisk, and the January 8 edition of the Boston Advertiser announced that only one person in five was able to obtain a reserved seat. To handle the overflow, the series was expanded to two sessions with each lecture being repeated on the after- noon following the regularly scheduled lecture.1 It was certainly a popular success, and according to Charles Eliot Norton, it was a first-rate literary performance.2 Newspaper publicity immediately helped to boost his lecturing reputation. The Lowell Lecture series was fully covered by two local newspapers, and excerpts from the lectures were carried in a third.3 This three-paper coverage did not meet the demand for copies of the lectures, however; and the Boston Daily Advertiser reprinted the first lecture on February 24, 1855, eight days after the close of the Institute, and announced that the newspaper could again furnish full sets of the lectures to a limited number of people.4 1Boston Advertiser, January 8, 1855, p. 2. 2Charles Eliot Norton, "Prefatory Note to Humor, Wit, Fun, and Satire," Centur , XLVII (November, 1893), 124. 3Boston Traveller, Boston Daily Advertiser and the Boston Evening_Transcript. 4Boston Daily Advertiser, February 24, 1855, p. 1.. 60 News of the successful series spread, and a letter from Francis Child in New York urged Lowell to repeat the lectures there, noting that they were eagerly read by his friends whenever copies could be obtained.1 It was an enviable success for a first venture, and Lowell could not help being impressed by the acclaim, but he was hardly overcome by it. He wrote to his close friend Briggs on February 9, 1855: My lectures have succeeded quite beyond my ex- pectation. One or two have been pretty good, but I have felt sad in writing them, and somehow feel as if I had not got myself into them very much. However, folks are pleased.2 One of those who was "pleased" was Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, as indicated by the following entries in his diary: January 9. Mr. Richard Grant White of New York, author of Shakegpeare's Scholar, came to tea. He drove in with us to hear Lowell's first lecture: an admirable performance, and a crowded audience. January 20. Lowell's lecture, on the old English ballads, one of the best of the course. January 31. Lowell is to be my successor! Dr. Walker talked with me about it this morning, and I have been to see Lowell about the preliminaries, and the matter is as good as settled. I am sorry for some of my friends who want the place. But for lectures, I think Lowell the best of the can- didates. He has won his spurs and will give the 1M. A. DeWolfe Howe, "The Scholar-Friends: Francis James Child and James Russell Lowell," Harvard Library 2317 letin, V, No. 2 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Li- brary, Spring, 1951), 142. 2Scudder, pp. cit., I, 377. 61 college just what it needs.1 Evidence g£.§ subsequent series, 1855 With the first undertaking successfully completed, other lecturing occasions appeared. That Lowell went on a Western Tour during March and April of that same year was well known.2 Whether or not the contract for the Western Tour was a result of the Lowell Institute series is not definitely stated by Lowell's biographer, though it seems plausible, since a letter written to Miss Loring just five days before the Institute began, indicated that the Western Tour was not in his plans at that time: By April 1, I shall be free--I shall have done mak- ing a fool of myself and shall make April fools of other people with immense relish.3 Had he already contracted to make the Tour, he would not have been "free" until May, since the engagements began in mid-March and concluded in early May. Another inference can be drawn from his statement that he would be free April 1: that he had been engaged by someone to give several lectures after the Lowell Insti- tute series closed; otherwise, he would have been free in February, the series ending February 16. 1Ibid., pp. 373-376. 2Norton, Letters, I, 223-228. Howe, New Letters, p. 57. Beatty, pp, cit., pp. 129, 30. 3Norton, Letters, I, 220. 62 Two unpublished letters to Jane Norton reveal fur~ ther data which give credence to this assumption. He spoke of preparing a lecture on Dante, one of a series of three or four, and mentioned an art lecture which he sent to her. These letters are dated January 12 (1855 is added to the letter in pencil), and Winter, 1855, indicating that he was working on preparations of Dante and art lectures while simultaneously preparing and delivering the Lowell Institute Lectures on English poetry. Lowell's interest in Dante has been noted by his major biographers, and it is known that he gave a series of Dante lectures after he became a professor at Harvard.1 However, the existence of a series on Dante early in 1855 is new material which this writer has gathered from letters and manuscripts, and an effort has been made to substantiate it to add to the knowledge of Lowell's lecturing. His letter to Jane Norton, "From Purgatory, January 12," gives this information: I send this Milton Lecture which is poor enough-- but comfort yourself with the thought that the Dante will be worse. I am just carrying him along the Comic's road on his journey to Paris, and am being eloquent about what I never saw anymore than the Lanissadone. I am wholly dependent on your description of it. Dante won't have thought the ono O'altrin worse than the pane or the scali-—if he had got it by Lyceum lecturing.2 1Ibid., p. 273. 2Unpublished letter to Jane Norton, in the Norton Collection (Houghton Library, Harvard University). 63 The Milton lecture to which he referred was delivered on January 30 in the Lowell Institute series. The fact is clear that Lowell was writing a Dante lecture just three days after the Institute began. It may be assumed with reasonable certainty that he would not have been involved in this preparation at such a time had he not been pressed for time. In other words, he must have been scheduled to deliver the Dante lectures in the near future. Further substantiation of this assumption is apparent in his letter to Stillman on January 25, 1855, in which he lamented that he was only a week ahead, i.e., two lectures, in prepara- tion of his Institute lectures on English poetry. This fact adds emphasis to the improbability that he would have taken time out from preparing the lectures he was currently delivering unless pressed by the imminence of another series. A second letter to Jane Norton, dated "Winter, 1855," lends further credence to the possibility of a second series: I send the two 1ectures--remember only that the Art Lecture is sketchy and the Dante one of three or four-a preliminary to mark out the ground. I don't know if you will be able to sort them- if not shuffle them and see how that will do.1 In another area evidence was disclosed indicating that shortly after the Institute, Lowell may have delivered at least five lectures, four of which were the Dante series and therefore were given in one place. Among the Lowell Institute original lecture manuscripts for 1855 were found lUnpublished letter to Jane Norton, Norton Collec- tion, Winter, 1855. ‘ 64 copies of the series on English poetry plus fragments of four Dante manuscripts and one lecture entitled "Art Lec- ture.” It is obvious that these five did not comprise any part of the English poetry lectures; but since Lowell, ac— cording to his letters, was preparing them during that series, and since there has been no previous research discovered concerning a subsequent series on Dante or a single lecture on art, it is believed by this writer that the manuscripts represent an unrecorded series of lectures which have been placed with the Lowell Institute series of 1855 because the Dante lectures were repeated the following year, along with the Institute lectures, as part of the Smith Professorship lectures. Where the Dante lectures and the art lecture were given cannot be definitely determined. Lowell mentioned lyceum lecturing in the first letter to Miss Norton; this may or may not have been a reference to the actual occasion of the delivery. However, the fact that the Dante lectures comprised a series indicates that at least these three or four were supposed to be given in one location. Two valid conclusions may be drawn from the above research: (1) that Lowell had not contracted for the Westm ern Tour on January 5, 1855, which would indicate that it was an outgrowth of his successful Institute lecture series, and (2) that it is highly probable that a course of lectures on Dante was given soon after the close of the Lowell In- stitute Lectures. 65 Western Tour, 1855 On March 12, less than a month after the Lowell Institute Lectures, Lowell began his Western Tour. He kept no records, or if he did, they are not among his papers at Harvard University, but he did write four letters1 which give some indication of his route, the intensity of the travel, and the kinds of audiences he faced. His adventures began on the first day out, when he arrived late for the train which was to take him to Buffalo. He described the incident in a letter to his small daughter. We did not get to Albany till six o'clock in the afternoon and there we had to cross the Hudson river . . . and so we were too late for the train that ought to have carried Papa to Buffalo. Papa walked across the river on the ice--and was told afterward that he had risked his life by doing so, which he did not believe--but the ice bent under us and the water bubbled up through the holes in it as we walked. Then Papa saw the train start, but his trunk (with all his lectures in it) did not get across in time--so he had to wait at Albany in a horrible hotel till 1/4 past 11 for the next train. After spending five hours in a "horrible" hotel, he caught the next train for Buffalo, where he was to lecture the following evening. He missed a night's sleep and arrived with a "terrible" headache, having alternately "froze" and "suffocated" aboard the train. 1Norton, Letters, I, 223-228; Howe, New Letters, pp. 56-59; and an unpublished letter to C. E. Norton, Norton Collection, April 9, 1855, from Madison, Wis. All the in- formation for recreating the lecture tour is taken from these letters unless otherwise footnoted. 66 He delivered his lecture and attended a reception afterward, where he met ex-president Fillmore.1 At eight o'clock the next morning he was on his way back to Pen Yen, New York, where he delivered a lecture on March 14. His third stop, after four days on the road, was Rochester, New York, about sixty miles north of Pen Yan. The next six days are unaccounted for; but on Sat- urday, March 24, Lowell arrived in Utica, New York, with two days free before his next lecture. With an air of amaze» ment, he noted that the snow was higher than the horses' backs. He spent the two days at Trenton Falls relaxing and then began his rigid schedule again. In the next five days he saw Niagara Falls, rode in'a railroad superintend- ent's private car from Detroit to Chicago, saw a man pour molten iron in Rockford, Illinois, and mailed a letter on March 29 from Elgin, Illinois, which he mistakenly called Elgin, Michigan. The weather was inclement with either rain or snow or both every day for the first fifteen, and Lowell noted that he had "had a hard time of it." I hate this business of lecturing. . . . To be re» ceived at a bad inn by a solemn committee, in a room with a stove that smokes but not exhilarates, to have three cold fishtails laid in your hand to shake, to be carried to a cold lecture-room, to read a cold lecture to a cold audience, to be 1Neither the Buffalo Morning Express nor the Daily Courier mentioned the lecture, though the Young Men's Ass'n Annual lists a lecture in Buffalo by Lowell on this date. 67 carried back to your smoke-side, paid, and the three fish-tails again--well, it is not delightful exactly. At the end of the first week of snow, train rides, and cold audiences, Lowell was ready to quit and tried to resign, but he could not get a release from his contract. "It has not been half so entertaining as I expected--for the West (so much of it as I have seen) is but the East over again—~only dirtier and worse-mannered." [He went on to qualify] "I mean that part of it which one sees at taverns and on railways. In the houses it is the East grown more openhanded." Lowell rode from Chicago to Rockford, Illinois, with Judge Drummond of the United States Circuit Court. He re— lated the following incident in a letter to Charles Norton: The gentleman who sat behind us had both his feet in a particularly dirty pair of boots--the soil is rich here, you know--up over the back of our seat close beside his honor's unconscious head. I looked so hard at the boots and their owner that I at last looked them down to the floor.2 A second incident in Dixon, Illinois, made his cir- cuit lecturing even less palatable: I arrived at Dixon, Illinois, about nine o'clock at night and owing to a blunder on the part of the Committee,-for I was expected at a private house-- went to the Principle [sic] Hotel, the Nachusa House. I entered a small barroom in which about twenty fellow titians were solacing themselves with tobacco, either by chewing or smoking, sometimes both. I lNorton, Letters, I, 224. 2Unpublished letter to C. E. Norton, Norton Collec- tion, April 9, 1855. 68 went to the bar, entered my professional name and asked a jaunty youth who presided at the solemnity with a cigar in his mouth at least ten inches long, "if I could have a room?" "No, Sir!" "Can't have a room?" "No, Sir! All our rooms are taken. I'll do the best I can for you. I think I can promise you a bed and i; shall 23 with §_respectable white per- son, anyhow!" "Whew! Can't I have even a bed by myself?" "No, Sir! Couldn't do it, no how." "Then I shall have to try the Dixon House." This was the rival Establishment, and my shot told. "Well, Sir, I'll try. Perhaps some gentleman will give up his room." Accordingly, by and by, he came §g_one with a confidential wink, and told me he had succeeded in getting me a room by myself. It was like the cell of a Cistercian Monk, and there was almost dirt enough for me to have dug my grave in and kept up the parallel. The room opened out of the side of a large one with ten beds in it, each carrying double. It was positively not eight feet square. The sheets had been clean when the Hotel Opened, that is, unless the keeper had kept another hotel before his emigration to this. Some former occu- pant had taken a fancy to smoke in bed and burned holes in the sheet on each side of the pillow. The arrangements for washing were a fragment of caststeel soap and a dirty towel. I suppose gentle- men who did not have beds by themselves, had to go without one or the other of these luxuries. I drew my nightcap over my head, turned up the collar of my cioak, and camped out upon the outside of the bed. 1Ibid. (n L‘ 69 While waiting for a train in Freeport, Illinois, he had another encounter with "Westerners." Finding that I was likely to lose my dinner, I looked round for an eatinghouse. I saw a sign and entered. The staple was pigs' feet, but I remembered the old proverb and asked for some boiled eggs. The land- lord-a little old man of seventy, said the woman "had just put some on to bile." Presently he brought a dish full and set them down on the counter with a large-bladed knife by their side. I took up the dish and was walking into the back room where a dirty table was spread, when the venerable man ad— dressed these winged words to me. "Where in h are you goin?" "Into the back room to eat my eggs." "Nobody don't go in there, without he pays for a meal of vittles. You don't eat eggs in there. We ain't agoin' to be acleanin' up arter everybody that wants to eat an egg." "But how am I to eat them?" (Blandly) "G d ye! There's the eggs, there's the counter, and there's a knife--what d'ye want more?" I could hardly help laughing, but putting on a severe countenance, I said, "My good fellow, there is no use in being crass about it. I shall eat my eggs in the back room and pay for a meal of vittles." This, of course, made things all right.1 Lowell added, "I am heartily sick of this part of the world. It is too new for an old fellow like me and something like eating raw meat." Lowell was thirty-six at the time. On April 4 he lectured on the "Old Ballads" in Madison, Wisconsin,2 and he stayed in the area through 1Ibid . 2This lecture was covered by the local papers and will be referred to later in the chapter. 70 April 9, during which time he visited the University of Wisconsin by invitation of the Chancellor.1 Lowell was in Cincinnati on April 12,2 and Long- fellow's diary places him back in Cambridge on May 3.3 Though the Tour was financially successful-Lowell earned six hundred dollars-it left him with an aversion for this type of lecturing. He later agreed to deliver courses of lectures at Rochester, Ithaca, Philadelphia, and Baltimore, but he never again signed a contract to tour the circuit. College lecturing, He began his duties at Harvard in the fall of 1856 by repeating the Lowell Institute Lectures on English poetry. These were followed by lectures on Dante and German liters ature.4 Whether the Dante lectures given in this course 1At the end of this letter he notes that he talked about horses with Bayard Taylor and William White. William White, Lowell's brother-in-law, had been a classmate of his at Harvard. See Scudder, pp, pip,, I, 76, 87. White wrote an advance notice from Chicago of Lowell's lecture in Madison for the Daily State Journal, April 3, 1855. Lowell's unpublished letter to Norton places White and Bayard Taylor in Madison with Lowell on April 9. White was back in Cambridge with Lowell on May 29, which is a strong indication that White was Lowell's publicity man and that he made the tour with Lowell. 2Three Cincinnati newspapers were examined con- cerning any lecturing Lowell might have done there. Neither the Columbian, Gazette, nor Enguirer contained any infor- mation. 3McFadyen, pp, cit., p. 177. 4Norton, Letters, I, 273. «n‘ e.— As» ‘A- 'V n~< (a 71 are the same ones he prepared in 1855 cannot be conclusively determined, but presumably they are, while the German lec- tures probably evolved from his reading and study in Germany. Although little evidence exists concerning the topics of his college lectures after the first year, Lowell's letters indicate the frequency of his lecturing. A course usually ran thirty-five2 or thirty-six lectures3 per term with two to four lectures each week.4 In addition to his Harvard duties, he served as a visiting lecturer at Cornell in 18695 6 and 1877.7 8 and at Johns Hopkins in 1870 He gave at least one lecture in New York City in 1857, and he mentioned 9 lecturing in Rochester in 1868. He, no doubt, supplemented 1Lowell spent the last half of 1855 and the first half of 1856 in Dresden, Germany, studying German and Span- ish, which he felt was necessary to qualify him for the Harvard professorship. 2223 Critic, September 19, 1891, p. 145. "I have to deliver thirty-five lectures in a winter at Harvard Col- lege. Now it takes just a lifetime to prepare thirty-five lectures. I lecture every other day, and the day on which I do not lecture I spend the time remembering that I have to lecture the next day." 3Norton, Letters, II, 64. 4Ibid., p. 48. 5Howe, New Letters, pp. 127-28, 134-35. Lowell was to arrive on May 26 to deliver twelve lectures. 6 Norton, Letters, II, 56. 7Ibid., pp. 192-93. This was a four-week series in which Lowell lectured on poetry. 8Ibid., I, 277. 9Howe, New Letters, p. 127. 72 his income frequently in this way. While this quite extensive lecturing career is sig- nificant in itself, other factors conducive to Lowell's development as a lecturer should be pointed out. Scudder suggests that his training in the classroom contributed greatly to his success in England as an after-dinner speaker.l Certainly his thirty-year involvement with Phi Beta Kappa . . . 2 was also a contributing factor in his success as a speaker. An account from one of the meetings shows Lowell's use of an anecdote to make a point: Lowell like Abraham Lincoln was fond of hinting in a pungent anecdote doubts . . . he did not care for the moment to express outright. Thus when the elective system began to be a burning question at Harvard, and extremists were inclined to preach an absolute freedom of choice in undergraduate studies, Lowell was asked, at a Phi Beta Kappa dinner, for his opinion on the question. "Well," he said, with a twinkle in his eye, "I have been thinking that the Faculty might meet with the same difficulty that an old landlord whom I knew once did. He had a great many original gas— tronomic theories; and confided to me, once, his conviction that ordinary ducks could be made to attain precisely the same flavor as canvas-backed ducks by feeding them largely on celery-seed. I asked him why he did not try the experiment and he replied mournfully that he had often endeavored to; but, said he, "the trouble is the blamed things won't eat the seed!"3 1Scudder,pp. cit., II, 264. 2Howard, pp, pip., p. 1. See also Howe, New Letters, pp. 147-48. He held the office of president of the Harvard Chapter from 1869 to 1871. Lowell's predecessor was Judge Hoar who became a member of Grant's cabinet early in 1869. Ibid., p. 154. Lowell passed the presidency to R. H. Dana in 1871. 3 The Critic, September, 1891, p. 144. 73 His own comment concerning his speaking on these occasions suggests that he did little preparation, speaking extempor- aneously or impromptu as he did later in England: I wonder at my own audacity when I remember how I used to get up as President of the Phi Beta or the Alumni and trust to the sppr of the moment. Yet I am alive to tell you so! Miscellaneous speaking Lowell spent sixteen years in continuous teaching, took part in the extracurricular Phi Beta Kappa and Alumni Club duties, and participated in outside lecturing, thus devoting a third of his life to speaking to small groups. He became a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 18552 and the Massachusetts Historical Society in 1863.3 His position as editor of the Atlantic Monthly_1ed him to attend Atlantic Club dinners, which were held during the early years of the magazine's existence. Contributors to the magazine were invited as guests of the publisher, and, as editor, Lowell was called on to do some public speaking and possibly to preside over dinners.4 He was also a member of the Saturday Club, a group of literary men, which included many of the Atlantic Club members.5 They met on the last 1Norton, Letters, II, 323. 2Scudder, pp. cit., I, 446. 31bido , pp 0 446-449 0 Francis H. Underwood, The Poet and the Man (Boston: Lee and Shepard Publishers, 1893), pp. 51-55. 5Scudder, pp, cit., I, 446-449. we and as! f .a. v" ‘A w “v Ug‘ i C 74 Saturday of each month, and here again Lowell probably took part in extemporaneous speaking activities. Later Speaking Diplomatic ppeaking For the beginning three years of his diplomatic career, Lowell mentioned only one speaking occasion. No doubt, his speaking was curtailed by the language barrier of his Spanish assignment. He was asked to join the Spanish National Academy, and upon his acceptance in November of 1878 he gave a short speech in Spanish.1 His transfer to England in 1880 greatly accelerated his speaking activities. His immense popularity put him in great demand as a speaker. As Scudder points out, the politics in England were handled differently from American politics. Whereas the American politician went directly to the press to promulgate an idea, the British politician went to a dinner, cornerstone ceremony, or some other so- cial function and made a speech. The newspapers gave most speeches of this kind wide coverage, and despite the fact that the speech might not fit the occasion and might be poorly delivered, it would, nevertheless, be effective through its press coverage.2 In a situation of this type Lowell's background almost assured him of success. With lHowe, New Letters, p. 239. 2Scudder, pp. cit., II, 246. 'n. 75 no political axes to grind, he could devote himself to the theme of the occasion, and possibly for this reason, he gained a reputation that eluded many politicians, who often bent the occasion to fit their theme. Of all the speaking he did in England, his famous "Democracy” address as president of the Birmingham and Mid- land Institute was certainly his best known, and the only political speech that he made in England.1 His speaking encompassed a great variety of occasions, however. He ad- dressed two literary societies: the Wordsworth Society as president, and the Browning Society as guest speaker. He spoke before several other organizations such as the Edinburgh Philosophical Institution, American Actors in England, the Provincial Newspaper Society, the Workmen's 1On this occasion he defended democracy and gave only positive arguments in respect to it. As he pointed out in his ”Independent in Politics" speech: "I felt it incumbent on me to dwell on the good points and favorable aspects of democracy as I had seen them practically illus- trated in my native land. I chose rather that my discourse should suffer through inadequacy than run the risk of seem- ing to forget what Burke calls 'that salutary prejudice called our country,‘ and that obligation which forbids one to discuss family affairs before strangers." Boston Post, April 14, 1888, p. 1. No texts have been discovered, no comments in letters, and no newspaper accounts relate to any other political speeches in England. The possibility that he spoke on English politics while serving in the capacity of American Ambassador is not likely. It is hardly feasible that he would risk becoming involved in English politics. LeClair, on page fifty of his disserta- tion, American Men pg Letters i3 England, refers to "Democ- racy" as the most famous of all the political speeches that he gave in the line of duty. As nearly as this writer could determine, ”Democracy" was his only political speech while in office. . to .n .\~ .§ 76 Peace Association, and the London Chamber of Commerce. He spoke at Dulwich College and twice at Cambridge University—- once for the Emmanuel College Commemoration and again for the opening of a new archeological building. He delivered several commemoration addresses, including those of Long- fellow, Gray, Fielding, Coleridge, and Stanley. He addressed his countrymen in England after the death of President Garfield, but he was in greatest demand as an after-dinner speaker. Lecturing_ppg_occasional speaking After leaving the English Ministry, Lowell continued speaking in America in much the same vein as he had in Eng- land, with commemoration, dedication, and after-dinner speeches as his staples. One aspect of his American speaking differed from his diplomatic addresses. He again became involved in political speaking, with copyright, tariff reform, and political independence becoming primary themes. He gave a speech in Concord on literature, dedicated a library in 1 Chelsea, Massachusetts, gave some authors' readings and shared the platform with Oliver Wendell Holmes when Lowell 1Scudder, pp, cit., II, 333-34, 361-368. Further material is available in the Huntington Library, where a printed text from one of these readings is located: "Selec~ tions for Public Readings, 1886." Call number 89168. Let— tered on the cover in ink is "very rare." See also zpp. Critic, August 22, 1891, p. 99. "His presidency of the -—-""1"- . American Copyright League was by no means an honorary posi- tion. He not only spoke and presided at one of the Authors' Readings at Chickering Hall in this city, but visited Wash- ington with other supporters of the movement to appear be- fore a Committee of the Senate." 77 delivered the "Two Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the Founding of Harvard Address."1 He gave another series of lectures for the Lowell Institute in 1887 and continued to speak through the summer of 1889. He returned to England four times after 1885 and engaged in speaking each time. Illness kept him in America after 1889 and prevented his filling several speaking en- gagements which he had scheduled in his last years. §peaking_Practice and Theory Attitude towards Speaking An interesting disclosure of this study was Lowell's dislike for public speaking. In letter after letter he bemoaned the horror of "finding something to say." Although Hale relates that Lowell enjoyed speaking,2 nothing could be farther from the truth. His letters from early January, 1855, to January, 1888, confront the reader with constant complaints arising from his difficulty with preparation of speeches. Lowell on several occasions attributed his dislike for speaking to his shyness: I had to preside over our commencement dinner, a service that seems simple enough, but which worries 1This address will be referred to as the "Harvard Address" for the remainder of this dissertation. 2Edward Everett Hale, James Russell Lowell and His Friends (New York: Houghton, Mifflin and Co., 1905), p. 102. V... I!!!" 1“ 78 a shy man like myself to a degree that would make you laugh.1 If I could only so far conquer my shyness as to be able to stand up and let myself run, I would go with pleasure.2 Of course I had to make a speech, and of course I made a worse one than I ought, for my shyness about such things has grown to such a passionate repug- nance that it won't even let me think calmly of what I am to say. A few close friends recognized this aspect of his character in his social relations. Theodore Watts, who knew him in London, related an incident of his shyness: He used to speak of himself as being an exceedingly shy man by nature. On one occasion I asked him to lunch with me to meet an eminent man of letters whom he had never seen and wanted to see. Noticing that he hesitated, I said--in irony of course--I am afraid that the American Minister who has jostled most of the grandees in Europe feels shy. He said, "I do, but never with grandees."4 A letter from T. W. Higginson to Horace Scudder depicts a slightly different aspect of Lowell's social shyness: I remember that Caroline King used to say that Lowell was uneasy in any circle where he was not 1Norton, Letters, II, 143. 2Ibid., p. 323. 3Howe, New Letters, pp. 318-19. For additional comments by Lowell concerning his dislike for speaking see Norton, Letters, I, 224, 278, 294, II, 290, 318, 319, 322, 352, 372; Howe, New Letters, pp. 135,151-52, 271, 294, 324; Scudder, pp, cit., II 337, 360, 352- 353. 4Theodore Watts, London Athenaeum, August 22, 1891. Found in Lowell Scrapbook at Houghton Library, Harvard, page unknown. See also Francis Underwood, The Poet and the Man; Recollections and Appreciations of— James Russell Lowell *(Boston: Lee and Shepard, 1893), p. 267. 79 the central figure. He was absorbed with working out his own problem which was doubtless one of hereditary difficulty.1 With one exception those who wrote about Lowell's shyness never mentioned that it was noticeable in his speaking or in any way affected his delivery. The exception, a former student, Nathaniel Shaler, found a cleverly hidden self- consciousness about Lowell: He appeared to try to hide it even from himself, by contriving a garment of naturalness which he wore cleverly, but it did not hide the self-con- sciousness which tormented him. As I learned after— ward, he had a devouring hunger for praise, which seemed necessary to lift him out of the self-crit- ical humor which possessed him. While I felt this defect in the man in such a measure that at times it made me fairly ache to look at him, his lectures fascinated me; he gave me indeed my first contact with a man of high literary quality, with something of true genius in him. Lowell's shyness was apparently concealed from his audiences because no mention is ever made of it in the ac- counts of his speaking, which leads the writer to conclude that his shyness probably affected his preparation and his desire to Speak, but after the decision was made to speak, it apparently did not affect his delivery or his ethical appeal. The shyness never left him, and, indeed, seemed to become more worrisome to him as he grew older. 1An unpublished letter from T. w. Higginson to Horace Scudder, located in the Scudder Papers in the Hough- ton Library, Harvard University. 2Shaler, loc. cit. 80 Motivation for Speaking Lowell was motivated to speak by (l) friendship, (2) the many offices and memberships he held, (3) his pro- fessorship, (4) the need to supplement his income, and (5) a sense of duty. Because of the dislike he had for speaking, in many cases only the persistence of his close friends could per- suade him to accept speaking engagements.1 His offices included the presidencies of Phi Beta Kappa at Harvard, the Wordsworth Society, the Birmingham- Midland Institute, the COpyright League, the American Archae- ological Institute, and the Modern Language Association. He was a delegate to the Republican National Convention and a presidential elector. He was honored with six doc- torates from the Universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Edin— burgh, Harvard, St. Andrews, and Bologna. He was an Over— seer of Harvard, A Fellow of the American Academy, The Royal Society of Edinburgh and the Royal Society of Literature (London), a member of the Massachusetts Historical Society, and the French and Spanish Academies. He was Ambassador to Spain and England and a distinguished visiting professor to both Cornell and Johns Hopkins Universities. Most of these memberships, honors, and offices required him to speak. Although Lowell made a comfortable living from teach- ing, writing, and editing, he was never wealthy and generally 1Infra, p. 94. 81 had need for money. As was noted before, he often relied on the platform to supplement his income. Despite the fact that his fees reached as high as 250 dollars per lecture in later years,1 and though he was much in demand as a speaker, most of his speaking was in fulfillment of his various offices and memberships, or through a sense of duty: ”I am to speak on politics and somebody ought to tell the truth," was his comment when asked to speak in Chicago on American politics.2 His sense of duty was probably the inducement for much of his speaking in England. As Ambassador, Lowell began a one-man campaign to promote better relations between the United States and England. This theme appears often in his English addresses and many of his later American addresses. Physical Appearance James Russell Lowell's physical appearance changed greatly from his early lecturing period to his more dignified later years. Julian Hawthorne described his early impression of Lowell as follows: In those days Mr. Lowell was a broad—shouldered, vigorous man, some five feet nine inches, perhaps in height, and weighing about 160 pounds. His reddish beard was broad and thick, his eyebrows heavy, and his gray eyes were now keen and pene- trating, now genial and humorous in their expres- sion. His voice was clear and finely modulated, 1Norton, Letters, II, 331. See also Howe, New Let— ters, p. 117. 2Howe, New Letters, p. 295. 82 his laugh hearty and contagious.l A Wisconsin newspaper reporter looking at the same man wrote, "Mr. Lowell is a singular appearing man-~wears a ferocious moustache and parts his long, straight, black hair in the middle, giving him a strangely uncouth and ab- original look."2 A second journalist describes him as "a sort of regal personage, dressed in homespun, revealing a massive frame and powerful, well-turned limbs, and a sly twinkle in his eye, indication that the aforesaid regal personage, looks now and then at the funny side of things."3 In 1877, when Francis Child shared a lecture plat- form with Lowell at Johns Hopkins, he had lost his "aborigm inal look." Child wrote in a letter, "J. L.'s good looks and insinuating ways . . . carry off the palm entirely from my genius and learning, but then I am as much fascinated as anybody and don't mind."4 William Dean Howells gave another picture of Lowell, contrasting his appearance after his return from England with a description of him as he was before: I see him in a sack coat and rough suit which he wore on all outdoor occasions, with heavy shoes 1Julian Hawthorne, "Lowell in a Chatty Mood," The World, October 24, 1886, quoted in McFadyen, op, cit., p. 1840 ' 2Daily Democrat, Madison, Wisconsin, April 6, 1855, quoted in McFadyen, op, cit., p. 176. 3Wisconsin State Journal, "James Russell Lowell" (an editorial), April 7, 1855, quoted in McFadyen, 10c. cit. 4Scudder, op, cit., II, 214. 83 and round hat. I never saw him with a high hat on till he came home after his diplomatic stay in London; then he became rather rigorously correct in his costume, and as conventional as he had for— merly been indifferent. In both epochs he was apt to be gloved, and the strong, broad hands, which left the sensation of their vigor for some time after they had clasped yours, were notably white. At the earlier period, he still wore his auburn hair somewhat long; it was darker than his beard, which was branching and full, and more straw-col- ored than auburn, as were his thick eyebrows; neither hair nor beard was then touched with gray, as I now remember. When he uncovered his straight, wide, white forehead showed itself one of the most beauti- ful that could be; his eyes were gay with humor and alert with all intelligence. He had an enchant- ing smile, a laugh that was exquisite music. Every- thing about him expressed the strenuous physical condition: he would not wear an overcoat in the coldest Cambridge weather; at all times he moved vigorously, and walked with a quick step, lifting his feet well from the ground. While his manner of dressing changed considerably after his ambassadorship, his energetic physical bearing remained much the same throughout his life. Creativeness and Preparation Although he was a noted critic of the writing of others, Lowell was not particularly introspective or analyt- ical about his own. His theory concerning his composition of poetry was rather mystical, feeling that it supernaturally 2 "came" to him. To Thomas Hughes he wrote, "My poems have written themselves and I cannot account for them."3 Writing 1William Dean Howells, "A Personal Retrospect of James Russell Lowell," Scribner's Monthly, September, 1900, p. 270. 2Norton, Letters, II, 10. 31bid., p. 332. 84 prose was, as he put it, “Invita Minerva," i.e., without the muse, and he felt as if he were "wasting time and keep- ing back my message."1 But of all his different types of writing, addresses and lectures seemed to be the most diffi- cult. To W. J. Stillman he wrote during his 1855 prepara- tion of the Lowell Institute Lectures, "I am not used to being tied to hours or driven. I have always waited upon the good genius-—and he will not come for being sent after by express, so I am in a fgggg'half the time."2 Lowell's habit of finishing his speeches at the last moment might seem to indicate that he had difficulty meet— ing deadlines dictated by speaking situations, but this line of reasoning is hardly credible when one remembers the many years that he met editorial deadlines without com- plaint, nor does the address form seem a feasible stumbling- block, when, as a poet, he constantly worked within the confines of rhyme and meter. A reasonable explanation might be found in his method of creation. Poetry seems to have formed in his mind when he was inspired by some idea or event, and what he called the "muse" was his subconscious constructing his poetry.3 A. Lawrence Lowell wrote, "He lA. Lawrence Lowell, 22, cit., p. 99. 2Norton, Letters, I, 222. 3Brewster Ghifelin, The Creative Process, A EZE? pgsium (Berkeley, Calif.: UniverSity of California Press, 1952 This book discusses the creative process in the lives of several creative men, and in each case the sub- conscious played an important part. Lowell is not mentioned, but the creative process appears to be the same. 85 carried poems in his head, sometimes for years and only wrote them down when in the mood."1 James Russell Lowell, writing to Godkin, lamented, "I had some rhymes in my head one day about a man with a 'policy,' which had a hopeful air about 'em, but I lost 'em clean out of my memory while I was hearing my classes mistranslate Italian and mispro— nounce Spanish."2 In the case of prose, he frequently chose his own subject matter and submitted it to editors who were eager to print his work. However, with lectures and addresses, the subject was selected in advance, and, in most cases, dictated by the occasion. Having to create within the limits of a specific tOpic went against his normal method of crea- tion and made the preparation a painful process of "getting" an idea instead of letting his subconscious mind develop one at leisure. Of course, an explanation of Lowell's creaa tive sluggishness in lecture preparation can be, at best, conjecture, but the perplexity that preparation caused him is not. His two most painful experiences occurred at the beginning and near the end of his speaking career, indicat- ing that he never overcame the problem. A chronological presentation of excerpts from six letters illustrates Lowell's earliest struggle with preparation. 1A. Lawrence Lowell, op, cit., p. 92. 2Norton, Letters, I, 370. 86 To W. J. Stillman on December 7, 1854: I am now so overwhelmed with lectures and Grub Street that I have literally not time to copy the introductory verses. To Miss Loring on January 4, 1855: I have been worked to death, and in wretched spirits about my lectures, which "would not" march as I wished them to, for all I could do. I am beginning now to be able to be carried away a little-—so I may get something into them.2 To Charles Norton on January 7, 1855: This ticket will admit you to . . . the sac- rifice of Iphigenia (Iphigenia, by particular request, Mr. J. R. Lowell). It is known that this interesting ceremony was originally performed for the sake of raising the wind, and Mr. L. will communicate a spirit of classic reality to the performance by going through it with the same end in view. . . . I have just got the flood on, and feel as if I m§ght deliver a course that will not disgrace me. To W. J. Stillman on January 11, 1855: I have been so fearfully busy with my lectures! and so nervous about them, too! I had never spoken in public, there was a great rush for tickets . . . only one in five applicants being supplied and a1- together I was taken quite aback. I have six yet to write, and am consequently very busy and pressed for time. As far as the public are concerned, I have suc- ceeded; but the lectures keep me awake and make me lean. Norton, Letters, I, 217. NH Ibid., p. 219. Scudder, op, cit., I, 370-71. boo Ibid., p. 372. See also Norton, Letters, I, 372. 87 To W. J. Stillman on January 25, 1855: I have delivered five of my lectures now and on Friday shall have half finished my course. Mean- while I have only a week's start, so that I have to work hard-what with the inevitable interruptions. To W. J. Stillman, dated February, 1855: I shall have done grinding for the Philistines next Saturday, and it will give meé I need not say, the greatest pleasure to see you. After thirty-one years of lecturing experience the process was as painful in 1886 as it had been in 1855. Four months before the Harvard Address, while he was still in England, he wrote Charles Norton: I am distressed with the thought of that abominable address. I have not yet accepted and would decline could I give a better reason that that I have noth- ing to say. Nobody ever thinks that of any impor- tance. What have I done to have this fly thrust into my pot of ointment which grows more precioug every day by diminution like the Sibyl's leaves. Three months later, on October 6, 1886, he had se- cluded himself at his daughter's farm to write, but had made no progress. I have been mulling over my address and today mean to break into it in earnest by blocking out an Exordium. It doesn't take hold of me and I always feared it wouldn't. It isn't exactly in my line. To fill so large a bowl as a hour I shall have to draw on the cow with the iron tail-~and pumping 1Norton, Letters, I, 222. 21bid. 3 Norton did not publish this section of the letter, but Scudder printed it; op, cit., II, 337. The original is in the Houghton Library at Harvard University in the Norton Collection. 88 is exercise that always wearies me beyond most.1 A little more than two weeks later, and just eighteen days before the event, he wrote: I am in despair about my address. I have written a page only and made some notes. The bayonets must prick me more sharply from behind to get me going. Why did the Lord make us with ten fingers and toes that we might count up to fifties and hundreds and so make ourselves capable of this superstition of anniversaries? Had He curtailed our left foot, for instance of one toe, we should never have missed it except as a gout-trap, and could never have di- vided any multiple of nine so as to suit our stupid love of symmetry. The Japanese might have done it, but nobody else. There would have been no Cornelius, and Napoleon would have lost his pyramidal allusion, but I see no other harm it would have done. Five days later, on October 26, he wrote Norton again: The address drags like an ox-sled caught away from home by a January thaw. It will not take hold of me, do what I may. I have written a fair share of it, but can't conquer our mutual alienation. My pitcher has gone once too often to the well. If I could scoop up a few drops with a shard of it, I were happy. But the well itself is dry:3 It is not known when he finally completed the writing of the address, but his letters plainly show the agony of his preparation. However, in order not to give an erroneous impression, it should be explained that Lowell did enjoy some aspects of preparation. Formulating his idea and geta ting it organized on paper were the distasteful aspects for him, but the reading preparation he often enjoyed. To Miss 1Scudder, 22, cit., II, 337. 2Norton, Letters, II, 318. 31bid., p. 319. 89 Norton he wrote in 1870, "I have been studying old French metrical romances and the like, and have done an immense deal of reading-for which I have a talent, if for nothing else."1 Often in preparing for his college lectures he would spend his vacation reading on an average of ten to twelve hours a day.2 Again in 1874, he wrote that he had read Barbour's ”Brus“ in eight unbroken hours of reading, and went on to say that he had averaged ten hours a day for two months, getting "so absorbed that I turn grudgingly to anything else."3 He felt that as a professor he should be learned and proceeded to read a great deal, making a systematic study of literature,4 partially because he en- joyed reading and partially because he felt the need for complete preparation. Yesterday I began my lectures and came off better than I expected, for I am always a great coward beforehand. I hate lecturing, for I have discov- ered (entre nouETmthat it is almost impossible to learn all_about anything. Lowell may have been apprehensive concerning his preparation, and he may have been inwardly shy concerning large group contact, but it should be pointed out that I-‘ Ibid., p. 64. N Loc. cit. Ibid., p. 130. A. Lawrence Lowell, 32, cit., p. 94. U190) Norton, Letters, I, 294. 9O preparation was also his strongest asset. His knowledge of the New England audience was unsurpassed and is well attested to by the success of the Biglow Papers as well as considerable current scholarship.1 Spiller, in his Literary_Historygg£.£hg_United States, characterizes Lowell as being as sure of his audience as a minister composing his Sunday sermon.2 Spiller made this statement in refer- ence to reader acceptance of Lowell's verse; but the audi- ence was the same, for those who read his poetry were the people who came to hear him speak. Audience In delivering the Lowell Institute Lectures of 1887, Lowell observed what he must have thought was a primary factor in speaking to a popular audience on a scholarly plane: "It is the business of the lecturer to treat his audience as M. Jourdain wished to be treated in respect to the Latin language—-to take it for granted that they know, but talk to them as if they didn't."3 lSeveral scholarly works have been devoted to Lowell's knowledge of the New Englander and to the philological ex- pertness with which he explored it. James Walker Downer, "Features of New England Rustic Pronunciation in James Russell Lowell's Biglow Papers" (unpublished dissertation, Univer- sity of Michigan, 1957-58). Robert Reinhardt, "James Russell Lowell's Appraisal of American Life and Thought" (unpublished dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1951). Arthur w. M. Voss, "The Biglow Papers of James Russell Lowell" (unpub- lished dissertation, Yale University, 1941). Russell B. Nye, "Lowell and American Speech," Philological Quarterly, XVIII (1939), 249-2560 ZSpiller 3:93;” 22. cit., p. 588. 3Works, VII, 188. 91 Lowell sometimes became irritated with his audience, as perhaps all lecturers have, and wrote, "I remember one phrase of his [Feltham] that tickled me--the 'spacious ears' of the elephant. It fits another animal, and sometimes when I have been ass-fixiated by an audience I have been tempted to beg them to 'lend me their spacious ears.”l Another time he wrote, "In composing one is confronted with his audience, which he cannot help measuring by the dullest of his fellow-citizens, and this is far from inspiring."2 This is not, however, indicative of Lowell's general atti- tude. He realized that the audience's estimate of what they heard was the all-important factor in his success. In 1853 he was in disfavor with his reading public, and their lack of interest caused his poem, "Our Own," to be discontinued in Putnam's Magazine. He wrote: Authors ought certainly to be as sensible as shop- keepers, and to know that if the public does not want their wares, it will not buy them any sooner for being called fool and blockhead.3 He was also aware that different audiences had dif— ferent expectations. He found that a centennial audience expected the "pith and marrow of a hundred years" from the speaker.4 The British audience expected humor, since he Scudder, 22, cit., II, 360. Norton, Letters, II, 150. DONE-4 Ibid., I, 201. uh Ibid., II, 150. 92 was considered by them to be America's foremost humorist. But, curiously enough, Lowell's most frequent observation was of the English "dullness." His sense of humor led him to take advantage of the English flaw. "I often indulge in the rhetorical figure called irony in conversing with the natives of the British Isles because they are so delight- 1 fully obtuse to it," he wrote his daughter in 1877. Still later he observed: I think the true key to this eagerness for lions [enthusiasm for Buffalo 3111 by the British Public]-- even of the poodle sort is the dullness of the av- erage English mind. I never come back here without being struck by it. Henry James said it always stupefied him at first when he came back from the Continent. What it craves beyond everything is a sensation, anything that will serve as a Worcester- shire sauce to a sluggish palate. We of finer and more touchy fibre get our sensations cheaper, and do not find Wordsworth's emotions over a common flower so very wonderful. People are dull enough on our side of the ocean-stream also, God wot; but here [in England], unless I know my people, I never dare to let my mind gambol. Most of them, if I do, look on like the famous deaf man at the dancers, wondering to what music I am capering. They call us superficial. Let us thank God . . . that our nerves are nearer the surface, not so deeply em- bedded in fat or muscle that wit must take a pitch— fork to us.2 Probably Lowell's most crucial "fear" was of boring an audience. He seemed always to gauge his success by the effect he had on a particular audience. During the 1855 Lowell Institute Lectures he wrote, "I delivered my first lecture to a crowded hall . . . and I believe I have succeeded. 1Howe, New Letters, pp. 227-28. 2Norton, Letters, II, 377-78. 93 The lecture was somewhat abstract, but I kept the audience perfectly still for an hour and a quarter."1 On another occasion, he observed jokingly that a lecture is good if an audience likes it.2 Audience appreciation alone would hardly be a criterion for value judgments by Lowell, but it indicates that he understood the value of audience ac- ceptance. In his odes, he set up the rhyme schemes in a manner which would be least likely to bore his audience.3 When he refused to read a poem at the Phi Beta Kappa meeting in 1849, he again illustrated his sensitivity concerning boredom. He expressed his dislike for a program in which the orator always appeared before the poet and wearied the audience to distraction before the poet had a chance to speak: Should not the "Literary Committee" take it into consideration that attentive capacities of an audience are limited? Either so tether the orators that they shall neither graze upon nor trample that share of the common paddock which belongs of right to Pegasus. . . . Do the orators believe that the ears of their audience are so long that a certain amount of wooden talk is need- ful by way of handle, as it were, in order to make the point of their discourse reach down to the tympanum? Certain it is that, if the hearers had their way, the poet would literally find, on most occasions, a clear stage and no favor. For there is a certain point of time (say quarter past 2 o'clock) at which they become instructively satis- fied that their dinner is cooked and cooling, and 1Ibid., I, 220-21. 2Howe, New Letters, p. 117. 3Scudder, 22, cit., II, 65-74. 94 after that one might as well recite verses to men whose heads do grow beneath their shoulders, and whose ears consequently are in their bellies. . . . This crisis may come a trifle earlier with country members, and later with those from the city, but a series of observations has convinced me that quarter past two is a fair average. Year after next let the poet come first, and let the selection be honestly made with a special eye to avenging the wrongs of our "oppressed race." Choose some author of "Washington, an Epic," with an eighteen inch bore, some McHenry wont to gradu~ ate his verses by the longaeval scale of the Ante- diluvians, and let him be dined amply beforehand by subscription of poets who have come in to the nutshells and melonrinds of former anniversaries, and then let him turn ad libitum the crank of his pitiless and unweariable barrelwagon.l Lowell's humorous idea of revenge leaves little doubt concerning his feelings about audience fatigue. Often in the opening sentences of his after-dinner speeches he told his audiences that he would be brief. On other occa- sions he expressed a reticence to speak because he had noth- ing to say. I don't wish to be there on the 27th but will be for your sake-—though it be wicked to speak when one has nothing to say. The monkeys our cousins are more.conscientious. Hearing of his selection to speak at the 250th Anniversary of Harvard's foundation, he wrote, "I have not yet accepted and would decline could I give a better reason than that I have nothing to say. Nobody ever thinks that of any lHowe, New Letters, pp. 33-34. 2Unpublished section of a letter to Charles Norton, dated August 13, 1885, Houghton Library, Harvard University. 95 importance."1 This plainly illustrates Lowell's feeling that content was all important to audience interest. He wrote of the same address, ”To fill so large a bowl as an hour I shall have to draw on the cow with the iron tail-- and pumping is exercise that always wearies me beyond most."2 His knowledge of the Boston audience demonstrates this idea still further: A Boston audience is like every other in this--that they like a serious discussion of any topic, and have an instinct whether it will be well handled or no. We have had a course of mountebanks this winter, and people will be all the more hungry for something serious and instructive.3 Structure There are few references to the structure of Lowell's addresses, and he apparently had no theory of his own in this area. However, he wrote of "blocking out his exordium" in his cab and trusting to the spur of the moment for the rest,4 which according to him was his normal preparation on several earlier occasions. In another instance, writing of a speech he had recently delivered, he remembered hearing several "ominous cracks under me as I hurried over the slender and shaky bridge which led from my exordium to my peroration."S Scudder, 22, cit., II, 337. Ibid. Norton, Letters, II, 55. Stone, 22, cit., p. 63. U'IbUJNI-J Norton, Letters, II, 253. 96 This is scant evidence to prove that he favored classic arrangement, nor would it be possible to determine from these references whether he preferred any particular rhet— orician as a guide for outlining his speeches, since he had read Aristotle, Cicero, and Quintilian. That his know- ledge of speech structure was not limited to mere use of terms is evidenced by his comments concerning Emerson's Phi Beta Kappa oration in 1867. He wrote: Emerson's oration was more disjointed than usual, even for him. It began nowhere and ended every- where, and yet, as always with that divine man, it left you feeling that something beautiful had passed that way--something more beautiful than any- thing else, like the rising and setting of stars. Every possible criticism might have been made on it but one-~that it was not noble. There was a tone in it that awakened all elevating associations. He boggled, he lost his place, he had to put on his glasses; but it was as if a creature from some fairer world had lost his way in our fogs, and it was our fault, not his. It was chaotic, but it was all such stuff as stars are made of, and you couldn't help feeling that, if you waited awhile, all that was nebulous would be whirled into planets, and would assume the mathematical gravity of the sys- tem. Logic To W. J. Stillman he wrote concerning Ruskin's logic, "He is a good logician, but a bad 'reasoner.' Give him his premises and he is all right. Now, in Aesthetics every man 2 more or less assumes his premises and must do so." 1Norton, Letters, I, 393-94. 21bid., p. 280. 97 In writing to Godkin, he found one of Anna Dickinson's addresses illogical. I enclose you a paragraph from an harangue of Miss Dickinson's at the Boston Music Hall last night-- Blst December. I don't send it because you will care for what she says about the Nation-which is weak enough-—but because it will give you a chance to say a timely word on an important subject. This theory of settling things by what anybody may choose to consider ”humanity," instead of trying to find out how they may be settled by knowledge, is a fal- lacy too common in this country. For your guidance, I add that there were some very good points in the lecture-better, indeed, than I expected. But it is very droll to me that Miss Dickinson should see that her "humanity" style of setting things right (by instinct, namely) is the very shillelah method she condemns so savagely in the Irish.1 Style One thing that bothered Lowell about lecturing was the absolute time limits assigned. He felt that time limi- tations adversely affected style. Yet whoever undertakes to lecture must adapt his discourse to the law which requires such exercises to be precisely sixty minutes long, just as a cer- tain standard of inches must be reached by one who would enter the army. If one has been studying all his life how to be terse, how to suggest rather than to expound, how to contract rather than dilate, something like a strain is put upon the conscience by this necessity of giving the full measure of words, without reference to other considerations which a judicious ear may esteem of more importance. Instead of saying things compactly and pithily, so that they may be easily carried away, one is tempted into a certain generosity and circumambience of phrase, which, if not adapted to conquer time, may at least compel him to turn his glass and admit a drawn game. It is so much harder to fill an hour 1Ibid., II, 14-15. 98 than to empty one!1 Lowell felt that style was natural and instinctive. He wrote the following to Harriet Beecher Stowe. My advice is to follow your own instincts--to stick to nature, and to avoid what people commonly call the "Ideal," for that, and beauty, and pathos, and success all lie in the simply natural. . . . There are ten thousand people who can write "ideal" things for one who can see, and feel, and reproduce nature and character. . . . What made Shakespeare so great? Nothing but eyes and-~faith in them. . . . I see nowhere more often than in authors the truth that men love their opposites. Dickens insists upon being tragic, and makes shipwreck.2 For the best possible style Lowell advocated the following: The most noticeable quality of the mere style is its unnoticeability. Balance and repose are its two leading characteristics. . . . To be simple is to be classical.3 Here again is the primary effect of Lowell's classical back— ground¥exerting itself in his love of simplicity, which he greatly admired in the Greeks. This attitude, that lectur- ing style was in direct opposition to good simple style, may be another reason that he was more comfortable speaking within the framework of the shorter extemporaneous speech. Delivery Lowell employed two types of delivery: academic reading and extemporaneous or impromptu speaking. Edward 1Works, VII, 185—86. 2The Critic, July 5, 1890, p. 11. Printed under the caption, "From an Old Letter." 3James Russell Lowell, The Round Table (Boston: R. G. Badger, 1913), p. 200. 99 Everett Hale, in James Russell Lowell and His Friends, de- scribed hishacademic reading style of delivery as follows: Mr. Lowell never imitates the stump speaker and never falls into the drollery of the comedian. His pronunciation is clear and precise; the modu- lation of his voice was kept in natural compass. He read like one who had something of importance to utter, and the just emphasis was felt in his penetrating tone. There were no oratorical cli- maxes, and no pitfalls set for applause.1 This same account of Lowell's delivery appears in several places besides Hale's biography. It is quoted in Lowell's death notice in the Colonade, Albert Mordell reprinted it in the introduction to the Rowfant Club's reproduction of the 1855 Lowell Institute Lectures. Reporters covering Lowell's Western Tour in Madison, Wisconsin, made similar comments: Thewlecture of James Russell Lowell, last evening was one the very best of the course delivered be- fore the Institute. It was rich in sentiment, philosophy and humor.--His style is excellent, his delivery easy, without gesticulation, and has the fgeedom of high-toned and agreeable conversa~ tion. Another wrote: He uses the simple, straightforward Saxon, and reads his lectures without attempting to add to the ef- fect of his language by any of the graces or tricks of oratory. His readings from old ballads were admirable and brought out, with fine effect, their bold and picturesque features.3 1Hale, 22, cit., p. 114. 2Daily Democrat, Madison, Wisconsin, loc. cit. 31bid. 100 An indication that his reading delivery changed very little over a thirty-one year period is an account of his Harvard address: His oratorical delivery was a perfect expression of perfect gentlemanhood. It had the "temperance which gave it smoothness." His voice, which was a most agreeable baritone in its musical register, was used in the quiet, earnest modulations of a cultivated man addressing a group of interested friends. He rarely made a gesture. His was not the temperament that could face a mob, like Wendell Phillips; but he could furnish that matchless ora- tor with poetic sentiments which often winged the piercing darts of his eloquence. His was not the gift of commanding promiscuous assemblies, which is the splendid possession of his friend, George William Curtis. Lowell had little of the essen- tially popular fibre. He was a public speaker of the finished academic and after-dinner sort, rather than an orator in the amplest sense of the term. He needed [lacked] the power to rise into eloquence of passionate and ringing speech to be quite per- fect as an orator.1 In the late 1880's Lowell participated in authors' readings, often sharing the platform with Oliver Wendell Holmes. In reading his own poems, he seems to have adapted his delivery to fit the content. It were superfluous to say that the two gentlemen read well; but this may be said, that a part of the charm consisted in a demonstration that verse may be read without the regulation hitch, gasp, and quaver of voice. . . . That expression is pos- sible without tremor or gush, or even appealing glances toward the ceiling, may be confidently asserted by all who had the pleasure of listening to these poets in their quotations from them- selves. . . . Dr. Holmes . . . put considerable of emphasis and a modicum of fire into his read- ing. . . . Mr. Lowell chose rather the monotone, 1"Lowell Editorial," p. 299. This periodical fea- ture was torn from a magazine with no other identification. It is among the Lowell papers at the Houghton Library. 101 with a clear-cut enunciation, as if his feeling were, "If these words will not of themselves yield my meaning, then 'perish the attempt!‘" He had to depart somewhat from this method, however, when it came to the reading of "The Courtin," and here his manner was mildl suggestive of that of his brother poet [Holmes§. These are probably valid criticisms of Lowell's "reading" delivery, since they were gathered from different sources over a period of thirty-one years and yet are similar in several respects. They all mention his pleasant voice, that he used a conversational tone, that he read well, that he used few gestures and that his delivery was not of the popular type. The Harvard Address criticism also stresses Lowell's lack of power for eloquence of the "passionate ringing sort," which would conform to a view he held of himself. He expressed a criticism of his own style of de- livery in an introduction to a Wordsworth lecture which he apparently delivered before a lyceum audience: In accepting an invitation to speak before you this evening, I confess that I felt a great deal of doubt whether I could make the things that interest mg, also interesting to you,--whether literary criticism were not a thing too remote from popular topics, perhaps too abstract in its nature to be profitably presented here. The Lyceum, it would appear, has in some measure departed from its virginal intenm tion and to a certain extent has begun to supply the place of the theatre where people go to be amused and are apt to be a little impatient if they are cheated of what they expect. It has trained a body of public speakers who know all the pulses of an audience and can move them to merriment or indig— nation as they list. Lecturing, like acting, has become an art and the starring system has naturally invaded the theatre, till there appeared to be no place left for quiet unprofessional people with 122g_§£itig, March 20, 1886, p. 149. 102 no gift of oratory, no knack at rousing applause, and no patent political medicine to advertise.1 The earlier accounts, the Harvard Address criticism, and his own estimate of his speaking talent indicate that his addresses were never written to "rouse applause" or to be "eloquent” in an emotional sense.2 His "reading" generally brought him excellent notices and considerable praise, but it was not always successful. There were critics who disliked his plain, unembellished delivery. An account of his Coleridge Commemoration Address was obviously written by a journalist who had heard him speak extemporaneously and felt that his reading delivery was poor by comparison: Mr. Lowell's speech preliminary to his unveiling the bust of Coleridge, which his countrymen had presented, was read instead of being delivered. This may perhaps have been a disappointment to those present who had any previous Opportunity of listening to one of the happiest of impromptu orators; but the educated public are certainly the gainers by those honorable scruples of literary conscience which induced him in this instance to give his thoughts that greater finish of form which they could only obtain from the pen, and which he rightly held the occasion to require. Thus per- fected, his address, which in any case no doubt would have been equally full of acute and sympa- thetic criticism, sparkled also with felicities 1Unpublished manuscript in the Houghton Library; one page written on the reverse side of a Dante examination, entitled “Wordsworth Opening." 2A. Lawrence Lowell, 22, git., pp. 83m84, wrote that emotional appeals were not characteristic of Lowell even in an emotional situation like anti-slavery writings. "In the first place his anti-slavery writings differ from those of his contemporaries by the fact that he never tries to harrow the reader's feelings by dwelling on the anguish of the slave. . . . He always appeals solely to the sentiment of heroism and manhood." 103 of diction, and abounded with that quiet humor which is hardly more constant or captivating even in Mr. Lowell's verse than in his prose.1 In the case of his Garfield Address, the critic was not nearly as kind. He reported that the address read beauti- fully in the newspapers but that "the speech was badly de- livered, and the Americans who were privileged to listen to it failed to perceive its beauty. All their applause was given to an Episcopalian bishop who had mastered the tricks of the platform."2 Lowell himself realized that his delivery was more effective when he addressed small groups and when he could use a conversational tone. He wrote to R. W. Gilder: I was disheartened by the size of the house. The sort of things I am apt to say are not exactly to be bawled and without bawling I might as well have expected to fill the Cave of Kentucky. Generally, when conditions were more favorable, he revealed a quickness and versatility of mind, and a certain native, spontaneous grace, both of words and manner, which were characteristic of him. He was "so truly genuine" that he could not fail to charm.4 1Critic, May 30, 1885, p. 261, reprinted from The Saturday Review. 2The S eaker, August 15, 1891. Newspaper clipping in Lowell papers at Houghton Library, page unknown. 3Norton, Letters, II, 372. 4Henry Stone, "Introduction," American Ideas for English Readers, James Russell Lowell TBoston: J. B. Cupples, 1892), p. x. 104 His impromptu delivery, compared to his reading delivery, received considerably more praise. Scudder wrote the The following of Lowell's speaking in England: It was natural that Lowell should be in demand on such occasions [dinners or societies], and it was inevitable that he should make a remarkable impression. He had for years cultivated the art of speaking to small assemblies when he had a con- genial subject and a responsive audience. He had the readiness of a practised writer, and he had above all a spontaneousness of nature which made him one of the best of conversationalists. It was but a slight remove from his lecture-room at Har- vard, or his study at Elmwood, to an English dinner- table, and the themes on which he was called upon to speak were very familiar to him. Literature, the common elements of English and American life, the distinctiveness of America, these were subjects on which he was at home, and he brought to his task a manner quiet yet finished by years of practice. Had set orations been his business, he would scarcely have made so remarkable an impression as he made by his off-hand speeches. Yet it must not be sup- posed that these were careless, impromptu affairs. He was helped by his readiness, but he did not rely upon it. He thought out carefully his little ad- dress, and sometimes wrote it out in advance even when he made no use of manuscript.1 Daily_Telegraph compared him to Charles Dickens: Literary ability and oratorical accomplishment are less commonly united in this country than in Mr. Lowell's own; but it may be doubted whether on either side of the Atlantic there has been any man of the first rank in literature who has at- tained to Mr. Lowell's acceptance and distinction as an after-dinner speaker since the death of Dickens.2 Sir James Rennell Rodd, a fellow diplomat, remembered Lowell as a speaker in his Social and Diplomatic Memories: I heard him deliver one of the most eloquent and ‘ finished speeches to which it had ever been my lscudder, pp. cit., II, 264—65. 2Daily Telegraph, London, August 13, 1891. 105 fortune to listen at a dinner given by the Incor- porated Society of Authors to American Men of Letters.1 All the accounts of Lowell's shorter impromptu de— livery that the writer could locate were extremely compli- mentary, while comments on his reading delivery fluctuated from high praise to less than flattering comments. After-Dinner Speech Bryce, in praising Lowell, hinted that he had de~ veloped the after-dinner speech to an art: There is a tendency today to make after-dinner speaking a mere string of anecdotes, most of which may have little to do with the subject or with one another. Even the best stories lose their charm when they are dragged in by their head and shoulders, having no connection with the allotted theme. Relevance as well as brevity is the soul of wit, for a good speech is a work of art, in which every part should have an organic relation to every other part. And when you tell a story, take some pains with the form of it. The late Mr. James Russell Lowell whom we in England ad- mired as the best after-dinner speaker of his day, was a master in that line. The classical felicity of his diction set off and gave charm to the small- est anecdote he told.2 Lowell never wrote an article or essay concerning his theory of speaking, but he did make enough comments and criticisms to make his ideas on the subject worth ex— amination. He was aware of the general mistakes that after- lSir James Rennell Rodd, Social and Diplomatic Meme ories 1884-1893 (London: Edward Arnold & Co., 1922), p. 154. 2Bryce, loc. cit. 106 dinner speakers often make and humorously referred to them in speeches of his own. I am consoled . . . by an observation of mine, which is that speakers on an occasion like this are not always expected to allude except in dis- tant and vague terms to the subject on which they are supposed to talk.1 In another speech he observed the following: I have also in my experience of after-dinner speeches observed that a speech is like an ill-broken horse; it is apt to take the bit between its teeth and to bolt at the most unexpected moments. A speaker frequently brings up, not where he intended So bring up, but where his steed chooses to land him. And with his usual sense of humor he intimated that "the staple of the proper after-dinner speech" was to tell the audience about their own city.3 On still another occasion his views concerning presiding at a meeting were: I shall be careful not to devastate the speeches of those who are to come after me by trying to show how many fine things I can say about the subject which will be the chief topic of discussion to-night. I shall prefer to let you suppose that I could say them If I would. For I consider the true office of a chairman on such occasions to be that of the heralds who blow a few conventional notes to an- nounce that the lists are open.4 In a letter to Henry James, he described what an address is: An address is a species by itself--a cross between essay and speech--tolerating, even inviting, more rhetoric than the one, less logic than the other and suggesting the touch of humour here and there lJames Russell Lowell, American Ideas for English Read— ers, ed. Henry Stone (Boston: J. G. Cupples Co., 1892), p. 52. 21bid., pp. 89-90. 31bid. 4 Writings, VI, 81. 107 that shall relieve without relaxing the attention of an audience.1 To make a good speech, Lowell supplied the following formula: I have my own theory as to what after-dinner speak- ing should be. I think it should be in the first place short; I think it should be light; and I think it should be extemporaneous and contemporaneous. I think it should have the meaning of the moment in it and nothing more.2 On another occasion, making a speech at a dinner for Henry Irving in 1881, Lowell asserted that an after-dinner speech ought to contain "an anecdote, a platitude, and a quotation."3 In ”Cambridge Thirty Years Ago," Lowell observed that a lag- ging audience at a political meeting could "be exploded at once by an allusion to their intelligence or patriotism; and at a literary festival, the first Latin quotation draws the first applause, the clapping of hands being intended as a tribute to our own familiarity with that sonorous tongue, and not at all as an approval of the particular sentiment conveyed in it."4 Lowell went on to explain that even a derogatory quote in Latin would have the same effect. He noted that Swift was "lousy with Latinisms," Browne's quotes were "far—sought and farfetched," and Feltham's were "stuck-in 1Howe, New Letters, p. 297. 2Address delivered before the Provincial Newspaper Society on May 7, 1884, p. 1. See also Scudder, 22, cit., II, 306. 3Matthews,gp, cit., p. 27. 4Clark and Foerster, op, cit., p. 289. 108 like plums in his poor pudding."1 Recognizing these dangers did not diminish Lowell's extensive use of quotation which 2 He felt that it was dif— he continued throughout his life. ficult for an ornamental quotation not to be successful for it embellished by its mere presence.3 Theory 3 A search through Lowell's speeches and letters for his theories concerning public speaking revealed that they are neither plentiful nor profound, appearing rather as casual observations or structural devices for his speeches. He often advanced as part of an introduction to a speech his theories concerning speech construction or speech con- tent, and then he would construct his own speech to follow the formula he had laid down.4 More often, however, his theory consists of astute observations dealing with the elements of speech making. 1Scudder, 22, cit., II, 359. 2George P. Clark, op, cit., pp. 225-26. Clark found that Lowell used quotation for three main purposes: (1) to ornament his style, (2) to develop his meaning, and (3) to provide humor. 3Writings, I, 19. 4Supra, pp. 105-107. CHAPTER IV TEXTUAL CONSIDERATIONS A major consideration in the study of public speak— ing is the difficulty of obtaining valid texts for the period before film and electrical transcription came into wide usage. "In a sense, each critic of oratory is also a bib- liographer; he must find the most authentic texts before he proceeds to an evaluation of the speaker's merit."1 In the case of James Russell Lowell, the biblio- graphic study has proved to be the most important and in- teresting aspect of this study for the writer. In many ways Lowell is a nearly ideal subject for textual investi- gation. He often wrote his speeches in advance and, after reading them from manuscript, furnished newspaper reporters with a c0py. At other times, when he spoke extemporaneously, stenographers were present; and in a few cases, he was re- corded by stenographers as he read from a manuscript. An- other factor to add authenticity to Lowell texts was his attitude toward them. He felt morally obligated to leave his extemporaneous speeches as they were delivered. Mr. Lowell found occasion to say that he never tam- pered with correct reports of extemporaneous speeches lLester Thonssen and A. Craig Baird, Speech Criticism (New York: The Ronald Press Co., 1948), p. 307. 109 110 that he had made. No matter how good a thing oc- curred to him afterwards, nor how much the report of his actual remarks would gain by it, it seemed to him unfair to get credit from the readers of what he had said, for what was really an after- thought.l Examination of newspaper accounts of his addresses supports this statement. Comparison of them with those later pub- lished by Lowell in book form shows little textual varia- tion.2 In longer addresses, the same attitude toward his texts prevailed. An example of this conscientiousness is displayed by the insertion of a footnote to make a correc- tion in his "Harvard Address" when he later published it in Democracy_and Other Addresses.3 Lowell's penchant for accuracy is further seen in his ”Democracy Address" from the same volume. Circumstances and poor communications with the press caused confusion concerning the textual ac- curacy of the address and led him to write Charles Norton, "It wasn't revised (as they say it was) by me. I did but insert some passages I spoke, but which were not in the 1The Critic, September 19, 1891, p. 144. 2It was not the purpose of the writer to collate all of Lowell's texts, but several were examined closely in a search for the most accurate ones for detailed analy- sis, and the writer found that there was generally little variation between newspaper accounts and the addresses Lowell chose to include in his books. 3James Russell Lowell, Democracy and Other Addresses (Boston: Houghton Mifflin & Co., 1887), p. 201. 111 notes given to the press."1 These "insertions," which in this case the press did not receive, have resulted in three separate versions of the address. Lowell was disturbed by the misunderstanding, as his letter indicates; and it is believed by this writer, because of the conscientiousness Lowell demonstrated, that he published the text which best represented what he actually said on the occasion, and that the version in Democragy and Other Addresses is the most accurate. There is only one address that appeared in Lowell's final publication of his works in which the accuracy of the text was questionable.2 On this occasion Lowell made the mistake of releasing the manuscript of a speech in ad» vance of its delivery without keeping a copy. In his atm tempt to maintain textual accuracy, he tried to memorize the address. The result, according to a letter to his friend Gilder, was something less than desirable; and the text, 0 O O O 3 . in this case, is unreliable. On other occa51ons when Lowell 1A note on the first published edition of this ad" dress, located in the Huntington Library, reads: "First published edition, differs in text from proof copy and from address as published in Lowell's Collected Writings." This note would indicate that there are really three separate versions of this address: the proof copy, the first edia tion in pamphlet form, and Lowell's later published version. 2This reference is to The Writings 2: James Russell Lowell (Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1890), which Lowell prepared for the press. 3Norton, Letters, II, 372. "I don't mean that the speech was bad as speeches go, to judge by the latest qan tations, but I delivered it as if I thought it was. The truth was that they made me write it out before I was ready, 112 was dissatisfied with his presentation or with the text in general, he often refused to allow it to be published and would not release the manuscript.1 Lowell's shyness and general lack of confidence in his speaking may have resulted in the loss of many addresses and after-dinner speeches through his refusal to allow publication. Lowell's desire for textual accuracy is as unusual as it is commendable, but it far from eliminates all prob- lems for the researcher. There are the usual errors by stenographers, misprints by the press, and deletions by editors and reporters. Besides the usual mechanical prob- lems there are two primary areas of consideration in which the researcher must exercise extreme caution when working with Lowell speech texts. The first results from a practice of Lowell's dur- ing his years as a professor. During this time he rewrote many of his college lectures as essays for periodical pub— lication and later included them in Among My Bock§,2 Among w and that tempted me to try committing it to memory and I couldn't, and I had no entire copy and that bothered me." Mr. Lowell was seventy years of age at this time and was deeply involved in writing an introduction to a book and some poetry, and he made no attempt to correct this speech text. 1The Critic, August 29, 1891, p. 109. See also Norton, Letters, I, 233. 2James Russell Lowell, Amon My Books (New York: Houghton Mifflin & Co., 1880). The first edition was 1870. 113 My_§22k§, Second Series,1 and My_§£ggy Windows.2 The essay titles are generally the same as the lecture titles from which the essays were reworked,3 and for this reason some caution must be exercised in working with the manuscripts. To add a bit to the confusion, Lowell delivered three and lJames Russell Lowell, Amon ‘My_Books, Second Series (Boston: J. R. Osborn & Co., 1876 . 2James Russell Lowell, My Study Windows (Boston: Houghton Mifflin & Co., 1880). 3There is substantial evidence that Lowell "reworked" his earlier notebooks, poems, and lectures for material for publication later in his lifetime. See Howard, gp,‘gi§., pp. 161-162, 340-365. Howard's general impression was that Lowell wrote almost nothing creative in the last third of his life but kept remining his notebooks and lectures for material for his essays and later poems. See Norton, Letters, II, 140, "I hope you will permit me to send you also my two volumes of prose, to which a third will be added next autumn. The article on Spenser has been wholly rewritten since you heard it, and contains only a passage or two here and there which were in the lecture." Ibid., p. 318. Lowell is speak- ing of a volume of poems under publication in 1887. "Not a volume of new poems exactly, but a collection made by my publisher of pieces already printed in different magazines during the last thirty years. . . . I have added to that old scraps enough from old portfolios to make a volume of proper size." Scudder, 22, gi£,, II, 111-112. "He complains, when preparing his article on Rousseau, that he is always bothered when he tries to do anything with old material, as he was in this case, inserting in his paper patches from college lectures; and any one who has had the experience appreciates the difficulty of turning the 'oratio directa' of the lecture into the 'oratio obliqua' of the essay,-- to mention but one of the 'bothers' of such work. But a comparison of the manuscript of Lowell's college lecture with the text of the printed article shows two things: first, that in going back to his old lecture, Lowell easily took fire from his own words and, in copying a sentence, ran on into a fuller, more finished conclusion. Again it is evident from the comparison that Lowell's direct address in speaking to his class from written lecture was in the form of sentences little different from what he used when writing for the public." 114 sometimes more lectures and addresses on the same topic, e.g., Wordsworth, Dante, and Shakespeare. In manuscript the texts are not always dated, are generally written on odd—sized sheets of paper, and are stored rather haphazardly in the same box with notebooks and other items. From pencil markings on the manuscripts it is apparent that someone, probably Norton, has attempted to sort and arrange them in their proper order. Unfortunately, there is no way to ver- ify that the texts taken from these manuscripts and published after Lowell's death are accurate. This brings us the second area of caution, the post- humous publication of Lowell's addresses. The largest col- lection of unpublished material remaining after Lowell's death consisted of his lecture and address manuscripts. Charles Eliot Norton, his literary executor, made extensive 1 revisions and deletions in this material, and he began 2 three months publishing the lectures in December, 1891, after Lowell's death. By 1894 he had put thirty—five lec— tures and lecture fragments into publication;3 however, lCharles Eliot Norton, Centurngagazine, XLVII (November, 1893), 124. "Yet these unprinted remains con— tain so much that seems to me to possess permanent value that, after some question and hesitation, I have come to the conclusion that selections from them [emphasis mine] should be published." Comparison with the manuscripts shows extensive deletions and revisions. 2 Atlantic Monthly, LXVIII (December, 1891), 816-823. 3George Willis Cooke, A_Bibliography_g£ James Russell Lowell (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1892), pp. 446m447. 115 Norton's notations on the manuscripts, copies of the revised manuscripts, and his editorial remarks all indicate that these published texts cannot be considered accurate enough for speech analysis. A second editor, Henry Stone, published a posthumous edition of Lowell's addresses, American Ideas for English 1 Readers. These ten2 addresses are, for the most part, reporter's accounts rather than full texts; and they are accurate only as general representations of what Lowell said on these occasions. In 1897 the Rowfant Club republished Lowell's 1855 Lowell Institute lectures verbatim from the Boston Daily Advertiser accounts. It was mentioned earlier that these accounts were taken from Lowell's manuscripts by his friend Carter, and that they are close representations of the orig- inal manuscripts. The original reporter made several de- letions in reporting the event for the original publication, but the Rowfant Club made no changes when republishing the series. Of the more than fifty lectures and addresses pub- lished after Lowell's death, none of the texts can be ac- cepted as completely accurate. On the whole, the Rowfant 1James Russell Lowell, American Ideas for English Readers, ed. Henry Stone (Boston: J. G. Cupples Co., 1892). 2This book lists eleven addresses, but the "Address Before the Town Council of the City of Worcester” was not delivered by Lowell. It was, instead, a letter containing the remarks that Lowell wished to be read in his absence. 116 Club publication is the most accurate. The availability of Lowell speech texts seems to bear a relationship to his national prominence. As his fame increased, so did the number of available speech texts. During the first twenty-five years his speaking was almost entirely of a local nature, consisting of classroom speak— ing and other local activities.1 For this period from 1857 to 1880 only six address texts were located, and of the estimated 3,500 lecture periods that Lowell held during his twenty years as a Harvard professor, only forty-one fragments and complete texts remain.2 The earlier 1855 series of lectures for the Lowell Institute gave Lowell his start as a college professor and at the same time gave him an opportunity to travel the Lyceum circuit. Lowell's aversion to the rigors of traveling and facing the "cold" audiences of "far West" and his refusal to allow Briggs to publish the Lowell Institute Lectures in book form com» bined to remove Lowell to relative obscurity as a speaker after he had made a brilliant start. Lowell's speaking maintained only local interest until he was appointed by the United States to the country's highest diplomatic post in 1880. His speeches became of international interest with his new office, and, consequently, lSupra, chap. iii, p. 73. 2Lowell gave approximately thirtwaive lectures for each course, teaching from four to six courses yearly for twenty years. 117 his addresses began to be published by English and American newspapers and periodicals. In these circumstances Lowell's ethical appeal and stature1 were greatly expanded beyond any he had previously attained. Chapter Three has already shown the part speaking played in Lowell's role as the Eng- lish Ambassador and has discussed the increased stature that accompanied him with his return to the United States in 1885. The number of speech texts available during the last six years of his life and their circulation in national newspapers and periodicals suggest that his speeches main- tained international interest.2 For the eleven years that Lowell lived after his initial appointment as Minister to England, forty-nine addresses were located as compared to the six discovered for the twenty-three year period just prior to 1880. Evidence indicates that, after his return to America in 1885, Lowell continued speaking to small local groups, a practice which he had begun in the early days of his Harvard professorship and had continued through his 1Supra, chap. iii, pp. 74-76. See also Norman Foerster, American Poetry and Prose (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1947), I, 762. "'During my reign no ambas- sador or minister has created so much interest or won so much regard,' said Queen Victoria." 2The exact number of Lowell speeches is impossible to estimate. The best guide the writer had was Lowell's personal correspondence, and even this source omitted sev- eral addresses which were alluded to in other sources. The New York Times and the London Times indexes were ex- amlnEdj'along with complete sets of The Critic, Harpgr' 5 Magazine, the Atlantic Monthly, and The Century; The Boston Dal 1y Advertiser and The Boston Transcript were examined from December, 1854, through March, 1855. 118 English Ministry.l There are five important limiting factors in select- ing representative speeches: (l) The extreme variety of Lowell's speaking makes it difficult to select four repre- sentative speeches, since he delivered literary, occasional, after-dinner, political, and reform addresses. (2) There is a time problem encountered with a lack of texts from 1857 to 1880. Of the six texts found for this period there are no manuscripts, and only one text is available for each of the six speeches, making collation impossible. Conse- quently, it is necessary to consider 1855-1857 as repre- sentative of the entire early period of Lowell's speaking and to select the remaining representative speeches from lTwo letters show more speaking than the number of Lowell texts would indicate. Charles Eliot Norton, Letters g£_James Russell Lowell (Cambridge: Riverside Press, 1904), III, 139. Norton published a three-volume edition of Lowell's letters, which added several new 1et- ters. These were not included in the earlier two-volume edition. "My only history is that I have been making visits (and speeches, of course) for the better part of a month.” The writer was able to find reference to only two speeches that Lowell delivered during this period: one at Ashfield on August 27, 1886, for which no text could be found, and a second speech at Concord on September 12, 1886. Ibid., pp. 153-154. To Leslie Stephens he wrote in March of the same year, "If you only knew how hard they work me with letters and speeches and things; and they have invented a new mode of torture-creadings from one's poems, by Dr. Holmes and me, for the benefit of charities of one kind or another.” Other than a specially printed sheaf of poems located in the Huntington Library and inscribed "Selections for Public Readings, 1886," no texts were found for this period. The first text found for 1886 was dated May 3, 1886. From this evidence and other unaccounted for gaps of time, it can be assumed that the present appendix of one hundred nine address and lecture texts represents only a small portion of Lowell's entire speaking efforts over a thirty-four year period. 119 the period after 1880. (3) There is a limitation imposed by the type of delivery used and the number of manuscripts available. His longer addresses were frequently read from manuscript, while his shorter addresses were almost always delivered extemporaneously. The selection of texts for the sample to be analyzed is partially limited by the number of complete manuscripts available. (4) The fourth limita- tion concerns finding valid texts of speeches Lowell deliv- ered extemporaneously. This was accomplished by eliminating those texts that cannot be verified as extemporaneous through sources other than the texts themselves. (5) Another lim- iting factor is the available audience information. This factor is governed by the number of newspapers and period- icals that covered the events and are available to the writer. It is not the purpose of this dissertation to authen- ticate all of Lowell's speech texts, but to locate enough addresses and lectures to form a representative sample for analysis. The writer has attempted to show that James Russell Lowell was an important speaker of his time, and the major role speaking played in his life and in his career has been demonstrated in Chapters Two and Three. In Chapter Four, along with Appendix A, he has shown that sufficient authentic texts are available for a valid representative sample, has discussed general textual problems that occur in Lowell's addresses and lectures, and has suggested five limiting factors in selecting a representative sample from those located. 120 An important consideration in selecting a representa— tive sample from Lowell's early speaking period is the twenty- three year time gap from which few texts are available. With the textual selection of this early period limited to the years between 1855 and 1857, the Lowell Institute Lectures become the logical choice, because they overcome the five limiting factors and also meet all the necessary qualifica- tions for analysis. Manuscripts are available, as well as newspaper accounts from the Boston Traveller and the Boston Daily Advertiser, whose reporter had access to the manuscripts. Newspaper reports of the audience, diary entries, letters, and other materials from which to evaluate the audience response and the general effectiveness of the speaker are available. Of the twelve lectures in the series, ”The Ballads" was chosen because of the completeness of the manuscript and of the newspaper accounts of the audience, which are more plentiful for this address than for any of the others in the series. The text is representative of Lowell as an early literary lecturer and presents him in his primary type of speaking situation, expounding a literary theme. Chapter Five will contain a detailed analysis of this text. Chapter Six will consist of an analysis of an ex- temporaneous speech on copyright reform. The speech was delivered before a congressional committee on copyright in January of 1886 and appeared in the Congressional Record. Because of its political overtones and its legislative nature, 121 this speech also has significance as a political address, making it doubly significant, as well as representative. Chapter Seven will contain a criticism of a longer occasional address. Of those available Lowell's "Two Hun- dred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the Foundation of Harvard University Address" provided the greatest amount of research material. Besides the manuscript, which is in the Harvard Library, there are three other texts as well as newspaper and periodical accounts of the speech. This particular address was often mentioned in Lowell's correspondence, and it was honored by having among its auditors the Presi- dent of the United States. Probably Lowell's reputation as an after-dinner speaker did the most to enhance his speaking reputation. Chapter Eight will contain an analysis of an extemporaneous after-dinner address. This speech proved to be the most difficult to select. While the others were more or less selected by a process of elimination, there are four or five in this category that offer sufficient material to allow detailed analysis. Only one of the five, however, offers proof of being extemporaneous. This is a speech delivered to the Incorporated Society of Authors to Amer- ican Men and Women of Letters, at the Criterion Restaurant in July of 1888. Three separate texts of this speech are available, one in the London.23mg§, one in The Critic, and one in pamphlet form produced by the Society of Authors. 122 This address contains one of Lowell's dominant themes, advocating better relations between America and England. Because of the theme and the extemporaneous de- livery, which Lowell used often during the final eleven years of his life, this speech is considered by the writer to be representative. The amount of available materials necessarily took precedence over other considerations in the selection of these addresses and lectures for detailed analysis. Rep- resentativeness took precedence over critical acclaim or apparent quality in the texts. Lowell's two main forms of delivery, reading from manuscript and extemporaneous speaking, are equally represented by two examples of each type. There is one each of his major types: a literary lecture, a reform speech, an occasional address, and an after-dinner speech utilizing a dominant theme of his final years. These addresses are thought to be typical and rep- resentative of James Russell Lowell, the speaker. CHAPTER V LOWELL INSTITUTE LECTURES, 1855 THE OLD BALLADS Introduction The analyses in the next four chapters will be con- cerned with four different types of speeches, each with distinctively different purposes. "The Old Ballads” was designed to teach or to inform, the ”Copyright Address" was to refute and persuade, the "Harvard Address” was to praise, and the ”Society Address” was to entertain; but, in spite of the widely diversified purposes, methods of argument and elements of style were found to be common to all four speeches. Factors Influencing Rhetoric Because all speech-making utilizes mental processes, experiences, background, and knowledge of rhetorical prac- tices, it is not surprising to discover common elements in different types of speeches by the same author. From this study of Lowell, the writer has discovered ten factors which seem to have influenced his rhetorical invention and his style. The following outline traces these ten factors and illustrates their relationship to Lowell's rhetoric. 123 .124 1. Wide reading in seven languages contributed logical and ethical proofs. a. Evidence through literary examples-logical proof b. Evidence through literary allusions-—logical proof c. Evidence through quotation-logical proof d. Reasoning by literary example-logical proof e. Reasoning by literary analogy-logical proof f. Reputation as linguist and classicist-—ethical proof 2. Philological interest affected style and logic. a. Precise use of words-sty1e b. Use of definition--logical proof 3. Poetry and prose writing experience influenced style, invention, arrangement, logic, and ethos. a. Knowledge of audience-logical and ethical proofs, style b. Clarity through use of similes, metaphors-log- ical proof, style c. Frequent use of analogy-logical proof d. Practical experience-invention, arrangement, and style ‘ 4. International prestige and varied accomplishments supplied him with ethical proof by influencing his speech introductions, his use of common ground, and his ethos. 5. Ancestry and strong Americanism determined his ethos and affected his arrangement by leading to parenthetical remarks vaguely related to the subject. 6. Shyness resulted in parenthetical remarks affecting the arrangement in his extemporaneous speeches. 7. Law study affected invention and style. a. Occasional use of law terms-style b. Use of legal arguments-invention 8. Invention was influenced by his critical faculties. a. Insight and ability to isolate primary arguments b. Ability to make valid critical assertions 9. The difficulty he experienced in preparation resulted in the re-use of early materials, thus contributing to-his invention. 10. Humor affected ethos, style, and logic. a. Ethos-ethical proof b. Entertainment-style c. Satire-logical proof 125 Analysis revealed that all of these factors, with the exception of shyness, were present in some degree in all four speeches. Those elements found to be common to all four speeches were considered primary elements of James Russell Lowell's rhetorical practices; thus, in an attempt to avoid repetition later in the four analyses, these pri- mary elements as they apply to all four speeches will be dealt with in this introduction. Common Elements of Rhetoric Ethical pppg§_ Lowell depended heavily on his humor and personal prestige as a national and international figure for much of his ethical proof. The humor,1 which came easily for him and was an intrinsic part of his speaking and writing, is prevalent in all four of the speeches. His prestige was extrinsic, operating independently of any effort on 1William Norwood Brigance, Spgech Communication (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1947), pp. 13-14. Brigance described humor as a special quality of insight: "Analysis of real humor reveals that it springs from deep insight into the nature of the subject to which it is ap- plied. This insight means more than knowledge; it implies understanding and wisdom. Humor is not obtained except by an objective view that permits of seeing details in their true relations." Emphasizing its ethical value, Brigance went on to say, "The speaker who shows a sense of humor in his mental outlook . . . is one to whom the audience is in- stinctively drawn. It is his guarantee of mental balance, and they accept it as such. In him they recognize a sane leader and listen the more willingly." Quintilian recog- nized humor as a "gift of nature" that "cannot be taught." Lowell gave evidence that he possessed this gift and used it advantageously, both logically and ethically. Lester Thonssen, Selected Readings ip_Rhetoric gag Public Spgaking (New York: H. W. W lson Co., 1942), p. 78. 126 his part, though he was aware of it and took advantage of it. This would appear to be the reason that he made no effort to establish rapport with the audience in the intro- ductions of three of the four speeches, possibly relying on his humor and prestige to take the place of intrinsic common ground that is generally a part of the introduction. There is also the possibility that he felt the introduction given him dispelled the need for common ground. Contrary to the usual procedure, however, Lowell included common ground at the end of his "Society Address," and it was ”tacked on” after the peroration of the "Harvard Address.“ "The Old Ballads" and the "Copyright Speech" contain no common ground appeals. Other factors of ethical value were Lowell's strong Americanism and his two-hundred-year American ancestry. They were both sources of pride to him; and though they were often a detriment to his arrangement-for he would break away from the point he was making to praise America or to defend her practicesl-he probably gained in ethical proof whatever loss may have occurred from his breaking from the outline of his address, for this was during the strongly nationalistic period after the Civil War. Logical proof Logical proof, which constituted the major portion of Lowell's rhetorical invention, appeals to the intellect lInfra, chap. viii, p. 200. 127 rather than to the emotion of the listener and concerns itself with evidence and reasoning. "Evidence is the raw material used to establish proof," consisting of personal experience, testimony of individuals, statistics, illustra- tive examples, and factual material.l Reasoning "serves as a cohesive force; through the relationship it establishes, the mind is led from recognition of discernible facts to a conclusion."2 Reasoning follows either an inductive or deductive pattern and is developed from example, analogy, cause, and sign.3 Lowell most frequently used reasoning by example and analogy, strongly supported by literary allusion, quo- tation, and humor, and clarified by definition and restate- ment. The following outline demonstrates the pattern of inductive reasoning by example which he frequently employed: 1. An assertion 2. Restatement (one or more times) 3. Definition (one or more times) 4. One or more examples 5. Restatement (one or more times) 6. One of four climactic conclusions: a. Restatement in plain style b. Humorous illustration (sometimes in the form of analogy) c. Illustration in grand style d. Quotation This combination is present in all four speeches; however, the conclusion in the grand style appears only in "The Old 1Thonssen and Baird, pp, cit., pp. 341-50. 21bid. 3Ihid. 128 Ballads." Lowell made extensive use of a second means of log- ical proof in the form of evidence, literary allusion, and quotation. Quotation was most often used as a form of testi- mony; and allusion was employed to refer to literary ideas, concepts, or authors. While literary allusion often provided clear illustration, it seemed in several instances to obscure meanings. For example, in the "Harvard Address" he alluded to the following: "Pilate's question still murmurs in the ear of every thoughtful and Montaigne's in that of every honest man." To apply the allusion, the listener would have to know instantly Pilate's and Montaigne's questions. A second allusion in the "Harvard Address” referred to Pythagoras: It is true that, if we may put as much faith in heredity as seems reasonable to many of us, we are all in some transcendental sense the coevals of primitive man, and Pythagoras may well have been present in Euphorbus at the siege of Troy. It would appear that Lowell flattered his audience by pre- supposing that they would know that Pythagoras believed in transmigration of souls and that he had claimed to have remembered a previous existence in the body of Euphorbus some nine hundred years prior to his reincarnation as Pythagoras.1 1In fairness to Lowell, it should be noted that his audience on this occasion consisted of Harvard gradu- ates predominantly, along with educators from other nations. 129 Other vague allusions included ”declaration in trover," Simonides, Tacita, Marina, Bishop Golias, and “black Care of the Roman poet," to mention a few. The number of easily identifiable allusions far ex- ceeds the obscure ones, and they make up a great part of the evidence used in "The Old Ballads" and the "Harvard Address”; and though the number was greatly reduced, allu- sions were utilized to good advantage in both of the extem- poraneous addresses. Along with literary allusion and quotation, Lowell showed equal preference for comparison, which, as he used it, frequently took the form of similitude.l Note the two following examples, one from the "Harvard Address” and one from ”The Old Ballads.” They were no more unreasonable than the landlady of Taylor the Platonist in refusing to let him sac- rifice a bull to Jupiter in her back-parlor. (Har- vard Address.) They did not moralize, but left nature to furnish her own morals; which she is as sure to do as she is to put a sting in the tail of a wasp. (The Old Ballads.) 1Sidney J. Smith, Precepts of Rhetoric (Worcester, Mass.: Holy Cross College Press, 1936), p. l . A simili— tude is "an argument based on a simile . . . or a metaphor, . . which affords a resemblance between the instance under discus- sion and a well-known instance in a different order of things." Smith further noted that the similitude has little force as proof, except with simple and uneducated audiences. "It is, however, a fertile source of illustration because its appeal is to the imagination, and as such it has much power as a means of interest and emotional appeal in popular oratory. Since Lowell's purpose most often was to inform or to enter- tain, similitudes served a useful purpose to him; he used them extensively in "The Old Ballads," and they appear fre- quently in the other three speeches, with the "Copyright Speech," primarily persuasive, containing the fewest. 130 Lowell employed many maxims and truisms in his speeches, making them his major form of deductive reasoning.l He uti— lized two variations: the plain maxim and the maxim with the reason subjoined, his reason often taking a humorous turn, as in the following from ”The Old Ballads." People do not want poets who only amuse them-nothing becomes tedious so soon as that-and what could be more intolerable than to have a longwinded fellow come in when you had a feast (for the minstrels were a privileged class) and drone over for the thousandth time the story of Sir Launcelot or Sir Isumbras? Imagine one of Mr. James's novels set to rather stringy music, and badly sung, and you compelled to hear it till you knew it by heart. I beg pardon for conjuring up so frightful an image. On other occasions his maxims were of the plain variety, needing no reason to make his point. In the "Harvard Address" lLane Cooper, The Rhetoric of Aristotle (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 193277'pp. 147-54. Aristotle classified the maxim as a form of the enthymeme, thereby making it a form of deduction. There are two basic varia- tions: the plain maxim and the maxim with the reason sub- joined, the reason being needed when "the statement is para- doxical or open to dispute; maxims that state nothing para- doxical need no supplement." Maxims have an important dis- tinction; they are ”a statement about those things which concern human action, about what is to be chosen or avoided in human conduct." Lowell may have been making this dis- tinction when he said in his "Harvard Address," ”I know that I am repeating truisms, but they are truisms that need to be repeated." Aristotle, in his discussion of the maxim, demonstrated that they have strong value as ethical proof as well as logical value: "The one great advantage of maxims to a speaker arises from the uncultivated mentality of an audience. People are delighted when he succeeds in express~ ing as a general truth the opinions they entertain about special cases." In emphasizing the ethical value, Aristotle pointed out, "Maxims always produce the moral effect, be- cause the speaker in uttering them makes a general declara- tion of ethical principles [preferences]: so that, if the maxims are sound, they give us the impression of a sound moral character in him who speaks." Lowell's use of maxims, then, like his use of the similitude, is valuable both as ethical and logical proofs. 131 he combined two plain maxims. The fame and usefulness of all institutions of learn- ing depend on the greatness of those who teach in them . . . and great teachers are almost rarer than great poets. Style Lowell's style can be best summarized by listing its four main characteristics: (1) wide use of quotation and allusion, (2) frequent use of simile and metaphor, (3) knowledge of philology, and (4) humor. The use of simile and metaphor, quotation and allusion, and humor have been discussed in relation to their effect on his ethical and logical proofs; but they remain as important elements of style also, because of their effect on clarity and interest. From all indications, Lowell's style was generally entertaining, though his vague references and obscure al- lusions may have on occasion disconcerted the listener. Lowell's philological expertness prevailed; and his content sometimes became obscured because of unfamiliar words; e.g., municipum, ferae naturae, coigns of vantage, alembic, Gratulatio, hobbledehoy, vapulatory, and eleemos- ynary. Keeping in mind that his audiences were seldom coma prised of "common” people, perhaps this language was not as remote to them as it seems; and "The Old Ballads," the only one of the four which would have been attended by the general public, contains few obscure words and no Latinisms or Greek phrases. Of the three primary qualities of style, clearness, force, and interest, Lowell appears to have erred occasionally 132 in the area of clearness in his use of allusions and by unfamiliar word usage, but he generally selected his words carefully, paying particular attention to the exact meaning he wished to convey. His sentences, on occasion, became complicated-one in the "Harvard Address" contains over 300 words-but are usually short, averaging from sixteen to twenty clear and graphic words. With the exception of parenthetical remarks that lengthened his sentences and disturbed the flow of his thought, the development as a whole shows logical coherence and progress. Lowell's force is enhanced by descriptive, graphic, vivid, and suggestive words comprising his similes and meta~ phors. His climactic arrangement and use of maxims and truisms add force to the projection of his ideas. The strongest characteristic of Lowell's style, in the opinion of this writer, was the interest that his speeches held. He seldom used lifeless or colorless words and his ideas were made graphic and concrete by frequent quotation and poetic phrases. Of all of Lowell's qualities as a speaker, probably his witty, arresting style helped most in his attaining a reputation as an entertaining and interesting speaker. Analysis pf "The Old Ballads" Setting and Audience Because they represent the beginning of James Russell Lowell's professional speaking career, the Lowell Institute 133 Lectures of 1855 are particularly relevant to this study; and ”The Old Ballads,“ the fourth in the series, has been selected for analytical consideration.1 In the throes of depression over a series of tragic events in his personal life,2 and having been rejected by his reading public,3 Lowell saw the lectures as an oppor- tunity for a new beginning and a new means of earning a 4 livelihood. For this reason he was elated over the rush 5 the overflow crowds,6 and the favorable news— for tickets, paper reviews. He was even more pleased with the new direc- tion the lectures gave to the course of his life, providing him with a secure position7 and achance to try out the lecture circuit.8 However, while on tour he acquired a definite aver- sion for that life, and instead of lecturing, devoted him- self to study and preparation for the Harvard professorship, which he was to hold for the next twenty years. He achieved popularity and a measure of financial security from his Supra, chap. iv, p. 120. NH Supra, chap. 1, pp. 1-2. Ibid. em Ibid. Supra, chap. iii, p. 59. (DUI Ibid. Ibid., p. 60. (Dd Ibid. ’ pp. 65"“70 O 134 successful Institute appearance; but, ironically, the same speaking success resulted in his absence from the platform for more than a year, while studying abroad to prepare him- self for the teaching of modern languages. A steady income for the next twenty years eliminated his financial need, and a time-consuming job demanded his attention, with the result that what might have developed into an outstanding lecture career became buried in the lecture classroom. Thus, the speech to be analyzed, as a part of the entire series, can be said to have greatly influenced the life of the lec— turer. Textual Considerations Four texts of "The Old Ballads" are available: Lowell's hand-written manuscript and three newspaper accounts, all located in the Houghton Library. The Boston Daily Advertiser had announced the day before the lectures began that their reporter would have access to the manuscripts. We are gratified to announce that we have made ar- rangements with a gentleman who is a personal friend of Mr. Lowell, and in whom he has perfect confidence, to furnish us with abstracts of his lectures, suf- ficiently full to give a fair idea of them. These abstracts will each be about a column long, or rather longer than the usual length of newspaper reports of lectures, and will be regularly published in our paper on the next morning after the first de— livery of the lectures.1 1Boston Advertiser, January 8, 1855, p. 2. 135 With minor exceptions, i.e., changes in word order and por- tions in third person, the Advertiser report is what it claims to be, an abstracted version of the original. Most of the deletions are full sentences, paragraphs, or poems. The Boston Evening Transcript reported its inten- tion of copying the Advertiser stories with limitations. The twelve lectures are to be reported in the Daily Advertiser the morning after their delivery by a friend of Mr. Lowell, who is amply qualified for the duty. We shall avail ourselves of these reports, and copy such portions as our limits will allow.1 A third newspaper, the Boston Evening_Traveller, carried the lectures, and, according to Howard, reported from stenographic notes. However, collation of available texts of "The Old Ballads" strongly indicates that the Traveller reporter relied heavily upon the Advertiser's morning version, as well as his own notes. This assumption is drawn from the fact that while the Traveller report is more extensive than the Advertiser (indicating the use of reported notes), those sections of the speech reported by both newspapers agree almost perfectly, even including ob- vious typographical errors and reversing of words2 (revealed by comparison with the manuscript). In one instance the Traveller copied a clarifying phrase which the Advertiser 1Boston Evening_Transcript, January 10, 1855. 2The manuscript refers to "simple and nervous," while both papers reverse it to read "nervous and simple poetry." 136 had inserted.l However, those portions appearing in the Traveller only show numerous variations from the manuscript, including such flagrant errors as misquoted lines of poetry, grossly distorted meanings in a few instances, and much paraphrasing. In one two-hundred-word paragraph, there are fifty-two discrepancies between the manuscript and the Traveller account, consisting of word and structure changes, deletions, and additions. The following appeared in the Traveller but not the Advertiser. Note the meaning as it appears in the manuscript: Whoever values these will hold Wordsworth to be the greatest man who has written English poetry in modern times. But Wordsworth had not in him even a suspicion of the dramatic imagination-egg had too much individual character--and when he puts himself beside the older poet he seems not only tame but downright barnyard. [Italics mine.] Now note the change which occurred in the meaning as it was paraphrased by the reporter: Whoever values these would value Wordsworth as the greatest man who had written English poetry in mod- ern times. But he was not dramatic: pg had pg individuality. [Italics mine.] Lowell quoted several poems as examples; and, in— variably, when the poem appeared in the Advertisep, the two newspapers' accounts agreed verbatim with the manuscript, while those poems which the Traveller alone reported '7 1Both papers add the phrase, "in the newspapers," to clarify a point. 137 contained numerous inaccuracies. Compare the following. Manuscript: I wish I were where Helen lies Night and day on me §he Cries I wish I were where Helen lies On fair Kirconnel lee Curst be the heart that thought the thought And curst the hand that fired the shot When in my arms burd Helen Dro t And died to succor moi Italics mine.] Traveller: I wish I were where Ellen lies; Night and day on me ghe griesy. I wish I were where Helen lies; On cauld Kirconnel lea. Cursed be the heart that taught the thoughtL And cursed the hand that fired the shot “€133 Eieir‘é‘i series: E’Eiti-fi‘a .1...) Howard stated that the reports in the Boston gpgyy p11§£_”were evidently made from stenographic notes, Eng consequently indicate interpolations and platform revisions."l [Italics mine.] This assumption is not validated by the findings, since those portions dependent upon the reporter's stenographic notes display extreme inaccuracy, with as much as twenty-five percent disagreement with the manuscript. Further examination shows the Traveller account to be ap- proximately one-fourth paraphrase in those sections not appearing in the Advertiser. Since the Traveller printed 74 percent of the manuscript text, and the Advertiser printed about 51 percent, the Traveller reporter had to rely on his notes for only about 23 percent of his report, and since 1Howard, pp, cit., p. 373. 138 this portion is highly inaccurate, it would be difficult to distinguish with any degree of accuracy between reporter paraphrase and Lowell's platform revision or interpolation. The Traveller reporter probably attended the evening session of the lectures, took extensive notes, perhaps in longhand rather than stenographic notes, and, with the aid of the next morning's Advertiser text, wrote his account. Though strong dependence on the Advertiser account is evi— denced, the Traveller reporter did deviate in seven instances, making the following changes: changed "few" to "two"; added ”that“ (not in the Advertiser or manuscript); omitted "only" (not in the manuscript but in Advertiser); deleted a sen- tence (in both Advertiser and manuscript); used different third person wording from the Advertiser; and used third person when the Advertiser did not. Since there is relatively close agreement between the Advertiser and the Traveller, and since the manuscript is available to collate that part of the Traveller which the Advertiser does not contain, it is possible to recreate a close facsimile of the actual speaking text. The Tpgyr pllg£,verifies the content of the lecture and the manuscript determines the actual wording, providing a reasonably ac" curate estimate that at least 74 percent of the manuscript was actually read. This allows an above average text to be reconstructed for analysis. 139 Arrangement There are five main divisions in this lecture: (I) the office of the poet, (2) a description of early poets in terms of their performance and contribution, (3) England's historical background and its effect on the early poetry, (4) the status and characteristics of ballads in English literature, and (5) the superiority of ballads over other forms of poetry. The first three divisions make up the introduction; the main body of the speech attempts to establish their superiority over other forms of poetry by listing thirty- seven characteristics of the ballads and providing examples, quotations, allusions, and illustrations to establish each characteristic. The conclusion is made up of nine advan- tages that the minstrels had over other poets. The structure of the address is a simple one, being, for the most part, direct and to the point, and it appears to be arranged almost according to a formula. An assertion, often in the form of a maxim, is followed by one or more illustrations. Under the five main headings are forty-five subheadings.l 1 Introduction I. Office of the poet A. Position in the body politic B. Comparison of early poet with political newspaper C. Poet as wielder of public opinion II. Description of primitive poet A. Comparison of poems to living men B. Bards C. Political poets compared to poets with historical purpose 140 In three instances Lowell broke away from his outline III. A. B. C. Body England's historical background as it related to the poetic output Background of English inhabitants, a peculiar one The changes that took place in the English people (Parenthetical insert: an expression of Lowell's avid Americanism) Comparison of the English with the American his- torical origin Stature and characteristics of ballad in English literan ture A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. O. P. Q. R. S. T. U. V. Ballads first truly national poetry Ballad makers not encumbered with useless informa» tion Ballad makers used common material Ballad makers thought, felt, and believed as their hearers did Ballads are pathetic Ballads are models of nervous and simple diction Ballads tell a story Ballads are spontaneous Ballads are models of narrative poetry Ballads display passion rather than thought or morals Ballads are picturesque and touching Ballad singers had the advantage of the spur of the moment and the excitement speaking gives Ballad singers knew what "told" Ballads plunge "into deep water at once" Ballads never give too much information Transitions are abrupt in ballads Passions speak out savagely (Parenthetical remark: a satire of newspapers and their effect on the English language-not entirely unrelated, but serves as a comparative illustration) 1. Definition of “expression" 2. Reasons editor writes 3. General contentedness in commonplace content 4. Function of newspapers 5. Compare scholars of past with current readers 6. Milk and watering of English Compares ballad makers with newspapers Minstrels were not metaphysical Contrasts metrical romances with ballads Common man to whom ballad maker sang had limited powers of association Comparison of the modern process of "reflective thinking" which is never found in the ballads Ballads imply "love of nature" rather than em- phasizing it 141 and included parenthetical, related ideas. The first was a result Lowell's of his early dislike for the English. In 1855 hostile attitude toward the British had not begun to mellow; and after demonstrating that the mingling of the races had left the English without a past of its own, he added defensively, "English writers demand of us a new tional literature. But where, for thirteen centuries was their own?" When stating the characteristics of the ballads, Lowell compared the minstrels to newspapers, praising the x. Y. Z. AA. AB. AC. AD. AE. AP. AG. AH. AI. AJ. AK. Ballads express primal sympathies Ballad landscapes are not metaphysical Ballads are the only true folksongs in English Disagrees with Scott's assertion that "flatness and insipidity” are "the ballads' great imperfec» tion" Minstrels avoid all entangling accessories and cleave to what is grand and permanent Ballads never make a mistake between body and soul Ballads are purely poetry of this world Ballads display force and earnestness of style Compression of ballad content Repetition in ballads Praises Wordsworth before making some harsh crit- icism of his modernization of ballads Supernaturalism of the old ballads was peculiar Tenderness of the ballads Pathos in ballads Conclusion Advantages of ballads and ballad makers A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. Ballad makers stood face to face with life Advantage of ballads is the sieve (of time) that they had to pass through Advantage of direct contact with audience Advantage of the outdoor living of the minstrels Charm of the ballads because "nobody made them" Ballads are dear because they are old Ballads' age renews hearers' youth Each generation adds enthusiasm to ballads We bestow youth on a poem and it in turn preserves for us some youth to bestow 142 contributions the minstrels made to the life of their time but deploring the influence of the modern newspaper: It is worth thinking of whether the press which we have a habit of calling such a fine institution be not weakening the fibre and damaging the sincerity of our English and our thinking quite as fast as it diffuses intelligences. After a bit of further comparison, Lowell concluded with a maxim: "We are continually becoming what we habitually read." Adding a note of wry humor, Lowell suggested, The power to read is a ticket that admits us to the company of the wise and good of all time-and if we read what dissipates thought instead of exciting it . . . it would be wise if the state should fur- nish every child born in it with a pistol to blow out its brains at once, as with this subtle means of getting rid of them by degrees. Lowell again digressed during his conclusion to renew his diatribe against newspapers: Day by day the art of printing isolates us more and more from our fellows, and from the healthy and inspiring touch of our fellows. We learn con- tinually more and more of mankind and less of man. We know more of Europe than we do of our own vil- lage. In each of these departures from the text, Lowell moralized, making points that were not directly relevant to his theme, although the comparisons between the minstrel and modern newspaper have some merit. Logical Proof In "The Old Ballads” Lowell frequently used the device of restatement. Note the number of restatements in the following example in which Lowell expressed a simple idea that the ballads have no metaphysical passages, and 143 that the people who lived in the period in which the ballads were composed lived and thought simply, rather than meta- physically. The minstrels had no metaphysical bees in their bonnets. They did not speculate about this world or the next. They had not made the great modern discovery that a bird in the bush was two in the hand. They did not analyze or refine till nothing genuine was left of this beautiful world but an indigestion. The people in those days lived frankly; they looked out cheerfully upon life, and were more concerned about their stomachs than the mysteries of their being. Their world was a small one. They took things just as they were, without supposing they were responsible for the consequences. Goodness did not always ”Put in its thumb, And pull out a plum;” nor did evil come to a bad end. They were probably sincerely thank- ful for a "good murder" or a shipwreck, just as news-boys are now. In order to make this simple point, Lowell stated his in- itial assertion, restated it in simpler terms, expanding the idea to include the speculative aspect of metaphysics, and then re-emphasized it in the form of a humorous example. In using a proverb, Lowell gave it a metaphysical twist in order to satirize the effect metaphysics has in complicat- ing an idea. A third restatement followed, this time add- ing a moral connotationu-that current metaphysical practice changed "beauty" into an indigestion. Having stated the idea four times, Lowell turned the coin and examined the "causes" that led to this "effect.“ Beginning with a sec— ond simple assertion, "The people lived frankly and cheers fully," he restated it in more concrete terms, emphasizing the "stomach” over the mysteries of life and contrasting simplicity with metaphysics. Lowell then restated the idea 144 of ”simplicity" in general terms: "They took things as they were.” He again contrasted "simplicity” with metaphysics, i.e., consequences for their actions. Following the pattern of his first assertion, Lowell used a well-known nursery rhyme to make his point, substituting "goodness" for Jack Horner, and thus satirizing metaphysics again. He tied both assertions together in a humorous climax, comparing minstrels to newsboys, "sincerely thankful for a good murder." This use of restatement and example serves as an excellent illustration of how Lowell reasoned inductively from example. It also illustrates the outline of Lowell's most used pattern of argument mentioned earlier in this chapter. This illustration utilizes a humorous conclusion, and although the other three forms of this pattern, i.e., the plain, the quotation, and the florid ending, are present in this lecture, the "florid” conclusion does not appear in the other three speeches and is therefore unique to this particular lecture. It is dead feeling that is wrapt up in a shroud of language. When in a matter that concerns emow tion, a man begins to contrive what he shall say and how he shall say it, he is going to utter semen thing that is unfit for him to speak and for us to hear. The poet does not make the poem; it possesses him and can no more tell you how it was made out of him than the brown earth can guess how the snow- drop that looks back at her could create itself out of her dusky bosom and find in her the secret of its perfumed pearls. We feel as wide a differ- ence between what is manufactured and what is spon~ taneous as between the sparks from an Electrical Machine, which a sufficiently muscular professor can grind out by the dozen, and the wild fire of 145 God that writes mene, mene, on the crumbling palace walls of midnight cloud.r In this lecture, the inductive pattern of definition and example leading into the "quotation" conclusion tends to be less elaborate than the other three conclusions and generally contains fewer restatements and examples. Lowell stated his assertion, defined it, illustrated it, and then relied on the quoted ballad to provide the emphasis, clarity, and proof of his assertion. The balladsingers had all the advantage of that spur of the moment which the excitement of speaking gives, and they also received the magnetism which came from the sympathy of their hearers. They knew what told, for they had their hand upon the living pulse of feeling. There was no time to palaver, they must come to the point. The Percy out of Northumberland And a vow to God made he That he would hunt in the mountains Of Cheviot within days three In the maggre of Doughty Douglas And all that ever with him be. Use of quotation and allusion as evidence has been discussed in the introduction as a general trait of Lowell's rhetoric; however, "The Old Ballads," an hour lecture, ex— ceeded the two-hour ”Harvard Address" in both allusion and quotation. The more common allusions referred to were the Bible, Shakespeare, Virgil, Homer, Spencer, Chaucer, Sir Phillip Sidney, Adam Smith, Dr. Johnson, Milton, Wordsworth, Mallet, Michel Angelo [sic], King Arthur, and Robin Hood. Less familiar ones were Numa, Tacita, Doddridge, Jamieson, 1This example also provides an excellent illustra- tion of Lowell's early use of similitude. 146 Firdusi, Demagorgon, ”gene, gene," "declaration in trover," and "sowing of dragon's teeth." On an equal level of importance with his arguments from example and analogy and his use of evidence was Lowell's use of humor. He applied some form of it in every paragraph, utilizing original humor, wit, satire, and irony. Satire and original humor appear to be his favorites and were most often used in making contrasts of the past with the present or in making fun of contemporary authors. Contrasting a death scene from an old ballad with an invented parallel provided Lowell with an opportunity to contrast the old with the new: If a maiden loses her lover, she merely»- Turns her face unto the wall, And there her heart it breaks. Using humorous invention, Lowell makes the following contrast: A modern poet would have hardly thrown away the opportunity offered him of describing the chamber and its furniture; he would put a painted window into it--for the inkstand will supply them quite as cheap as plain glass. He would tell you all about the tapestry, which the eyes of the dy» ing maiden in her extreme agony would have been very likely of course to have been minutely inter- ested in. He would have given a clinical lecture on the symptoms, and a post—mortem examination. In a second instance Lowell poked fun at newspapers: We are apt to wonder at the scholarship of the men of two centuries ago. They were scholars because they did not read so much as we do. We spend more time over print than they did, but instead of com- muning with the choice thoughts of choice spirits, and insensibly acquiring the grand manner of that supreme society, we diligently inform ourselves of such facts as that a fine horse belonging to Mr. Smith ran away on Wednesday, and that a son of Mr. 147 Brown fell into the canal on Thursday, or that a gravel-bank caved in and buried alive Patrick O'Callahan on Friday.1 Ethical Proofs Lowell's ethical proofs vary little from those ex» pounded in the introduction. He used humor, maxims, and similitudes and utilized his American theme, which served as ethical proofs. At this early period Lowell was noted as a humorist, primarily because of his Biglow Papers, which had been published in 1848. By including a great deal of humor in this lecture, Lowell was meeting what must certainly have been an expectation of the audience. It is also pos- sible that the many poetic passages contained in this lec- ture were Lowell's attempt to please the audience by living up to their expectations of him as a poet. Source of Ideas Lowell cultivated his ability to observe from early adulthood, when he began keeping commonplace books in which he recorded his observations and impressions in the form of maxims, epigrams, and poetry. In these early years Lowell also included quotations from books he had read, 1George Edward Woodberry, Literary Memoirs 3; the Nineteenth Century_(New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Co., 1921), p. 317. In his criticism of Lowell's Democracy and Other Addresses, Woodberry praised Lowell's "dignity of phrase such as has not been noticeable in any American for a long time." For his example of this dignity of phrase, Woodberry cited much of the above quotation from Lowell's "Books and Libraries Address" of 1885, not realizing that Lowell had excerpted this passage from ”The Old Ballads" of thirty years earlier. 148 but this practice seems to have been neglected after 1852, when, instead of writing in commonplace books, he began making notations in the margins of his books as he read them. Unfortunately, the commonplace books were written mostly in pencil and are very difficult to read, and only one idea was traced to them. The fact that he copied one idea from them is indication that he used them as a source for these lectures, and, more than likely, made frequent use of them. Since Lowell used Wordsworth and his poetry for several examples in “The Old Ballads,” it is likely that he utilized materials he had gathered to write an essay on Wordsworth which he published early in 1854. Considering the hundreds of original similes, meta» phors, illustrations, and analogies present in this lecture series, Lowell's inventive faculties must have been heavily strained. Perhaps the difficulties he experienced with his preparation of the series was, in part, a difficulty in producing the large number of comparisons, illustrations, and examples of original humor that were employed. The casual reader of newspaper accounts of these lectures would have missed the greater part of Lowell's original illustra— tions,because, in shortening the lectures for publication, both reporters removed a large portion of these amplifica~ tion devices. 149 Style M. A. DeWolfe Howe pointed to an important aspect of Lowell's style in his biographical account, located in the Dictionary 2; American Bio ra h , when he described Lowell's ”facility in the twisting of words into all the shapes demanded by punning and verse-making." Howe explained that Lowell could not resist an outlandish pun “even in a serious book review." He was capable of applying to certain Shakespear- ian commentators "the quadrisyllabic name of the brother of A915, King of Sparta"--in which it took a Felton [a noted Greek scholar] to recognize Budamidas. Lowell's use of obscure allusion was noted earlier, and ”The Old Ballads” contained several examples of this defect. Lowell's ”word twisting" brings to light another aspect of his style. He inserted in his first printing of "The Cathedral“ a "miserable interchange with an Englishman at Chartres": "Esker vous ate a nabitang?" he asked: "I never ate one; are they good?" asked I. Howe's comment on this incongruity was, "Such things are incredible, but there they are in the spontaneity of Lowell's first printing." "The Old Ballads" manuscript contained only one example of this type; and it did not appear in either of the newspaper texts, indicating that it might have been deleted in delivery. The better aspects of Lowell's "word twisting," as they relate to style, are demonstrated by his use of 150 simile and metaphor: (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (ll) (12) (13) The words of the backwoodsman were sometimes as keen and sure of stroke as his axe. They never had the life squeezed out of them by the printing press nor lost their color by imprisonment in books. We become mere sponges to be saturated with the stagnant water of village gossip. The world is now one great village; then, a little hamlet was a world. When they speak of death their words smell of the mould. We riddled such barrow-loads of gravel for a grain of gold dust, and when we found it, it was mica after all. Here all was grim as the grave. It is plain enough that the main business of this man is to die and of the poet to let him, and not keep him in his agony while he puts Pegasus through all his paces. It is grim as a fresh-dug grave and bare as a coffin» lid. The adoption of a new religion was like putting them in the position of persons suffering from a sudden concussion of the brain. It is dead feeling that is wrapt up in a shroud of dead language. . . . sounding like a declaration in trover. It was a different ghost that the olden poet rose, and not one full of Doddridge's Sermons. They did not live as we do in a world that seems a great ear of Dionysius. It becomes apparent when examining Lowell's meta» phors and similes that there are two distinct kinds: those invented comparisons and word inversions that make his mean— ing immediately clear, i.e., the first ten; and the last three, which are allusive and have meaning only to those 151 familiar with the allusion. Fowler detailed the primary purpose of the metaphor and the simile in these words: In nine out of ten metaphors the purpose is the practical one of presenting the notion in the most intelligible or convincing or arresting way, but nine out of ten similes are to be classed not as means of explanation or persuasion, but as ends in themselves, things of real or supposed beauty for which a suitable place is to be found. It can be seen that Lowell's metaphors were generally used in the normal manner, but that his similes differed from the normal pattern, serving most frequently for explanation and persuasion in the same manner as his metaphors. In the last three examples, the purpose may have been the same as in the others, but the result was not. The number and force of Lowell's amplification de- vices, his use of restatement, and the simplicity of his outline are all factors that made this lecture generally clear and easy to understand, in spite of the occasional obscurity caused by florid passages set in lengthy and com— plicated sentences, as in the following example: But the temperament, the deep human nature, the aboriginal emotions, these utter themselves in the voice. Fear chokes it to a husky whisper chilled through with pale mortality; love softens it till the words seem shod with roseleaves and run up their errand secret as the dew: Courage rings in it like a trumpet announcing succor: it trem— bles, more sensitive of coming sympathy, than aspen that stirs in its sleep with a dream of wind: and when the fevered eyes are burned dry of their futile rain, it draws its tones of sorrow from red heartu caverns far below the surface-springs of tears as the sources of life itself. 1H. W. Fowler, A Dictionary_g£_Modern English Usage (Oxford University Press, 1950), p. 536. 152 The inclusion of florid passages as conclusions to his inductive reasoning patterns, and its use in other sec- tions as a restatement device, resulted in this lecture's fluctuating from middle to grand style in all three parts of the speech, the introduction, body, and conclusion. Effect Sumner called Lowell's "Milton" Lecture the best in the series,1 whereas Lowell must have felt that "The Old f Ballads“ was better for the popular audience, since he chose to repeat it in Madison, Wisconsin, during his Western Tour.2 Another indication of the effectiveness of the speech is the apparent popularity of the series with his reading audience. His friend, F. J. Child, wrote him, "I am off tomorrow for New York, and must depend on the Advertiser for my lectures."3 Charles Eliot Norton asked Arthur N. Clough in a letter to him in England if he had received "The report of Lowell's lectures,"4 and an admirer who had read an account in the newspaper--the "Sweet Singer of Hart» ford," Lydia Huntly Sigourney--wrote from Connecticut, "The 1Scudder, 22, cit., I, 373. On February 6,1855, Charles Sumner wrote Longfellow, "Lowell's lecture on Milton lifted me for a whole day. It was the utterance of genius in honor of genius." 2Supra, chap. iii, pp. 69, 99. 3M. A. DeWolfe Howe and G. W. Cottrell, The Scholar Friends (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952), p. 8. 4Sara Norton and M. A. DeWolfe Howe, Letters of Charles Eliot Norton (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1913), p. 119. 153 echo of your voice has traveled beyond the Old Bay State.”1 (An attentive friend had sent her Lowell's lectures by way of the Advertiser.) Recognizing the widespread public interest, Field asked Lowell for permission to publish the lectures, but Lowell refused: It has just got through my skull, and made a dent E“ in my sensorium, that you wrote me a note, ever ' so long ago, about my lectures and the publication 7 of them. I don't mean to print them yet-nor ever 5 till they are better.2 n The advertiser ran short of "sets" of the series and had to reprint the first lecture of the series a second time g, when they ran out.3 More tangible results of the series have already been discussed, i.e., the Harvard Professorship, the Western Tour, and the possible Dante series subsequent to the Western Tour. The results certainly changed the course of Lowell's life, and perhaps his success led him away from speaking rather than serving to encourage him. The Western Tour proved an unpleasant experience, and the Professorship took him to Germany where he was buried in study for over a year, thus missing the opportunity to follow his triumphant series with further speaking engagements. 1Beatty, 22, cit., p. 132. 2Norton, Letters, I, 233. 3Advertiser, February 24, 1855. CHAPTER VI ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT SPEECH Setting and Audience Lowell became an active member in the fight for international copyright on November 20, 1885, when he en- tered the editor's office of the Century Magazine in re- sponse to a circular 1etter. He offered to "write out a poem he had been carrying around in his head for some time."1 Furnished pen and paper by the editor, Mr. R. W. Gilder, he dashed off the following: In vain we call old notions fudge, And bend our conscience to our dealing: The Ten Commandments will not budge, And stealing gill continue stealing. This poem appeared in the February issue of the Century Magazine, along with pro-copyright letters from fifty-four other authors, educators, and ministers. Sometime between November 20 and January 29, when he appeared before the Congressional Committee on Patents and delivered the speech with which this chapter deals, Lowell became president of lUnpublished letter from R. W. Gilder to Horace E. Scudder, Scudder Papers, Houghton Library, Harvard Univer- sity. 2James Russell Lowell, "Open Letters: International Copyright; Plain Speech from American Authors," Century Magazine (December, 1885), p. 627. 154 155 the American Copyright League and gave his support to a campaign that had been under way for almost a hundred years.1 James Russell Lowell, as president of the League, went to Washington just six months after his return from the English Ministry to appear before the Committee on Patents in a hearing concerning the Hawley Copyright Bill 3" and the Chase Bill to amend the current copyright law.2 1In 1790 a copyright law was passed in America. The patriotic emphasis of the times allowed protection exclu- sively to American authors, while the English copyright pro- . tection "could be claimed under common law or gentleman's EJ agreement on the basis of prior issue and regardless of § the author's nationality." Spiller, gp, git,, p. 126. It was a publisher's market for the first thirty years, with American presses turning out 30 percent national literature and 70 percent English. Ibid., p. 236. In 1827 American authors began to use the copyright protection British law offered them through residence in England prior to publica- tion. As added incentive British publishers were often will- ing to pay an American author cash in advance for first pub- lication rights. The English author, however, was not pro- tected under American law, and his work became fair spoil for pirating American publishers. By 1850 a sense of fair play had intervened, and a gentleman's agreement tended to equalize the situation. Ibid., p. 237. Laws in both coun- tries altered frequently but never corrected the situation. A liveable status quo was maintained by the publishers' "courtesy of trade convention“ until the late 1870's, at which time it lost its ability to curb excessive reprinting. Increasing profits in the publishing business attracted new firms who saw no reason to honor the “gentlemen's agreements" of their competitors, and pirating again became the rule rather than the exception. By this time, however, American authors had developed English followings, and British pub- lishers stepped up their pirating activities. In 1878, as G. H. Putnam reported, one of every ten books printed in England was an American book. Ibid., p. 807. Authors, magazine editors and publishers, and many book publishers banded together in 1883, forming the American Copyright League, to bring pressure to bear in Washington. Their opponents were typographers, binders, and printing manage- ment in general, who masked their greed in “pious words about the cheap dissemination of good books." Ibid. 2Both bills favored international copyright, and Lowell showed no preference for either. As a representative 156 Lowell was a good choice for several reasons. Be- cause of his first-hand knowledge of the attitudes of Eng- land's leading political elements, he was an expert on the course of action that England would probably take.1 Sec- ondly, he still carried considerable prestige which could be counted on to add some influence in Washington. To qual- ify him further was his reputation as America's leading literary critic, as a prominent author, and as an eminent educator. On this occasion Lowell came to answer questions for the Committees for Patents from both houses of Congress at a special hearing attended by other members of the Copy~ right League, lobbyists, and members of the Typographer's Union. Among those named in the Congressional Record were Senators Gray, Teller, and Chase, along with Samuel Clemens, R. W. Gilder, BranderMatthews, Mr. Green, and Mr. Estes.2 Immediately preceding Mr. Lowell at the hearing was an em- ployee of the Bell Telephone Company, Mr. Gardiner Hubbard, of the American Copyright League, his concern was to plead for fairness and to promote international copyright. 1The legislature in America was reluctant to tamper with the multimillion dollar publishing business; and bee sides, should an amendment be passed granting copyright privileges to British authors, there was no assurance that England would reciprocate with the noncresident clauses that these bills provided. 2Senate Re orts, First Session, 49th Congress, Numm bers 1089 to I315, Inclusive, except Number 1278, 1885~1886 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1886), VII, 28-44. This will be referred to hereafter as Senate Report. 157 a lobbyist who was hired to protest the bills. His address irritated Mr. Lowell and caused him to reply extemporaneously to Mr. Hubbard's charge s against international copyright.1 Mr. Hubbard's speech presented most of the standard argu- ments against granting international copyright and appeared to be well prepared by demonstrating opposition arguments and assertions persuasively. Although it is apparent from his opening remarks that Lowell was taken off guard by this speech, the arguments that he presented extemporaneously following Mr. Hubbard's speech were solid and well-founded, + as evidenced by the fact that they were the same basic argu— g; ments he continued to use throughout the next five years that the copyright fight continued.2 1There are many limitations involved in selecting extemporaneous speeches for analysis. The following were deemed the most important factors: (1) Was it typical? (2) Was it representative? (3) Is there proof that it was extemporaneous? (4) Are there descriptions of the delivery? and (5) Are there valid texts? Chapter Four cor tains ample evidence to indicate that all of the selected speeches are typical and representative. An internal statement supplies proof of extemporaneous delivery, and a description of Lowell's delivery on this occasi.on is given in an article in the G227 tury Ma gazine. The text, according to the same article, was printed in "several journals.“ R. W. Gilder, ”James Russell Lowell's Bible Argument,” Century Ma azine, X, 161—62. Several journals were consulted in a search for this text. The Critic, March 6, 1886, pp. 1191 23, printed a verbatim copy of the Senate Report, and no other reports were found. Auer suggests that the Congressional Record is not generally considered a highly accurate source. J. Jeffery Auer,,gg Introduction Eg.Research” in Speech (New York: Harper & Bros.), p. 130. Still, Lowell's speech is recorded as testi- mony and it was not subject to revision and extension. For this reason, it is believed by the writer that it is a highly faithful report of the proceedings before the committee. 2A letter he wrote to Mrs. Briggs in May of 1890. Thg_Critic, June 7, 1890, pp. 262m63. See also The Critig, 158 Arrangement To understand the structure of Lowell's speech, it is necessary to examine Mr. Hubbard's address. On the sur- face the situation resembles a debate rather than a general speaking situation; however, examination of Lowell's other extemporaneous speeches shows that he often took note of remarks by previous speakers and toastmasters and structured his speeches around their primary ideas. This speech differs from his usually light, extemporaneous speaking, however, because his topic in this instance was one that demanded persuasion and argumentation. A comparison of Hubbard's and Lowell's speech outlines shows that Lowell's speech is structured primarily to refute Mr. Hubbard's arguments and to undermine his authority in this subject. Of Mr. Hubbard's entire speech, only his assertion that American authorship had not suffered was ignored by Lowell; and there is a possibility that Lowell included this argument under his general questioning of Hubbard's knowledge of the pub- lishing business.l August 29, 1891, p. 110. ”It was Lowell's moral argument upon which the law was finally passed in 1891.” lcr. outline of Mr. Hubbard's speech with the cute line of Mr. Lowell's speech. Mr. Hubbard's arguments 1. Introduction establishing speaker's interest and study of international copyright for thirteen years 2. Assertion that an author has no claim to his writing because it is different from any other kind of property; only while an author retains a manuscript is it his property; when it is published it becomes the property of the world 3. Assertion that copyright is a modern concept and that 159 Mr. Hubbard's first effort was to establish his authority by making it known that he had been called before the Library Committee in 1872-73 and had testified concern- ing international copyright at that time. He pointed out that the Library Committee had found international copyright inexpedient and had recommended that no such act be passed. S. 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. 4. 7. 8. there is no precedence for it except on a limited basis Assertion that there is a distinction between the laws in England and those of America, copyright in England protecting the author's rights, while copyright in America is meant to benefit the public and not the authors Assertion that international copyright would raise book prices, restrict production, and destroy cheap reading Assertion that present laws do not discourage American authorship Assertion that passage of the Hawley Bill on copyright would give the bulk of America's publishing business to foreign houses and that scarcely a single book would be printed in America Assertion that international copyright had been found unconstitutional A summary conclusion stating that international copy- right would restrict arts and science in the United States Mr. Lowell's arguments Short introduction Refutes ”rightmof-property' argument Questions Hubbard's knowledge of publishing Questions that international copyright will raise book prices and discourage cheap publishing States opinion that the bulk of book publishing would be transferred to America as a result of international copyright States personal thesis with national and topical applia cations, showing that the primary consideration in copy- right is moral Refutes Hubbard's arguments as immoral Repeats and amplifies his refutation'of the ”right-ofn property" argument, examines the history of Hubbard's "lack-of-precedence" argument Short conclusion 160 Mr. Hubbard stated that from his experience with the Library Committee and from subsequent study, he had become convinced that international c0pyright was not in the interest of the people of America. Referring back to the previous Library Committee, Mr. Hubbard stated its conclusion: that copyright for Amara ican authors could be interpreted as furthering arts and EL sciences, but that taxing the American people to pay fora eign publishers and authors served no such purpose. The Library Committee felt that the framers of the Constitution ; did not intend that foreigners be given such a right. é; At this point Mr. Hubbard was questioned by a member of the Copyright League: If patents could be granted to foreigners, why should copyright be withheld? Mr. Hubbard replied that there was no difference between a copyright and a patent, and that he himself did not think copyright unconstitutional; however, it was for the Committee to de— cide if it was in the public interest to grant copyright to foreigners. . Upon resuming his speech, Mr. Hubbard projected the cost of English books to the American public by compar— ing the current English prices with the American reprint prices. He estimated that each English book would increase in average cost by about $4.70 over the current reprint price, should English authors be allowed to secure copyrights. He went on to present statistics showing that copyright of American books had increased 25 percent over a period of 161 ten years, demonstrating that American authors were not being discouraged by the competition of English reprints. Mr. Hubbard asserted that it was only through inexpensive editions that the American people could be well supplied with literature; and he concluded that the proposed bills would enhance prices, restrict production, and destroy inn expensive reading. "The tendency of each one of these things, it seems to me, is not to promote science and the arts, but to restrict the advance of science and the arts."1 Delivery j Upon the conclusion of Mr. Hubbard's remarks James Russell Lowell was introduced to the Committees by Mr. Green, and R. W. Gilder wrote the following impression of Lowell's delivery on this occasion: No reports, verbatim or otherwise, could re—create the atmosphere of this remarkable scene. . . . Noth- ing could exceed the tact, goodunature, ready wit, and hurtling sarcasm with which Lowell took the field.2 Gilder continued, noting Mr. Hubbard's misfortune in having to precede Lowell, thus providing Lowell's "lance an embod- ied foe."3 The keenest thrusts were accompanied by a twinkle of the eye, a pleasant falling inflection of the voice, or a smile, that was like the glistening 1Senate Report, p. 33. 2"James Russell Lowell's Bible Argument," 92, cit., p. 161. 31bid. 162 of a damascus blade, with an edge as sharpe as its glitter. It was not only in direct assault that Lowell proved his ability, but throughout the long session by answering quickly and ably the questions coming to him from every side.1 Arguments Lowell opened his remarks by referring to Mr. Hub- bard's "very extraordinary speech," which "called for some comment."2 He called Hubbard’s statement concerning his belief that there is no such thing as property in books "a very common fallacy." Lowell pointed out that this ar- gument is generally put in another way, "that there is no property in an idea." Lowell agreed that there is no prop— erty in an idea but asserted that there is property in ”the fashioning that is given to an idea"; and he supported this assertion by stating that the constitution already recog- nized this by granting patents. "Patents are nothing but ideas fashioned a certain way."3 Lowell, in what appears on the surface to be an innocent comparison, gave a second example. "For instance, the Bell telephone is precisely a parallel case to that of books, and I think there are a great many people in this country who are interested in the Bell telephone and believe it to be property." To Mr. Hubbard and the committee, however, this comparison was not as innocent as it seemed but was rather an example of Lowell's lIbid. 2Senate Re ort, p. 34. 31bid. 163 wit, since Mr. Hubbard was employed by Bell Telephone. Lowell next dismissed opposition views ”like Mr. Hubbard's as purely hypothetical,” and began to argue ad hominem, by placing his prestige against Mr. Hubbard°s. He tells you that it [copyright] would make books dearer. I do not think he has the slightest evi- dence on which to show you that it would make books dearer. My own decided opinion is that it would make books cheaper. When he says, also, that it is an attempt of publishers to make large profits on small editions, instead of small profits on large editions, I think he should have a more general knowledge of the book trade—-nay, of the modern tendencies of the trade in general-~before he makes an assertion of that sort.1 Lowell attempted to undermine the lobbyist°s authority by questioning his knowledge of the publishing business. He first called attention to the English practice of printing expensive first editions and thereby implied that Hubbard's statistics on English book prices were exaggerated. Sec- ondly, Lowell noted the trend of circulating library owners to dictate to the publishers, who were at that time control- ling the market. This observation that publishers were rapidly losing control of the book market was an endeavor to negate Mr. Hubbard°s argument that publishers would con- trol prices if international copyright were to become law. As a further argument against the idea that copyright would raise prices and lower quality, Lowell gave the example of an Edinburgh publisher who paid American authors copya right, reprinted "beautiful little volumes,“ and sold them Ibid. 164 for a shilling. Lowell added, for the benefit of the legis- lators, that the American people were not against cepyright but were for inexpensively printed books. Relying on his knowledge of the American people, Lowell argued: I myself am perfectly satisfied that the reading public in America, being much larger than in Eng- land, and demanding cheap books, the result of a copyright law, if we ever get one, will be to trans— fer the great bulk of the book trade from England to this country, and with it the publishing of books. That is my firm belief.1 Mr. Lowell admitted, “But that is purely hypothetical, like Mr. Hubbard's argument." Lowell elaborated on the thought that the book market would come to the United States.1 "If the larger market be here, and if books have to be printed in a cheaper form in order to suit that market, I think they will be so printed."2 Having questioned Mr. Hubbard's authority and replied to his arguments, Lowell stated his own thesis and at the same time branded Mr. Hubbard's arguments as immoral. I, myself, take the moral view of the question. I believe that this is a simple question of moral- ity and justice; that many of the arguments which Mr. Hubbard used are arguments which might be used for picking a man's pocket. Playing on Hubbard's "cheapness~of~1iterature" argument, Lowell continued, One could live a great deal cheaper undoubtedly if he could supply himself from other people with- out any labor or cost. But at the same time—mwell, lIbid. 2Ibid., p. 34. 165 it was not called honest when I was young, and that is all I can say. Restating his thesis, Lowell referred to the Bible as ”a book which was . . . more read when I was young than it is now,"2 and stated that the Bible is right when it says, "Righteousness exalteth a nation." Making the application to copyright, Lowell continued, "I believe this is a ques- tion of righteousness."3 Restating his thesis a third time, Lowell said, "If I were asked what book is better than a cheap book, I should answer that there is one book better than a cheap book, and that is a book honestly come by."4 In one paragraph the thesis was stated three times: on the personal level, i.e., "I take a moral view"; on a na- tional level, ”Righteousness exalteth a nation“; and on the topical level, "A book honestly come by.” In this same paragraph, while driving his thesis home, Lowell unleashed two strong arguments against Hubbard's cause: (1) that his arguments could be presented in favor of picking pockets, and (2) that a cheap book is not as valuable as an honest book. Lowell admitted that he favored cheap books, going on to define what he meant, i.e., cheap in price and not in quality. He concluded that quality was ”almost" a g..- Ibid., p. 35. N Ibid. Ibid. ow Ibid. 166 national consideration. Following his reflection concerning cheap books, Lowell resumed his attack on Mr. Hubbard°s argument that authors had no property claim in their books by examining his definitions: I should like to ask, in answer to one of the points which Mr. Hubbard made-the notion, namely, that there was no common-law property in books-what is the origin of property? I am not sure that that has ever been quite settled. I think the general theory is that it was force; that the stronger man got possession of what he could, and held it; that force takes the precedence of right, as Bismark says. And Lowell added a pointed observation: "Advancing civili- zation is supposed to have found a better system."2 Having discussed the historical background of prop- erty, Lowell broke his topic into two of its legal aspects: the tests of "custom" and of modern "status.“ But there are many pieces of property for which we cannot show any common law right. We can show custom ”whereof the memory of man runneth not to the contrary." And Mr. Hubbard°s notion that there is any meaning in the fact that copyright was is- sued first to publishers springs simply from the fact that as the publisher had to buy the right of publication, the copyright was in him, as the lawyers would say; it was not in the author gny longer. That follows as a matter of course. Agreeing with Hubbard's statement that ”copyright is a modern species of property," Lowell explained the reason: "It could lIbid. 21bid. 3Ibid. 167 not possibly have arisen before the invention of the art of printing.“ Lowell pointed out that before printing was invented, owning a manuscript constituted owning the book, and trouble and cost of piracy operated as safeguards to the author. The "trouble of copying would almost have given the copyist a right to the possession of the book."1 The reason that copyright is modern is because the art of printing is modern, and because the rapid multiplication of books is even more modern than the invention of printing.2 Lowell was clarifying Mr. Hubbard's statements of copyright status, i.e., its modernity, because Hubbard gave the im- pression that there was no precedence under law for an author to have property in his writing. By restating Hubbard°s contention that copyright is modern and by adding the his— torical background, giving examples, and showing that print~ ing had completely changed the author°s status by making piracy possible and profitable, Lowell appeared to strengthen his own position and to weaken Hubbard°s argument that legal precedence was not in an author°s favor. Lowell seemed momentarily to digress from his "righta of-property" argument to attack Hubbard’s apparent attitude that it was shameful for an English author to want more money for his books, using an example of a prominent Eng- lish author whose book had recently been reprinted in the lIbid. 21bid. 168 United States.1 Although this example appeared to have no connection with his property arguments, he suddenly returned to his former line of argument: I think it is very natural he [the English author] should wish more money for his book, and cannot help feeling that he has as clear a right of prop- erty in the form he has given to his thought as the inventor feels that he has when he applies for a patent to protect the materialization of his ideas in the machine. Lowell further illustrated his argument by using the example of Shakespeare, concluding his speech with a final appeal to consider the author's right of property. Shakespeare takes from an Italian novel the story of the Merchant of Venice, we will say. But does not Shakespeare put something into the Merchant 2; Venice that nobody else by human possibility could have put in it? Does he not establish in that way, quite as much as the inventor of a machine, a certain right of property? There are people, you know, who deny the right or property altogether, and they enforce it with very strong reasons and make strong arguments . . . as those brought against the copyrighting of books or the ownership of a copyright in them.3 Ethical Proof Lowell's ad hominem arguments questioned Hubbard°s knowledge of the publishing business, and his restatement of Hubbard's argument on "copyright precedence” appeared to negate his opponent as much ethically as it did logically. lIbid. The English author was Justin McCarthy, and the book Lowell made reference to was probably Camiola, published in 1885. 2Ibid., p. 36. 31bid. 169 Lowell gave the overall impression of being completely honest by announcing straightforwardly that his assertions were opinions and that they were for the most part hypothetical, "like Mr. Hubbard's." Since Hubbard had not presented his assertions as opinions, he may have appeared a bit underu handed, or at least not as honest as Mr. Lowell. Lowell further suggested Hubbard's dishonesty when he announced that his own position on copyright was a moral one. Again he contrasted his moral stand with Hubbard's immoral one, using the "pickpocket" argument. He quoted from the Bible and spoke of honesty and righteousness. The ethical value of these appeals is obvious and shows Lowell bettering an already strong position. The fact that twenty-one of twenty-six "I thinks" included in the speech are in the first half might indicate that Lowell relied on his previously established ethical appeal to supplement his arguments. Possibly because of 'his awareness of his ethical appeal, Lowell did not attempt to establish common ground or authority within his speech as Hubbard did; but, on the contrary, he stated his opinions and trusted their being accepted on the basis of his own authority. As indicated previously, this manifested itself in Mr. Lowell's using twenty-six Variations of "I think” in his twenty-four minute speech.1 In his first ten minutes, 1This speech was timed in the same manner in which radio scripts are timed, using two words as equal to one second of time. 170 variations of "I think" were used thirteen times. In the next minute and forty seconds, while Lowell was stating his main thesis of "morality and justice," he used "I be- lieve," "I cannot help thinking," "my view of it," "if I were asked," and "that would be my feeling" eight times. In the last twelve minutes of the speech he used variations of "I think" only five times, and two of these were in the last paragraph. Undoubtedly Lowell's use of these phrases shows his attitude toward himself and toward the ethical appeal that he transmitted to his audience. Logical Proof This is not to say that Lowell neglected logical argument for ethical appeal, but rather that he strongly combined them. In dealing with Hubbard's arguments, he placed his opinions directly against his opponent's, admits ting that his own assertions were "purely hypothetical, like Mr. Hubbard's." Then, he proceeded to make assertions which were exactly the opposite of Hubbard's; e.g., book prices would not increase, and the bulk of the publishing would move to the United States. This left the Committee to decide whose opinions carried the most weight. The second half of the speech is devoted entirely to close examination of the question of an author's right of property in his work. The examination is historical, chronological, and filled with examples and illustrations. The approach was refutative, answering each one of Mr. 171 Hubbard's assertions in turn and supplying new examples as he made new points in favor of copyright. atria Complementing his presentation of logical arguments, Lowell employed a generally plain style in this speech, using no flowery phrases nor poetry. The sentences, although not always short, are direct and simply stated; and he used only two rhetorical figures: a simile, "Books . . . are like umbrellas”; and irony, "I do not wish to urge . . . [righteousness] too far because that is considered a little too ideal." Lowell did display one habit in his style that seems to detract from its simplicity. He made many parenm thetical remarks‘which break the flow of the sentences. With the inflections of delivery, perhaps they were not as apparent to his immediate audience as they are on the printed page. His concluding sentence is the best example of this habit: There are people, you know, who deny the right of property altogether, and they enforce it with very strong reasons and make strong arguments, I think, quite as strong, it strikes me-mto be sure, I am myself an author, and perhaps do not look at it fairly—-as those brought against the copyrighting of books or the ownership of a copyright in them. Effect The effect of this speech cannot be measured in tangible results, but it was the beginning of a movement. The American Copyright League, formed in 1883, had accom- plished little to this date. After 1885 meetings were held; 172 money was raised through authors' readings for the cause; other committees lobbied congress and presidents; and magm azines printed pro~copyright articles, editorials, and let- ters. In spite of this combined effort, it was another five years before the bill was finally passed, and at that time the same moral argument first espoused by Lowell was the reason given for its passage.1 Lowell himself stated what he thought his chief, accomplishment was with regard to international copyright when he wrote the following to Kate Field: We have made progress. We have secured public dis— cussion, and a righteous cause which has done that has got the weather gauge of its adversary.2 1"The Tribute of a Poet and Critic," Ehg_Critic, August 29, 1891, p. 110. In an interview with a Critic reporter, Edmund Stedman gave the following information: "It was to Mr. Lowell, in spite of the hard work of other advocates, that much of the success of the final copyright campaign was due. From the first Mr. Lowell advocated In- ternational Copyright purely as a matter of national honor and justice to foreign authors. . . . During the recent cam- paign, then, we had no valid argument in behalf of Inter- national Copyright except the moral one, and the law was finally passed upon ground held by Mr. Lowell." 2222_Critic, June 7, 1890, p. 262. Lowell firmly believed that given the choice, the American people were fair-minded and would vote on the side of truth. For Lowell, then, the chief object of the American Copyright League's efforts was to secure public discussion and to get the ar- guments before the public. This speech proved effective in accomplishing this end. CHAPTER VII TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FOUNDATION OF HARVARD ADDRESS Setting and Audience a _, ' L ‘%W- On November 8, 1886, Harvard University celebrated her two hundred and fiftieth year, with James Russell Lowell as the chief orator, delivering a two—hour speech in praise of his alma mater. Four months before the distinguished occasion, he had written to Charles Eliot Norton, "I would decline if I could give a better reason than that I have nothing to say."1 As a result of his ambassadorship he had become one of Harvard's most renowned sons; his reputation as a speaker almost equaled his reputation as a poet, and he was the ideal choice. Also, by virtue of the ambassador— ship, Lowell's name had been elevated to capital letters in the Harvard Quinguintenial Catalogue, making his one of the most prominent listings: JAMES RUSSELL LOWELL, A.M.; LL.B. 1840; D.C.L. Ox- ford 1873; LL.D. 1884, Cambr. 1874, St. Andrews 1884, Edinb. 1884; Smith Prof. French and Span. Lang. and Lit. and Prof. Belles Lettres, and Smith Prof. Emeritus; Rector St. Andrews Univ.; Overseer, Fellow Am. Acad.; Memb. Mass. Hist. Soc., Am. Philos. Soc., and Real Acad. Espanola; Fellow Royal Soc. Edinb., and Royal Soc. Lit. (London) U.S. Min. Plen. Spain, Gt. Britain. 1Supra, chap. iii, p. 87. 173 174 To this impressive list other honors and accomplishments could have been added, but probably the most important would have been Lowell's presidency of the Birmingham Midland Institute, where he delivered his famous "Democracy Address," eliciting unlimited praise in the United States. Lowell was joined on the platform for the august ceremony by Oliver Wendell Holmes, poet for the occasion; and behind them was seated a third famous Harvard graduate, the President of the United States, Grover Cleveland. Sanders Theatre, the place of the event, was filled to capacity, and an observer noted that one student was perched on the top of an open door in order to get a better view.1 Harvard graduates and representatives from univer- sities all over the world comprised the audience. In spite of the supreme honor bestowed by Harvard University in selecting him to speak, Lowell was in a dis- traught state of mind, personal problems weighing heavily on him. Part of his depression was due to his old nemesis of preparation that kept him in a state of despair for four months.2 An incident just two weeks before the occasion greatly distressed Lowell. Julian Hawthorne stopped at Elmwood to visit Lowell between trains, and Lowell spoke freely with the son of his old friend. Later, to his immense 1A. Lawrence Lowell, pp, cit., p. 101. 2Supra, chap. iii, pp. 86-89. 175 dismay, he learned that his conversation had appeared in the New York World, presenting him in a very unflattering manner by printing many of his "off the record" comments. An exchange of public letters ensued, with Hawthorne declar= ing that Lowell knew he was being interviewed for an article and Lowell denying it. On October 27, just twelve days before the "Harvard Address," Lowell wrote a letter to the “a Boston Herald. - If he [Hawthorne] shall assert that he told me for what he came and that I understood him, I shall feel obligated to leave the matter to those who know us . both as a question of veracity between him and me. 53 The life of a man, into whose private affairs the ” public assumes the right to look, is far from agrees able at best; but on the terms which Mr. Hawthorne seems willing to justify, it would be unendurable. I have now said, I hope, the last word which I shall find it necessary about an affair, almost as painful to me for Mr. Hawthorne's sake as for my own, though he could hardly have chosen a victim who could suf- fer more keenly. I might fairly go farther and repudiate indignantly a report of my conversation which wholly misrepresents me in its more offensive particulars, but I remember Sancho's proverb and desist.1 It was in this frame of mind that he took the platform to speak. Textual Considerations The "Harvard Address" received wide publication, appearing first in a special supplement of the December, 1886, Atlantic Monthly. It was reprinted in two parts in The Critic, and within twelve months it was published in lThe Critic, November 6, 1886, p. 227. 176 Democracy and Other Addresses. All three printed texts, with minor variations, are close representations of the reading manuscript. Emotional Proof Of the four speeches analyzed, this address was the only one in which Lowell used direct emotional appeals. They appeared rather subtly, the first coming as a compar— ison; Harvard sons returning to their school were likened to a prosperous son returning to his old home. We come back hither from the experiences of a richer life, as the son who has prospered returns to the household of his youth, to find in its very home- liness a pulse, if not of deeper, certainly of fender, emotion than any splendor could stir. "Dear old Mother," we say, "how charming you are in your plain cap and the drab silk that has been turned again since we saw you! You were constantly forced to remind us that you could not afford to give us this and that which some other boys had, but you sent us forth into the world with the sound constitutions and healthy appetites that are bred of simple fare." Lowell made a moral application of his emotional proof: "It is good for us to commemorate this homespun past of ours; good, in these days of a reckless and swaggering prosperity, to remind ourselves how poor our fathers were." He continued with his purpose sentence for the address. “This is cur Founders' Day, and we are come together to do honor to them all." Later in the speech Lowell employed an emotional proof a second time, when he referred to the fact that Sanders Theatre had been built to commemorate the Civil War dead. It is the stuff out of which fortunate ancestors are made, and twenty-five years ago their sons - ‘4'. P's-J" 177 showed in no diminished measure the qualities of the breed. In every household some brave boy was saying to his mother, as Iphigenia to hers,--"Thou bearest me for all the Greeks, not for thyself alone." [The quotation was in Greek.] Nor were Harvard's sons the last. This hall commemorates them, but their story is written in headstones all over the land they saved. This second emotional proof served to close a rather lengthy narration in which he described the life of the early New England clergy. Ethical Proof Besides using all the general ethical appeals dis" cussed in Chapter Five, Lowell added other innovations in \ 57 m. this speech. His remarkable extrinsic gthg§_has been dis- cussed as part of the background and setting of the speech; possibly to add weight to his opinions, he called attention to his accomplishments, e.g., "I stand here as a man of letters, and as a man of letters I must speak." He also used his ethos to attempt to refute arguments as he had in his "Copyright Speech" a few months earlier. "This is not true, if I may judge from some little experience, but it is interesting as implying a certain consciousness, which is of the most hopeful augury." Also, "I have seen several Spirits of the Age in my time, of very different voices and summoning in very different directions, but unan— imous in their propensity to land us in the mire at last." Opinions from his own experience appeared frequently in this address, prefaced by "I think," "I am not ignorant that," "I am saddened." 178 There are quotations in five languages, Latin and Greek taking predominance; and if one applies Lowell's own view on the use of them, i.e., "The first Latin quote draws the first applause," it is possible to infer that they were inserted to elevate his ethical appeal; however, it is probe able that they were employed because academic style was expected from a scholar and a man of letters. 5; Lowell again relied heavily on humor, maxims, and similitudes; and, as has been previously emphasized, they were strong factors of ethical proof. Wu"; .v‘ Logical Proof Lowell's use of logical proofs for this address did not vary from his general practice as far as the type he used, i.e., predominant forms were reasoning from example and analogy, most of the evidence being literary examples and allusions, quotations, restatements, and definitions; however, the content was considerably more erudite, and his examples and allusions were drawn from history and lit— erature more than in the other three speeches. Still, in spite of the occasion, the similes Lowell chose to use sometimes took on the pungent flavor of those used in "The Old Ballads“--"Fancy flutters over these vague wastes like a butterfly blown out to sea, and finds no foot- hold," "Opinions are 'as handy,‘ to borrow our Yankee proverb, 'as a pocket in a shirt,‘ and I may add, as hard to come at." On a more intellectual plane he referred to "the black Care of the Roman poet," Platonic year, Ruskin”s opinion 179 that he could not live in a country without castles or cathedrals, Euripidean chorus, and concepts of Milton and Donne, to name a few of his erudite examples. The following is characteristic of his use of his- torical example in this address: The colony, still insignificant, was in danger of an Indian war, was in the throes of that Antinomian controversy which threatened its very existence, and yet the leaders of opinion on both sides were united in the resolve that sound learning and an educated clergy should never cease from among them or their descendants in the commonwealth they were building up. Lowell also supplied examples of the early history '15.“.- A "I," of Harvard, including a lengthy one concerning two Indians who were taught to read Latin and Greek. He alluded to men of importance to the history of Harvard, e.g., Higginson, Cotton, Wilson, Norton, Shepherd, Davenport, and Winthrop, to list a few.1 In several instances Lowell argued from his own authority, as was noted in the discussion of ethical proof. He recalled personal examples of his early school» ing to illustrate his logical proof: The late Professor Popkin, whom the older of us remember, would have allowed that title [of letters] only to the Greeks,—~and to teach them in such a way as to enable the pupil to assimilate somewhat of their thought, sentiment, and style, rather than to master the minuter niceties of the language in which they wrote. 1In referring to these family names, Lowell did not make reference to specific members. 180 His general illustrations were characteristically clear and poignant: Many a boy has hated, and rightly hated, Homer and Horace the pedagogues and grammarians, who would have loved Homer and Horace the poets, had he been allowed to make their acquaintance. While most of these logical proofs are common to all four speeches, the "Harvard Address” shows Lowell deviating from his general practice in two important aspects: he used narrative and he used extensive deductive reasoning, neither of which appeared in the three other speeches. With nar- rative, he led the audience to visualize the early New Eng- land clergy; and from literary evidence, he deductively recreated early Harvard teaching practices. Arrangement Lowell's arrangement for this address is not a coma plicated one, but it is rather the common chronological arrangement of many commemoration addresses~~past, present, and future. Introduction 1. Time's paradoxes—-past, present 2. Homespun past--past Body 1. Birth of Harvard-past 2. Objects of the founders-~past 3. Chief service of the college-~past 4. Debt of Massachusetts-~present 5. Meaning of a university--present 6. New education--future 7. What Harvard has done, ought to do--past, present, future 8. True measure of success--future Conclusion 1. What a diploma should stand for-peroration 2. Common ground appeals, welcome alumni-—future 3. Praise of President Cleveland ‘Z'CW‘ 181 Within this outline, Lowell allowed himself consid- erable mobility, and using the rhetorical device of digres— sion, spent more time than appeared to be prudent to his purpose on the elective system, teaching foreign languages, and democracy. With less emphasis he discussed state social- ism and the French school system. All of these were made relevant to Lowell's speech, but there is a possibility Fe that he inserted the last three in order to propagate his own opinions. While the elective system controversy was at its we! ' , peak in 1884, Child wrote Lowell in England, "I can tell you we need you here now. The chemists are in conspiracy to oust Greek, and then Latin."l If the situation were still in a state of flux, Lowell may have given his expanded views on the elective system and the teaching of languages to help the cause of his fellow faculty members. Source 2: Ideas Horace Scudder suggested that Lowell's addresses were "a series of valedictories." Lowell did in the closing years of his life sum up, in forms which occasions for the most part suggested, his leading principles and doctrines, as if in a series of valedictories. Thus "Democ- racy" was a confession of his fundamental belief in the region of world-politics; his address at Harvard was the one word onyscholarship which at the end of a scholar's life he most wished to say. I lHowe and Cottrell, 93. cit., p. 64. ZScudder, 92. cit., II, 372-73. 182 There is evidence to indicate that when he began to write the "Harvard Address," he had already decided to publish it in his Democracy_and Other Addresses, which ap- peared in 1886. He gave the speech on November 8, and on November 17, he wrote to Lady Lyttelton when the book was on the point of publication: "I shall ask your acceptance ere long of a volume of my addresses and you can judge for yourself as the last ['Harvard Address'] will be in it."1 Besides this statement, the longer sentences of his literary style that appear throughout the speech serve as intrinsic indications of his intention. It is possible to trace several of the ideas which Lowell projected in the address. In the introduction he referred to the "sentimental relish” that Americans have for age and the fancy that ”we have to play very hard in order to believe that we are old.“ This concept of age had been mentioned in "The Old Ballads" and again in his "Old South Church Address." A letter to Norton, written at the time he was com- posing the address, showed his humorous reflections on ”time." To his own thoughts he added several literary allusions and quotations concerning "time" and placed them in the "Harvard Address“ introduction. Lowell made reference to three older schools, in- cluding Oxford and Cambridge, both of which had conferred lHowe, New Letters, p. 294. .‘r' L, - 183 honorary doctorates upon him. Much of his invention was derived from the early history of Massachusetts. Lowell had been an active member of the Massachusetts Historical Society since 1863, probably giving him first-hand access to early documents of the state. He referred to ”the Gratulatio presented by Harvard College on the occasion of the accession of George III." Since Lowell's grandfather, "the Old Judge," had helped to pre— pare it, this may have been inserted as a matter of pride.1 He related personal experiences and recalled his own instructors at Harvard; and he offered his definition of what a university should be, drawing from a statement he had made to Harvard's President Walker thirty years earlier. His digressions on electives, teaching of languages, and democracy appear to be part of Lowell's basic philos- ophy. The elective system had been the cause of an earlier controversy, his ideas on language may have been the genesis of his later speech as the first president of the Modern Language Association, and his ideas on democracy had appeared in his "Democracy Address" in England and would reappear later in his "Independent in Politics Speech." Because of the occasion, however, the sources of Lowell's invention were primarily literary, stemming from his vast reading background. 1Underwood, 92, cit., p. 11. 184 Delivery Only three comments have been located concerning Lowell's delivery on this occasion, and they serve little purpose to the study, since they appear to be contradictory. One account has been noted in Chapter Three. The writer, who is unidentified, says that Lowell's "oratorical delivery was a perfect expression of perfect gentlemanhood. His voice . . . a most agreeable baritone . . . of a cultivated man addressing . . . friends.“1 He tells of the qualities Lowell did not possess: ”rarely made a gesture," "had not the gift of commanding promiscuous assemblies," "little of the essentially popular fibre," "not an orator in the amplest sense of the word." A. Lawrence Lowell described Lowell's oration as "somewhat despondent in tone," but he did not stipulate whether it was due to delivery or content.2 Thirty-three years after the event, Barrett Wendell recalled a Wordsworth stanza in the "Harvard Address" that he thought Lowell had delivered admirably. Referring to Lowell's reading of it, Wendell remarked, "The wonder of this, perhaps, can never be fully felt except by those who heard him read the lines."3 lSupra, chap. iii, p. 100. 2A. L. Lowell, 22, cit., p. 101. 3Barrett Wendell, Speech, Commemoration g: the Cen- tenary of the Birth of James Russell Lowell, p. 41. li—I'F-lm” Arm~ ‘.'~!r'-I $ " it" ' Style Lowell employed all the general elements of style that were characteristic of him; but the many quotations and allusions in Latin and Greek, plus two in Italian and French, make this address less clear to the general reader, though it was probably clearer to his immediate audience. His allusions, as was noted in Chapter Five, probably caused 7, some obscurity even to the listening audience. Besides being more erudite and formal than the other speeches, this address seems to have a more consciously polished effect. There are more instances of repetition for effect; e.g., "It is good for us to commemorate this homespun past of ours; good, in these days of reckless and swaggering prosperity." [Italics mine.] Of the four speeches, the "Harvard Address" alone contains a large number of rhetorical questions. Is it indeed so self-evident a proposition as it seems to many that "You may” is as wholesome a les- son for youth as "You must"? Is it so good a fore= schooling for Life, which will be a teacher of quite other mood, making us learn, rod in hand, precisely those lessons we should not have chosen? He also posed questions to which there were no definite ana swers and then provided his own opinion as to the best answer. What and to what end should a university aim to teach now and here in this America of ours whose meaning no man can yet comprehend? And, when we have settled what it is best to teach, comes the further question, How are we to teach it? Whether with an eye to its effect on developing character or personal availability, that is to say, to its effect on the conduct of life, or on the chances of getting a livelihood? Perhaps we shall find that we must have a care for both. 186 Another characteristic of this address, which is a deviation from his style in the other three, is Lowell's frequent sprinkling of longer, complex sentences, averaging approximately thirty-five words, and in one instance, going to over 300 words. The address fluctuates from formal stately sentences,- Leave in their traditional pre-eminence those arts that were rightly called liberal; those studies that kindle the imagination, and through it irradiate the reason; those studies that manumitted the modern mind; those in which the brains of finest temper have found alike their stimulus and their repose, taught by them that the power of intellect is height» ened in proportion as it is made gracious by measure and symmetry. to "low comedy" sentences like the following: They would have said to the president, with the Gypsy steward in the old play when he heard the new-come nightingale, "Oh, Sir, you hear I am called." Besides the stately sentences and the "low comedy" type, there are several poetic sentences. Referring to the "gray seclusions of the college quadrangles and Cloisters at Oxford and Cambridge," he noted that "the very stones seemed happier for being there." Consequently, the style is sometimes stilted, some- times unclear with vague allusions, charming in spots, per- suasive, and most of all, a mixture of Lowell, the interest» ing writer, and Lowell, the erudite scholar, speaking not to the common man, but rather to other scholars. 187 Effect Woodberry, in his criticism of Democracy and Other Addresses, though complimentary to Lowell, did not suggest that Lowell accomplished the primary purpose of a commemora- tion speech, that of giving praise, but instead voiced too many of his own views about the ills of Harvard. He wrote that Lowell sometimes exhibited too much tact, but in the F’ "Harvard Address,” on the contrary: The constraint of the hour was evidenced by the 5 complete liberty of speech which he sensibly ac- corded to himself: as one in the house of his friends, he magnanimously determined to say his say, irrespective of who might be critical, sure 3V of amiable tolerance if not of cordial agreement. Lowell's own opinion is recorded in a letter he wrote to Lady Lyttelton. My address at the Harvard Commemoration is over and gone and I am slowly shaking off the discom- fort of the praises it won me—-for I did not think it very good. The occasion did not-~would not rouse me, do what I might. The value of the speech today is not as an example of a good commemoration address but as a representation of Lowell's theories on education. 1Woodberry, 22, cit., p. 304. CHAPTER VIII SPEECH BEFORE THE INCORPORATED SOCIETY OF AUTHORS Setting In 1888 James Russell Lowell's ethical appeal had reached its zenith,and the press was referring to him as "the foremost citizen of the Republic" and as "one of the six most interesting men alive."l Adding to his public 17 honors, he had just returned from the University of Bologna, where he had received his sixth honorary doctorate on June 13. Hours before the ceremony took place, he had fallen ill with gout and had to be rushed back to England where he had made a slow recovery. Although he had been recuperating for almost six weeks before the event, he was described as look- ing "far from well” when he rose to speak before the Incor- porated Society of Authors on July 25, 1888.2 Audience His audience consisted of authors from America and England, publishers, educators, and governmental dignitaries. Lord Tennyson, president of the Incorporated Society, was unable to attend, and James Bryce, M.P., presided in his 1Supra, chap. ii, p. 54. 2The Critic, August 11, 1888, p. 67. 188 189 absence.1 The program followed the usual "toasting" system, and Lowell, the chief guest, was chosen to answer the toast for literature.2 Despite the assigned topic, the interest of the audience was focused toward international copyright, the American authors being interested because they had taken part in the copyright movement and the British authors, be» cause they stood to benefit if the bill were passed. At the time of the meeting, the "supporters of the International Copyright bill in the House"3 expected to see it come to a vote and be passed before Congress adjourned. Although the bill did not pass until three years later, the expectation of the audience at the time of the speech was that the passage 1James Bryce was serving as undersecretary of foreign affairs at the time of this speech. He served as British Ambassador to the United States from 1907 to 1913, was a noted author and historian, and in 1914 was created Viscount Bryce of Dechmont. Clarence L. Barnhart (ed.), EE§.E§E. Century_§§ndbook g£_English Literature (New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts, Inc., 19567, p. 174. 2Examination of pamphlets containing after-dinner proceedings in England and the United States shows that the same general structure prevailed in both countries. A pres- ident, chairman, toastmaster, or master of ceremonies pre- sided and proposed the first two toasts, to the Queen and to the President of the United States (if an American were present), and a second that would fit the chief guest of the evening. When Lowell was present he usually answered for literature. The rest of the toasts during the evening seemed to be impromptu but followed a prescribed pattern. There were usually toasts to science and to the hosts of the evening. The minor toasts varied, depending on the audience and the areas of interest and competence of the guests; e.g., on this occasion one toast was to "Fellow Novelists on this side of the Atlantic." The chairman pro- posed the toast to literature and designated Lowell to an- swer it, giving him a rather lengthy introduction. 3The Critic, August 11, 1888, p. 67. 190 of the bill was imminent, and, by the general tone of the speeches, there seemed to be a general feeling of elation and triumph at the dinner. No toasts to copyright were given, but each of the first three speakers talked about it; and Bryce devoted one-third of his introduction of Lowell to copyright, making it almost obligatory that Lowell follow his lead. Midway in his speech Lowell commented that he "could not very well avoid touching upon the subject of International Copyright,"1 and directed his remarks toward the audience's primary interest. Textual Considerations Four texts have been located for this after-dinner address: they are in the London Times,2 Th2.Critic,3 éEEEf igag’ggggg'f2£_English Readers,4 and a Report gf_£2§_§£gf ceedings g£_the Dinner Given by 322 Society 92 Authors 32 American Men and Women g£_Letters E; the Criterion Restaurant, 23 Wednesday, July gg, 1888.5 The first three texts are lLowell regarded the lack of international copyright laws as a moral blot against America and probably would have liked to have avoided discussing the subject in England. He had a reputation for being "touchy" concerning any at~ tack on America, even if it were justified. This may ac- count for the way Lowell approached copyright in the body of his speech. 2London Times, July 26, 1888. 3The Critic, August 11, 1888, pp. 67-68. 4Stone, 22, cit. 53222£E.°f the Proceeding_.at the Dinner Given;§y the §2£$§£x,0f éggflggg to American Men and Women of Letters, 191 identical, the Times appearing on July 26, The Critic on August 11, and American Ideas fourteen years later in 1902. Stone (American Ideas) credits the Times as his source, but The Critic does not, in spite of the fact that it apparently is. 322 Critic, however, supplies audience information which is not in the Timpg. This might indicate that The Critiq received audience information from a London source, possibly r~ one of the guests at the dinner, along with a copy of the London Timgg' account, and combined them for its report of the event. The Critic sheds additional light on the SocieEy Report of the address by noting that a stenographer was j present and that a full report of the speeches would be published in the fail.1 The Society Re ort, exclusive of punctuation, con— tains more than eighty variations from the $§gg§_text. The Timg§_reporter omitted several sentences and single words, he misplaced words, and he presented sentences in different word order from the Society_Report. Of the more than eighty differences, only four significantly change the meaning or give rise to ambiguity. Two deletions from the Egggg text concern Lowell's shyness and his fear of boring his audience. The first is near the middle of the speech: I do not intend, Mr. Chairman, to detain you long, in fact, I am not precisely in a condition to make at the Criterion Restaurant, ngWednesday, July gg, 1888 bendon: Society of Authors, 1888), pp. 17-25. Hereafter referred to as Society Report. lThe Critic, August 11, 1888, p. 67. 192 what I consider to be an appropriate after-dinner speech. Again, near the end of the speech, he voiced his fear of boring his audience: And I shall leave you to hear the other speakers for whom at this time you must justly be impatient. The quotations,appearing near the middle and near the end of the speech, in conjunction with his opening remark that ti he "rose under a certain oppression,“ give some insight into his frame of mind and attitude toward himself.l Another 5 variation, the misplacing of the word "topical" in the Times ‘Q' , . text, changes the meaning of a Lowell philological allusion. The Times also omitted, perhaps intentionally, a remark in which Lowell corrected Chairman Bryce for reversing the pub- lication dates of Cooper and Irving. Because of his renown as a scholar, he could not let the incorrect allusion go without comment even though the correction may have affected his ethical appeal. Th (D difference between the two versions is net great in content, style, or arrangement. The texts vary enough, however, to prove that they were recorded by different so rces; and they serve as reliable checks on each other. There is agreement on over 90 percent of the material in the two texts, leading the writer to conclude that both are gener— ally close representations of what was said. There are more deletions from the Times text, perhaps indicating that the 1Supra, chap. iii, pp. 86-88. 193 Society's stenographer was more accurate and conscientious than the Timgg'.reporter. Despite reasonably close corre- lation between the two texts, there is evidence of editing. For example, the Timgp text contains "that" where the Report used "which" on three occasions. Twice the Eiggg included the word "singular" as an adjective, but it did not appear on the Report text, indicating that there may have been a mi certain amount of loss through the sheer mechanics of copy- ing a speech from stenographic notes. i Collation of these two texts provides as nearly perfect a text as can be reproduced today from a speech k? . - . given in 1888. Arrangement Probably the most interesting aspect of this speech is the fact that it has six primary ideas or themes and resembles a musical composition in the way that the themes are interwoven. They appear to be structured around the remarks in the chairman’s introduction. Mr. Bryce quoted from Alexis de Tocqueville, recalling the strained relations between the United States and England in 1828, in order to contrast with this the fact that Americans and Englishmen were sitting at the same table. Lowell used the date in the quotation, 1828, as a focal point in time and as a transitional device from which he led into his six themes: (1) better relations between America and England, (2) litc erature, (3) copyright, (4) England, (5) language as a common 194 tie, and (6) Lowell. Perhaps "Lowell" should not be con— sidered a theme, but he stated his accomplishments, personal anecdotes, and ideals candidly, causing them to appear as a part of the speech itself as well as a means of increasing his ethical appeal. The speech is not arranged with common ground near the beginning as is frequently found in speech construction. Rather, in this speech, Lowell's common ground 5; and audience appeals are located at the end of his speech, as are the other themes most likely to solicit audience ap- peal, i.e., "England" and "language as a common tie." The arrangement of his ideas is as follows: i l. The oppression of speaking (Lowell theme) 2. The need for better relations between England and America 3. The assigned text, literature 4. A reference to self merit (Lowell theme) 5. A discussion of copyright 6. A reference to the occasion (better relations theme) 7. A detailed discussion of the better relations theme 8. Lowell's love of England 9. The common tie of language 10. Better relations and the conclusion Mr. Bryce, on the other hand, had introduced all of these themes in the following order: 1. Better relations 2. The attraction of England for Americans 3. Copyright 4. Lowell°s efforts on behalf of copyright 5. Lowell's literary reputation 6. Lowell as a public official 7. The common bond of language 8. A toast to literature It should be noted that Lowell did not comment upon the themes in the same order in which they were presented. 195 For example, he included copyright as a part of the Lowell theme. You have alluded also, in terms which I shall not qualify, to my own merits. You have made me feel a little as if I were a ghost revisiting the pale glimpses of the moon, and reading with considerable wonder my own epitaph. But you have done me more than justice in attributing so much to me with rem gard to International Copyright. After being introduced as a part of the Lowell theme, copy— ,F right was discussed in some detail; later it appeared as an example in the theme of better relations between the two countries. Likewise, Lowell's "love of England" theme was developed after first using it as an example of increased J good will between the two nations. The speech is arranged in a climactic structure, building near the close and incorporating three poetic alu lusions in the climax. Logical Proof Lowell followed his usual pattern of argument in this speech with one notable exception: instead of his primary method of reasoning by example, he used reasoning by analogy. He compared his own speaking to the pitcher which, in the proverb, ”had gone too often to the well." Referring to c0pyright, he made an analogy between "preserv= ing pheasants that fly over the fence” and books that do the same thing. He also used analogies comparing England to Rome and London to "David's palace near a hundred streams." Style Lowell's use of language complements his logical structuring, being figurative in only five instances, where he employed such phrases as ”old home" for England, "noble language" for English, and "the roaring loom of time" for the noise of London. The absence of figurative language in the introduction and the body of the speech indicates he that the plain style was used; however, the conclusion cona tains the five figures of speech and the analogies compar- ing England to Rome and London to David's palace. This + 1 . elevates the conclusion to middle style. As was mentioned ,fi earlier, Lowell utilized his conclusion to establish common ground and to elicit good will: thus he changed his style to match his new "cause." His philological interest is particularly evident in this address with his attention to the precise meaning of words, e.g., "His [Johnson's] famous lines about the life of the scholar, and by scholar he meant the author." "But there were a great many lpgal considerations, topical as our ancestors used to call them." ”I cannot help feelm ing as 1 stand here that there is something especiallyrn I might almost use the cant word and say monumentally- 1Thonssen and Baird, pp, pip., p. 415. "Quintilian formalized this concept by saying that the style should be adapted not only to the cause, but to particular parts of the cause. Thus the orator will rely upon different arts and modes of expression in the exordium, narration and so on." 197 interesting in a meeting like this." "I was going to say fraternize when I remembered that I ought perhaps to add 'sororize!‘" [Italics mine.] Lowell again fell into his habit of parenthetical remarks mentioned in Chapter Five; however, he limited the number to eighteen for the entire speech, and in only one sentence did he use two parenthetm ical phrases. The six themes which make this speech different from the other three cause no apparent lack of unity in the the» matic treatment. Ethical Egggf Lowell began his speech with strong ethical appeals. He explained how difficult it was for him to speak, how easy it was when he was young, and how awkward "now that a certain aphasia overtakes me, a certain inability to find the right word precisely when I want it." He went on to say, "I had pretty well made up my mind not to make any more after-dinner speeches." He amplified the statement with two proverbs, and then, following this build up, cons cluded, "But I could not resist. I certainly felt that it was my duty on an occasion like this." After this serin ous appeal, Lowell chided his audience about their improved financial status over those authors a hundred years earlier. He quoted Samuel Johnson's lament about the ills that as" sail the author: ”Toil, envy, want, the patron, and the ‘ . ‘d * .~ . {I‘ 'Ir“ 198 gaol."l He made allusion to a Wordsworth poem, suggesting that the present authors were like "forty feeding as one"2 and noted that a hundred years before "one [author] fed like forty when he got the chance." Lowell's most eloquent ethn ical appeal is at the end of the speech when he praises their England and their London. Source pf.gggg§ Humor is present throughout the speech-anot the joke-book variety,but resulting from Lowell's native wit. Punning, he used ”spur“ of the moment and then changed it to mean a "spur" in his flanks. This was no doubt spontanem ous; however, he had often mentioned in his letters the need to be pricked with spurs and bayonets to make him write. Many of his ideas and much of the humor that appear in his speeches can be found in his letters, indicating that his invention was cumulative, having been practiced and polished in his lifelong prodigious correspondence. Compare the following quote from an unpublished letter of 1871 with an excerpt from the speech under discussion. He offers a joking admonition of the English attitude toward Americans: Letter, 1871: If your countrymen [English] could get over the notion that we are always trying to bully or cheat 1John Bartlett, Familiar Quotations (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1940), p. 230. 21bid., p. 297. 199 them and that we are governed by a committee of hyenas! I think the American people the most rea— sonable in the world and for a very simple cause»- that more of them are practiced in affairs. Eng- land (you will pardon my frankness) always seems to me like a woman, who from inexperience in bus— iness can't comprehend why in a bargain there must be advantages to both sides and who accordingly always takes it for granted that she has been done in some inexplicable fashion--I hope she will come to understand that the bulk of our people are of English blood and have a very English way of feel- ing wronged also. When they feel so they are more apt to turn their cuffs than to offer the other cheek, an impulse which if it did not come from their blood, I know not where they got it.1 Speech, 1888: I think I have been told often enough to remember that my countrymen are apt to think that they are always in the right; that they are apt to look only at their own side of the question. Now, this con- duces certainly to peace of mind and imperturbability of judgment, whatever other merits it may have. I am sure I do not know where we got it. Do you? The seventeen years that elapsed between the letter and the speech resulted in a shorter and more compact presentam tion, but the idea is the same. Lowell may have used it in other extemporaneous speeches to his English audiences, since it hardly seems probable that he would suddenly re- call the idea after so many years. There are other ideas in this address that are not new. Many can be traced to previous speeches and letters. In a letter to Mrs. W. E. Darwin in 1880 Lowell wrote con: cerning speakers, "Some pity is also due to the unfortunate 1Unpublished letter to Frederick Furnivall, Hunt- ington Library (July 15, 1871). 2Collatedspeech text. 200 creature who is obliged to inflict his particular form of 1 In this speech aphasia (isn°t that the word?) upon them." he considered himself: "But I find as I grow older a care tain aphasia overtakes me." In October of 1886 Lowell wrote Norton, "My pitcher has gone once too often to the well. If I could scoop up a few drops with a shard of it, I were happy."2 He alludes to the same proverb in the address: I had been bethinking me of the old proverb with regard to the pitcher and well and it was not al- together a consolation to me to think that that pitcher, which goes once too often to the well, belongs to the class which is taxed by another proverb with too great length of ears. Lowell's remarks about copyright are easily identi- fiable as the same arguments he used in the Copyright Speech before the Committee on Patents.3 An interesting aspect is that with the same arguments that he had formerly con- demned American publishers for the practice of pirating English books, Lowell at this time defended them before his predominantly English audience. He re-stated his conm tention that American authors were unanimously in favor of international copyright on a moral basis, and that the rest of the problem lay in the early application of the property law. Then he changed to a defensive argument with the following remarks: I think that perhaps a little injustice has been done to our side of the question; I think a little 1Norton, Letters, II, 252. 2Ibid., p. 319. 3Supra, chap. vi, p. 159. 201 more heat has been imported into it than was alto- gether wise. I am not so sure that our American publishers were so much more wicked than their Eng- lish brethren would have been if they had the chance. I cannot, I confess, accept with patience any imu putation that implies that there is anything in our climate or in our form of government that tends to produce a lower standard or morality than in other countries.1 This argument was based on opinion, and Lowell used reasonm ing by analogy and from example to support it. The reaso.- ing took the same form as his arguments had three years earlier. I, of course, understand, as everybody understands that all property is the creature of municipal law. . . . It is not difficult for the average man to comprehend that there may be property in a special form which genius or talent gives to an idea. He can see it° It is visible and palpable, this property in an idea, when it is exemplified in a machine, but it is hardly so apprehensible when it is subtly interfused in literature.2 Even the Latinism, "ferae naturae," that he used to describe books was from his earlier speech on copyright. Lowell strengthened his new position by mentioning a visit to Longfellow, from which he was able to make his point that thousands of copies of Longfellow's books had been pirated by English publishers. The origin of one quote in the speech caused a con= siderable stir-~his reference to the sounds of London as the “roaring loom of time." There was a lively discussion 0 O O 3 O V O O in The Critic in subsequent issues as many subscribers lCollated speech text. 21bid. 3The Critic, September 26, 1891, p. 158. 202 wrote, expressing their opinions that the phrase deserved quotation marks. Two readers traced it to Goethe's Faust, a third to Lowell's own address, "Democracy," and a fourth reader credited it to Carlyle's "Sartor Resartus." In a letter to his daughter Lowell voiced his own fears concern— ing plagiarism: Last night I had to attend a dinner of the ”Incor- porated Society of Authors." . . . Of course I was very miserable and I thought my speech very miser- able too, but the audience seemed to like it--more fools they. The fact is I have talked so often after dinner that beside not knowing what to say, I can't remember what I may have said and am afraid of plagiarizing from my former self. By doing the same thing over so many times one runs the risk of a metamorphosis more dreary than any of Ovid's-- into a barrelorgan to wit.1 Effect In his theory of after-dinner speaking, Lowell laid down these criteria: a good speech should be "extemporanem ous, contemporaneous, and should have the meaning of the moment in it and nothing more." Applying Lowell's own stand- ard to this speech, one would have to conclude that the speech is extemporaneous and contemporaneous, thus meeting two of the three requirements. However, it falls short of the third criterion of containing "only the meaning of the moment" in it, because more than thirty years after hearing the speech, people were still referring to it. Sir James Rennel Rodd wrote, "I heard him deliver one of the most elo— quent and finished speeches to which it had ever been my lHowe, New Letters, p. 324. 203 fortune to listen at a dinner given by the Incorporated Society of Authors."1 Twenty—seven years after the event Brander Matthews recalled, "He made one of the happiest of his speeches, as full of good will as it was of 'good things.”2 Several years after Lowell’s death James Bryce had this to say: Relevance as well as brevity is the soul of wit, for a good speech is a work of art, in which every part should have an organic relation to every other part. . . . The late Mr. James Russell Lowell; whom we in England admired as the best after-dinner speaker of his day, was a master in that line.3 Perhaps Lowell failed to fulfill his criteria for a good after-dinner speech (i.e., by having it meaningful beyond the moment), but he did help to fulfill one of the primary desires of his life, as stated in his speech; If I look back to anything in my life with satiSa faction, it is to the fact that I myself have, in some degree, contributed . . . to this good feeling [between England and America]. 1Rodd, loc. cit. 2Matthews, op, cit., p. 27. 3Bryce, loc. cit. CHAPTER IX CONCLUSIONS The accomplishments of James Russell Lowell have sometimes been questioned, and he has been referred to as a "man of parts"1 and a man who "seemed greater than anyn thing he had ever done."2 This study has attempted to fill a gap in Lowell scholarship by considering one of those "parts," and, in so doing, it has estimated Lowell's ac— complishments and abilities as a speaker. While endeavor— ing to answer questions about Lowell's speaking, the writer discovered a number of important facts. The following para- graphs set forth summations of the major findings resulting from this study: 1. It was found that speaking played a major role in Lowell's total literary output and that Lowell was re- luctant to publish his speeches, only one volume having been published in America during his lifetime. 2. It was found that ten significant factors from Lowell's life influenced his speaking. 3. It was found to be doubtful that Lowell was involved in anti-slavery speaking, as has been previously 1Clark and Foerster, op. cit., p. cxxxix. 2Underwood, op, cit., p. 57. 204 205 supposed by many Lowell scholars. 4. It was found by exploring in some detail Lowell's teaching career through his former students that several aspects of his teaching were related to his speaking. 5. It was found that Lowell's being awarded a doc- torate from the University of St. Andrews is not mentioned by any of his major biographers, and his earning a Master's degree is noted only by M. A. DeWolfe Howe. 6. The Lowell Institute Lectures of 1855 were found to be more important for the direction they gave to his life than for their success, 23; £3, 7. Certain misconceptions were found concerning the validity of the texts of “The Old Ballads." 8. It was found through the evidence of two unpub- lished letters to Jane Norton that a possible Dante lecture series may have taken place immediately following the Lowell Institute Lectures of 1855. 9. An unpublished letter written during Lowell's Western Tour was found, enabling the writer, with the help of three published letters, to reconstruct the Western Tour and to shed new light on Lowell's attitude toward the West and the rigors of the trip. 10. It was found that Lowell’s dislike for speaking and his shyness were two interesting insights into his charm acter. The extreme difficulty that he experienced in his speaking preparation was found to be incongruous with the life of a writer. 206 11. It was found that Lowell displayed a knowledge and respect for his audience. Several of Lowell's comments concerning audiences were found, as well as his views on arrangement, logic, and style. 12. Accounts of Lowell's delivery, along with his theories of arrangement, logic, and style, were found to enhance the general knowledge of Lowell as a speaker. 13. It was found that Lowell's chief accomplishn ment as a public speaker lay in the reputation he attained as an after—dinner speaker while in England; and some of his comments concerning after-dinner speaking are included in this study. 14. Lowell's speaking reputation was found to de- pend more heavily upon his reading audience than upon his listening public. An estimate of his lifetime listening audience was found to be less than lO0,000-—about one—half the circulation of Harper's Magazine or the Atlantic Monthly, 15. Several previously unlisted texts of Lowell‘s speeches were found, enabling the writer to correct some current bibliographical errors. It was found that Lowell's attitude toward textual accuracy contributed to the valid— ity of the texts. Several general textual problems in work- ing with Lowell texts were found. 16. It was found through analyzing a representa- tive sample of four Lowell speeches those factors of his rhetoric that made him successful as a speaker. 207 17. Lowell's use of humor was found to be a strong factor in his logical and ethical proofs; and his logical proof was found to be enhanced by reasoning through example and analogy, and by his use of example, literary allusion, and quotation as evidence. 18. One of Lowell's most frequently used rhetorical devices was found to be the similitude. 19. It was found that Lowell apparently utilized his reputation as a public figure to supply the necessary audience attention, seldom using ethical appeals, other than humor, in the introduction to his speeches; but, in— stead, he occasionally made extensive use of common ground techniques as part of his conclusion. This procedure was found to be unusual as a rhetorical practice and might sug- gest some further study as a valid method of ethical proof. 20. It was found that Lowell's arrangement in two extemporaneous speeches analyzed was structured after the speeches that preceded them. In "The Old Ballads" the struc- ture was found to be a simple five-point outline with sub- headings. Each heading and subheading was found to be an assertion and was proved logically with reasoning by example and through analogy, embellished with similitude, defini- tion, and restatement. It was found that the "Harvard Ad- dress" followed a pattern of past, present, and future, employing as a primary form of argument reasoning by example. Emotional proof, narrative, and extensive deductive reason- ing were found to be used in this address but not in any 208 of the other three speeches. 21. It was found that Lowell's reasoning was almost entirely inductive, and that he displayed a favorite pattern of induction which he used in all four speeches.1 22. Lowell's style was found to be partially detere mined by his evaluation of his audience, varying considere ably from "The Old Ballads" to the "Harvard Address." It was found that the grand style of the earlier lectures gave way to plain and middle styles in later years. Although Lowell's style was found to be a major factor in his effectiveness as a speaker, he displayed some tendencies that detracted from the clarity and flow of his speeches: (a) his parenthetical expressions, especially in his extemporaneous speeches; (b) his vague literary ale lusions which may have mystified his listeners; and (c) his occasional long, involved sentences in his written speeches. These were found to be minor faults, causing only momentary vagueness or confusion in his generally clear, forceful, and entertaining style. lSupra, chap. v, p. 127. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Adams, Henry. The Education of Henry Adams. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1918. Auer, J. Jeffery. An Introduction to Research in Speech. New York: Harper & Bros., 1956. Beatty, Richard Croom. James Russell Lowell. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1942. Brigance, William Norwood. History and Criticism of Ameru ican Public Address. Vol. I. New York: Russell and Russell, 1960. . Speech Communication. New York: Appleton» Century-Crofts, Inc., 1947. Bryce, James. University and Historical Addre esse es. New York: Macmillan Co., 1913. Canby, Henry Seidel. Walt Whitman, ag_American. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1943. Clark, Harry H., and Foerster, Norman. James Russell Lowell. New York: American Book Co., 1947. Cooke, George Willis. A Bibliography of James Russell Lowell. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1906. Cooper, Lane. The Rhetoric of Aristotle. New York: Apple- ton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1932. Emerson, Edward W. The Early Years of the Saturday Club 1855-1870. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1918. Encyclopedia Americana. Vol. XVII. New York: Encyclopedia Americana Corporation, 1954, 665. Foerster, Norman. American Poetry and Prose. Vol. I. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1947. Fowler, H. W. A Dictiona_y of Modern English Usage. Ora ford University Press, 1950. 209 210 Ghifelin, Brewster. The Creative Process,A Symposium. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 1952. Greenslet, Ferris. The Lowells and Their Seven Worlds. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1946. Hale, Edward Everett. James Russell Lowell and His Friend:. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1905. Howard, Leon. Victorian KnightmErrant. Berkeley: Univer— sity of California Press, 1952. Howe, M. A. DeWolfe (ed.). New Letters Lf James Russel; Lowell. New York: Harper & Bros., 1932. , and Cottrell, G. W. The Scholar-Friends. Came bridge: Harvard University Press, 1952. Hubbard, Elbert. Little Journeys to the Homes Lf AWPIIC Authors. New York: G. P. Putnam“ 5 Sons, 1896. Lowell, James Russell. American Ideas for English Res ders. Ed. Henry Stone. Boston: J. B. Cupples Co., 1832. . Among My_Books. 2d ed. New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1880. . Among My Books, Second Series. Boston: J. R. Osborn & Co., 1876. . Qemocracy_and Other Addresses. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1887. . Letters Lf James Russell Lowell. 2 vols. Ed. Charles E. Norton. New York: Harper & Bros., 1894. . Letters Lf James Russell Lowell. 3 vols. Ed. Charles E. Norton. Cambridge Riverside Press, 1904. . My Study Windows. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1880. . The Round Table. Boston: R. G. Badger, l9l3. The Writings Lf James Russell Lowell. 12 vols. Cambridge: The Riverside Press, 1890m9 92. Mays, Samuel J. Some Recollections Lf Our AntiMSIaverv Conflict. Boston: Fields, Osgood, & Co., 1869. 211 Nort.on, Sara, and Howe, M. A. DeWolfe (eds. ). Letters Lf Charles Eliot Norton. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1913. Ogden, Rollo. Life and Letters Lf Edwin Lawrence Godkin. New York: Macmillan Co.,—1907. Parrington, Vernon L. Main Currents Lf American Tboight Vol. II. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1927. Pattee, Fred L. The Development Lf the American Short S+ory. New York: Appleton~Century Co., 1935. Rodd, Sir James Rennell. Social and Diplomatic Memories 1884-1893. London: Edward Arnold & Co., 1922. Scudder, Horace E. James Russell Lowell: A Biography. 2 vols. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1901. Shaler, Nathaniel Southgate. The Autobiography_Lf Nathaniel Southgate Shaler, with a SuppLementary_Memoir EX His Wife. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1909. Smalley, George W. Anglo-American Memories. New York and London: G. P. Putnam's Sons, The Knickerbocker Press, 1911. Smith, Sidney J. Precepts Lf Rhetoric. Worcester, Mass.: The Holy Cross College Press, 1955. Spiller, Robert E., et al. (eds.). Literary_History_of the United States. New York: Macmillan Co., 1959. Stone, Henry (ed.). "Introduction." American Ideas fLr English Readers. James Russell Lowell. Boston. J. B. Cupples, 1892. Taylor, Walter Fuller. A History Lf American Letters Boston: American Book Co., “1936. Thonssen, Lester. Selected Readings in Rhetoric and Public Speaking. New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1942. , and Baird, A. Craig. Speech Criticism. New Yerk; The Ronald Press Co., 1948. Underwood, Francis H. The Poet and the Man. Boston: Lee & Shepard Publishers, 1893. Vernon, Hope Jillson. The Poems Lf Maria Lowell with Una published Letters and a Biography_. “Providence: Brown University, 1936. 212 Wendell, Barrett. Stelligeri and Other Essays. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1893. Woodberry, George Edward. Literary Memoirs of the Nineteenth Centurx. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co., l92l. Articles and Periodicals Atlantic Monthlx. All issues prior to 1900. Atlantic Monthly, LXVIII (December, 1891), 816n23. ‘Boston Daily Advertiser, December, 1854, through March, 1855. Boston Evening Transcript, December, 1854, through March, 1855. Boston Post, April 14, 1888. Boston Traveller, January through March, 1855. Buffalo Morning Express, March 13, 14, 1855. The Century_Magezine. All issues prior to 1900. Columbian (Cincinnati, Ohio), April 5wl7, 185’. The Critic. From its beginning through 1891. Daily Courier (Buffalo, New York), March 13, 14, 1855. Paily Stage igurnal (Madison, Wisc.), April 3, 1855. 23$ X zilegraph (London), August 13, 1891. gnouirer (Cincinnati, Ohio), April 5-17, 1855. Gazette (Cincinnati, Ohio), April 5wl7, 1855. Gilder, R. W. "James Russell Lowell’s Bible Argument," 2:3 Century Magazine, X, 161-62. Golann, Ethel. "A Lowell Autobiography," The New Englang Quarterly, VII (June, 1934). Harper°s Magazine. All issues prior to 1900. Hawthorne, Julian. "Lowell in a Chatty Mood," New Yogi world, October 24, 1886. ‘uf. . ‘ 213 Horwill, Herbert W. New England Magazine (October, 1902), Howe, M. A. DeWolfe. "The Scholar-Friends: Francis James Child and James Russell Lowell," Harvard Libragy Bulletin, V, No. 2 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Unim versity Library, Spring, 1951), 142. Howells, William Dean. "A Personal Retrospect of James Russell Lowell," Scribner°s Monthly_(September, 1900), p. 270. Lgndan Eimes Index. Lowell, A. Lawrence. "Memoir of James Russell Lowell,“ Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society (June, 1896). Lowell, James Russell. "Open Letters: International Copy- right; Plain Speech from American Authors," 233 Century Magazine (December, 1885), p. 627. New York Times Index. Norton, Charles Eliot. ”Prefatory Note to Humor, Wit, Fun, and Satire," The Century Magazine, XLVII (November, 1893), 124. :11 B. "Lowell nd American Speech," Philological .ar.erly, XVIII (1939), 249n56. gm The Pioneer (January, February, and March, 1843). Edited by Robert Carter and James Russell Lowell for the three months of its existence. New York: Scholars' Facsimiles and Reprints, 1947. Public Qpixi n, V (Washington and New York, April 21, 1888), 25m26. Rogers, Frances M. "The Libraries for Romance Languages and Literature," Harvard Librarnyulletin, 1V, No. 2 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Library, Spring, 1950). Woodberry, George E. "Lowell's Letters to Poe," Scribner°s Magazine (August, 1894), p. 171. Youn ! “A .. Men's Ass°n Annual, March 13, 14, 1855. Cm us A. "Address on January 24,1861.” Proaeeim ings in the West Church 0A the Occasion of wt.re Ben C c Seni ‘e ; Chem 195 Lowe l D. D. Its or Pa"**r. mam“- W.alker, Wise, & Co., 1861. Lowell, James Russell. "Address of James Russell Lowell. Commemoration Service s aA West Church Boston 1737: 'r87 Boston: Damrell and Upham, 1887. . Adiress delivered before the Provincial Nefiapihg Seeiiety, May 7,1884. Matthews, Brander. Speech. Commemoration of the Centgnary of tAze Birth of James Russell Lowel New Yoer Charles Scribner°s Sons, 1919. Original Materials ollections (early poems, d.rafts of essays and lectures, commonplace books, journals, notebooks, miscellanem ous papers, and scrapbooks): Houghton Library, Harvard University: Burnett Collection Cunningham Collection Horace E. Scudder Papers James B. Lowell Collection Norton Collection Henry E. Huntington Library, San Marine, California; Field Collectionmm65 letters Miscellaneou wm85 letters to English and American friends; rare cepies of Lowell's addresses, toasts, afteradinner speec :hes lectures, and read.i ng Unpublished Material Beveridge, Jeanette. "James Russell Lowell°s Editors hip of the Atlantic Monthly." Unpublished Maste.r° s thesis, Department of Literature, Mich.igan State University, 1937. Clark, Ge.orge P. "Classical Influences and Background in tzhe Writings of James Russell Lowell." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1948. Downer, James Walker. "Features of New England Rustic Prom nunciation in James Russell Lowell's Biglow P1£;L;," Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Mizhn igan, 1957- 58. ”Q“; - 215 Grommon, Alfred H. "James Russell Lowe11°s Writing on Libm 2rty, Aboliti.on and Public Affairs, 1836m1861." “nylrlilned Ph D. dissevfation, Cornell Univer31ty, 1C1414. Leclair, Piobert Charles. "Three American Travelers in Eng- land: James Russell Lowell, Henry Adams, Henry James." Ung>ublished Ph.D. dissertation, Pennsylvania Univeru sity, 1944. McFadyn., Alvan R. "The C0 ntwmporaneou» Rep1+ation of Js.mes Rissell Lowell." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertat M01, Depa m+me nt of Literature, Florida University, 1954-55. Reinhardt, Robert. "James Russell Lowe11°s Appraisal of American Life and Thought." Unpublished Ph.D. dis- sertation, University of Wisconsin, 1951. Voss, Arthu.r W. M. "The Biglow Papers of James Rrssell Lowe “l. Unpublished Ph. D. dis ssert.atiCn, Yale Uni— versity, 1941. 0) Other Source Quinqseniay Catalogue a; Harvard Unive er Houghton Library, Harvard Univer sity for 1895 , p. 145. 51 ty Republican Party National Conventions, Proceedings lstjklth, u unu- - A856-Afi96. On microfilm in Michigan State Univera sity i rary. U.S. ;:na+e ReE3rAs,F . st Ses ssion, 49th Congress, Numbers 1989 to 1315, I lncllsive, except Nuw her 1278,1885m 1886 (Washington: Government Printing Off.ice, 1886), VII, 28—44. entire or kertial texts have been located. their delivery dates, first, ‘0 10. APPENDIX A This appendix is a listing of speeches fo 1 followed my a DATE AND TITLE Jeno Q,_185§ Deiinitions Jeno 11, 1855 Pien575 Ploughman°s Vision Jen. m; 16, 1855 The Neprioal Romances “‘1’ ~":. ’71 o The gen. 23, legg Chaucer Spencer Jan. 30, 18R5 Miltcn Febo 2, 1855 Butler 53b. 6, 1855 'ope Eebo 93 1855 Poetic Diction coded bibliography of speech texts. sou M55, D, M55, D, M55, D, M55, D, M55, D, M55,1 D, M55, D, M55, D, M55, D, M55, D, r Weich The 109 speeches, and source reference code are listed RCE bml, d, e bml, d, e bul, d, e bml, d, e bml, d, o bul, d, e b‘]. 9 '21 9 6: ha]. , b5] 9 l O I 0 Spencer manuscript is not the same one delivered in 1855. 216 11. 12° .gu ‘_, 160 180 19- 20. 21. 22. 40. 217 ‘11 Wordsworth reb. 1-, 1855 Lhe Function of the Poet I???) o 1.8 “- Mar 0 1L, .1852 Etch-5p .128) an Nero 11L1855 Moral Elements in Great Art Firdusi Wolfram von Eschenbaoh I, II Shakespeare Art Lecture The Poet's Poetry Romantic Literature I, IV, v II, III, Humor and Wit Elements .. O f the English Language Puritanism Style, The Product of Imagination The Study of Literature Froma Mertis Crome Kalevala Beginnings of Medieval Literature Troubadours and Jongleurs Chanson de geste Karl Roland M53 M35 M38 M35 M55 218 41. Odd Leaves M85 42. Mr. Nocn°s "Eligan" MES 43. Dr. Wales MSS, F=6 44. Kano and Orthoepy M38 45. Translation MSS, k 46. Originality and Tradition in M83, k LiteratLlre 4?. Choice in Reading MSS, k 48. The Search for Truth MSS, k 49. Close of Lectures at Cornell MSS, k UniVersity 50. The Poetic and the Actual MSS, k 51. Poetry in Hemely Lines MSS, k $2. Montaigne MSS, k 53. The Hun-erous and the Comic MSS, k 54. Firrt Need of American Culture MSS, k 55. Exaqt date unknown MSS ”casseai 56. 1857 E The PC wer of 8 ound (A Rhyr-ed Lecture) 57 o S'éft: 3.8 7(‘ Lu’l JILLJ*e to Jotn P. Kennedy 58. fiPEiEEalLS7§ MSS, Fol Caucus S eec 59. kr§.;o 183 1877 T Speech at Old Sou.th Meetingnhouse 60. £125, 1877 L~2 Tribute to Edmund Quincy 61. Nov 6, 1880 A, V, m-l l at a Dinner Given Him by ctors of Edinburgh Philosoph- estitution VI! 62. 63. 64. 66. 73. .Azg. 2, 1880 Speech at Club Dejeuner to Am:rican Actors Dec. 1%, 1881 S: ech at the Chapt.er House of Wes win ter Abbey in Commemoration of 0.913 Stanley July 5». 1883 Reply to Toast to Literature, Science, and Art at Dinner for Henry Irving £31. 29, 188.1 Speech at London Chamber of Commerce Dinner 3:1C. 4, 1883 Au1.c.5 on unveilizlg the bust of Fielding Add.r:e 55 read before the Edinburgh Philosophical Institution; Shakespeare' 5 Richard III 13:24-55 1 nknowq “but DulWich College Add.ress March 2, 1884 Cir-In" pe ecn at the ceremony of placing S a bust of Longfellow in West— m1n3+zer Abbey April 25, 1884 Address on Browning gay 6, 188% Address at the University of Cambridge on the opening of the Archaeological Building E§X_lflb_££ggi Address as president of the Wordsworth Society June, 1884 Provincial Newspaper Society Address i B, I, m-2 B, m-4 t i A B, m-S : MSS, u u, F—2 75. Tun 6.1884 sum-unl— Au«rems on International Arbitram tion to a deputation from the Workmanus Peace Association 76. Oct. 6, 1884 Birmingham and Midland Institute: On Democracy f 300th anniversary of founda— 78. 1 Notes on Don Quixote 79. M2y 7 1885 Adaress on the unveiling of l Emnanuel College commemoration o t the bust of Coleridge in Westminst.er Abbey 1 80. M?” Co, 1885 :1". “-1... ulna—— Address del vered at the unveiling of the bust of the poet Gray in the hall of Pembroke College, Cambridge 81. June) 1885 Eragment of after—dinner speech at Heb-«v5; rd 4. ~ r2 82“ gfl?'vo 12¢" .LC58.L‘ éheeoh ac Cr1 co anniversary of i 83. Dec. ggl_l885 '.;ss CH books and librar 84. 1885 rd at the 250th ts incorporation ies Addresses at the inauguration of Bryn Mawr College 85. J n. 1.886 Svee; h before committee on 86. Feb. 9, 1888 Savage Club speech patents B, l, mm7, hm MSS, A, hm4, b-2, N, B X—l Q, F23 M88 3 m~89 C lThis speech was copied by a friend of Lowell's from tee Savage Club records. 87. 6‘) 032. 97. 98. 99. 100. N I“) if; F’7".‘.‘~;' 3,. "i386 Afiuxék: mm 1886 511 + w :3 s l—Jo < m n m & K O r"h E {D U) ('1' t.sts p. ‘ld English Dram Q) Nawrh lgg? .1.“ :-,.I.4v_’:-;.l _‘:.~‘ ott-Ll'. ’. - . .A- D" '3, [3.7.7. 1’1 Match, 1887 y;umcnt and Fletcher , 1 n. “,C19 1507 HWIJ' ‘ , Massimger and Ford DEG-K! 0 2‘8: 1.88 ? Addzegs on international copy» right in Chickering Hall, New Yozk 25C. 279 1887 speech ixom the chair at the meeting for the formation of the International Copyright Associatien Xm2 M33, JJ, anl, B, 0 M53, DD, jnl M33, DD, j~2 MSS, DD, jm3 a DD: j”4 M33, DD, j=5 MSS, M I\) |\) N 101. Dec. 29, 1887 ddnl Aooress at a meeting of the Tariff Reform League 102. April 12, 1888 dd~2 Short speech delivered to the Reiorm Club 103. April 13, 1888 ddn3, n, o, P, C The independent in PoliticS 104. l :ng8 F_5 Civil Service Reform Association 105. l888 MSS Civil Service Reform Speech 106. July_25, 1888 A, R, h-9 Society of Authors to American Men and Women of Letters, at the Criterion Restaurant 107. upgl_g§ 1888 A, halo SpEEech at a banquet of the Liverpool Philomatic Society 108. EEELL1889 C, 3 Address” on Study of Languages 1090 April 29, 3O , May_l 1889 h~ll, C Address at nWashingt.0n Cent e. ary Celclrati in New York In Cooke's bibliography (QB. cit., pp. 174579), of forty of Lowell's speeches five major discrepancies occ or. On July 3, 1875, at the Washington Anniversary in Cambridge, Lowell read a poem instead of delivering a speech. (p. 174.) Two letters are counted with the speeches: one concerns a m3.jor in the British Army, dated 1884 (p. 175); the second is a S+ate Departme.nt dispatch (p. 176). The fourth is listed as an "Address before the Town Council of the City of Worcester, in reply to an address presented to him by the Mayor." Lowell did not deliver this address but sent a letter to the Mayor to be read on the occasion. (p. 176.) Concerning Lowell's Birmingham and Midland Institute Address, "On Democracy," Cooke gives one of the sources as the Pall Mall Gazette, when it should be the Pall Mall Budget. Tp. 176.) TESS A C DD JJ 223 Manuscripts Manuscripts, Houghton Library, Harvard University Books L:3well, James Russell. American Ideas for English Ioairr Ed. Henry Stone. Boston: J. B. Cupples (141-”"599 09 “a —. . Democzragy_and Othe.r Addresses. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1887. . Latest Literary_Essays and Addresses. Cambridge: Riverside Press, 1891. . Lectures on English Poets. Cleveland: lhe Rowfant Club, 1897 . The Old English Dramatists. Houghton Mif- flin Co., 1892. . The Power of Sound. New York: Priv. print., 1896. Scudder, Horace. James Russell Lowell. 2 vols. Bos- ton: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1901. Proceedings and Reports qugilll bCClPEl Paoers Part V, p. 112, 1884. CiICYlufle Poivorsitv. Emmanuel College Commemoration c-f_ BCUth Anniversary of the Founda+ion 1884. Cambridge, Engla.'1d: C. J. Clay and Son a.t University Press 1885, pp. 9-10. 2333:“ of President Garfield. Meeting of Americans in Lo.odon, at Exter Hall, 24 September 1881. London: Benjamin Franklin Stevens, 1881. Democracy_ An Address Deli.vered in Town Hall Birmigg— h33*n ozn the 6tzn of October, 1884. Birmingham: Cond -4.“- H.‘ ‘- .uf‘l—ca— ”I I- A R.ecord of Commemoration November 5th to 8th,1886, on the Two Hundred and F1ftieth Anniversary_of t.he AA'C;~ \- Folno1ng of Harvard Universi_y. Cambr1dge, 1887. Report of the Fifth Annual Meeting. Transactions of the Wordsworth Society. No. VI. Edinburgh, Constable, 1884. t-« M 1 11 U "J 5‘) . ,1.) ‘5‘," ‘ ‘ e -- '\ " s - J "' V ‘ " rx ‘4 C "5’ --~ ' wdr‘;hh3r€f*i Ursfo::-;1 -ocletv Prroeedinos. 'flm~7m_1\"~&mlm-IJA‘7ml—‘-(-‘- nawwrh .1. o 'u IL". E. 1... o f L? ‘ ' 9 V 0 .J. .L 9 P o wi' 1: D 0 r. .‘ t I“ ‘ . fl 0 :9. a .1528 (I a, .1.;§ 77 a 0 .v o .L 7 9 P o f 7.) C» o O 4' . 1 '~‘ ‘: 1 .-- ‘1 " ’ 6‘ , o 110'... r.- (- ...ffl ’3 J 9 V 0 ' O (‘ 5.“! 34> O Proziediefl; CF Desting fer the Formation of the Intern natitnel C [y 1aht A seeiatggg. Boston: 1888. cup—misun— Rtocsed1oas at the Dedieation of the New Li tr1ry Build» o In- ”LINFQ'— Jtn-‘mwfl f-Fln-J“ ’ nmlfl- __ ’ f. I .- .‘ . . I M “ a.“ ”In warm (Than!— 123. Ct-isaa. mass. Cambridge: John— Wilson and Son, 7.: - ,xc-‘h " "‘l‘:.'- .5... .- A “If; ' nrj‘m‘ 1", ‘ fl " artmn-111ry krezs, 1836. A Record of Commemora_1on, ~af‘l‘ mun-m 1%“) “In the Two_H ired an.d 1i f*'et infi of ngvgzj University. Reform Club Series. New York: The Reform Club, 1888, u-u “In.“ '''''' mm au- m—u -—_p—--.,, ’h 6p: rt No. 1188, 49th Congress, lst Session, p. 28. R— trrt of fhe Proreedl 39 at the Dinner Give n,hzm the ~71~'v 0* Authors to A erlr an Men and Wome.:' of Letters ”A“ v‘-- .. ..u.‘:-b; -Lm nu 1!- nun-um _-—-_—~. .- uu “— m“ \ 1~ J; I“ -‘ I" ‘ ‘ 5 5 r'\ - ‘ I \ _: s _‘ J- a i' \ \ ~ I ... > 1:11:11- 1:- : .1; 2r *- .1: :35” 12.1.1125 1833;. F..- AR‘.;_' '4.- -x‘ A 7 .1 .- tsp o L I'm/.5.) o §3$3~+1rno for 1n611c Readings 1886. Huntington Lin 1 orar y 89168 Privarw printing. Sfiffiiflliua meoriai Ffill.:ri +he Old Sou++meHatingéConse. Rep rt c-t a Mashurzru tmezlnba bitants Cft$ikhlflflp in Memorial Hall, Harvard College, January 18, 18.7. Beaten: Press Cf ‘fi‘VC~ H. Ell.isg 1877. , 41 . -- A V -~ .\ a. l- 1 " 1 v N R Q a T I .C: ._ :3. .31.; , f. 3.1:: ’ '1 1. A 1:: ear-:5 gar. 1 3 ,.f. the .4.-..—'¥.:1:£:1:3:~ c. ,‘\ ’ .‘ -‘_‘ . ~ . I’\ - a, . . 01 " __' Sofiejh af 3 Dinner divs“ rim by 4h; direc.tor of the -. fi‘ .7. .m_';.-1..- ”2.1-— ‘ ....- .m- nu. ‘1“. .41”.— 1.11.— u." “flm 135 L .1. ‘1) 1““ u — \r r v t. 5. -\ . -i Lrnrfl .rqh PhL‘ w'n‘E-hwrj-.. ,r.1+1‘_ 1J1 3n“ Bo... may; A-Jrna- ‘x‘x {‘11luzIQAm-w ‘MA-A_ sum I-L‘len—‘W' zL-nrzm _ ' Ld1rurhz'fl‘, hiVflflWCfV‘ 6 Cue: '1‘ :Ddu‘ at...» u19‘w-“m' mum-.111" The West Church Rotten-“Commemaration Services of the RZI4IIrn'fiR7HRZEcTRVC?: If: P163e1+ er istry_anl the 9?:1"f53335.°d “3‘83""53111511 :13; 1:3. 5557 153:1 “9 93; “151355319 LMEL1.&9 ch-3 7 BJa'iNé Damjr ell & Upham, 1887. MiSC' how}.- ifi4?(j an‘iruceq rsses at *h.e. IHAHO‘ a .ion (f Bryn Mawr CC .lle ge, '"" “3'3.“‘67. Ta 1; .1. p. :77. L h Annual R.eport of the Dante Society, May £6, r' mln- .‘I-‘C-d—I-l - assail— 858, (amtridoe 1886. ! i I—Js;> L) T}: T i F. RE 2. l%*' , f I l ! Finn? FPQFS and Perlcdicams "I’m ‘smlm .3 A1,] 3‘". £11." 1‘76.“+r~.y -11 u—-< :¢.-'-... ...-s _I‘O—U‘JI - '— g. % B.vt~n D il_v Aivbrtlsar 10 'J 41'0”.E.C.E}ow$ 3-88:.) 0 2 o [5", v 2391‘18R0 [ii—.6? ‘5)“ T'!.:-i’l-- ~25: C’ 1......" Lia—.2. .:...;_'-..,*.'.j'-.X. 59;.-ég. _. .1. o Ll't.’:: O “'3ng 9 .1..<(j i, 3 F"p O 10.53 0 2’0 A‘Fjro 1.39 .1888.) p. 10 3. Apr. 149 1838, pp. 1 & 2. d BTE§CU_§ “:”1nfi Trahfiatiptg Jan.mFeb.g 1855. dd Bcszan Post ‘ m e BTSFQQ Traveller, I;n.~Feb., 1895 f .323 L’m+rvl. Vol. 47, Nov., 1893 - May, 1894. l. NDV., 1893 pp. 125m3l. 20 08.5.9 1893: pp. 223m24. 3. Jan.? 1894 pp. 432-39, 4. Pkwjog 1894 In)..515ml6. 5. Mar.. 1894, pp. 719-21, Vol. 48. 6. May. 1894, pp. 24a28. g ”In: (131/9214145?" Ad\' I Afllg 1:161? . A) 1.894.; p. 7950 h ”N: (.3: 31.1."; 1"?" 1525.“??? (1.884,, p. 386 2. ch. l. 1854, pp. 213-15, 3. May 23, 183%. .p. 249n?90 4. 5:58 139 18859 ,. 283. E. Jwre 299 1895 ;. 10. 1. 9 1 o DISC 0 15:; .1 8}} 89 13p a .31.." c IVIaY 4', lfJ89? E1130 2255.260 1 The Era.9 London, August 29 1880. Jul-nun .‘ M .ou'h" 1H iifncr95, LXX l. L1IL ch, 1885, pp. 644-45. Vol. 85, JilnemNov., 1892. 2. p. 75.. 3. p. 195. 4. p. 410. S. p. 560. 6. p. 757. 7. p. 943. The Harvard grimson, March 23 — May 4, 1894. “mun-l. Literary_flgrld, XVI (May, 1885), pp. 188~89. London Times 1. Nov. 7, 1880. 2. Sept. 24, 1881. 3. Sept. 26, 1881. 4. Dec. 14, 1881. 5. Sept. 5, 1883. 6. May 7, 1884. 7. May 8, 1885. 8. Ray 27, 1885. 9. Unknown date. Lowell, James Russell. The Independent in Politics. New York: G. P. Putnamas Sons, 1888. (Question of the Day Series.) New York Eveninngost, April 17, 1888. ...-F- New York Tribune, April 29, 30, May 1, 1889. Pall Diall Budget, October 6,1884, p. 15. w2'iw-‘OL-‘b “I'V‘m‘. Provincial Pri.nted at Newspape£_Society, June, 1884. Darlington: the Northern Echo Printing Works. Publlca+1cn of +;he Modern Language Association, Vol. V, No.1. "Address by Lowell. " Baltimore, 1890. The Standard Transcript, July 5, 1883. Unidentified newspaper clippings and handwritten copies of newepaper texts at Houghton Library. APPENDIX B This appendix lists references to speeches for which no texts were located. Lowell presided for six and ones half hours at a Phi Beta Kappa dinner in 1865. He missed a lecture in New York, Feb. 9, 1857, but gave it on Feb. 16, 1857. He lectured on Spencer in Baltimore, possibly in 1870 at Johns Hopkins University. He agreed to preside at an English meeting on Jan. 23, 1884. He spoke at Peterhouse (St. Peters College, Cambridge), Dec., 1884. He spoke at Ashfield, Mass., in July, 1885. He spoke before the Harvard Club of Chicago in Feb., 1886. He spoke at Pepys9 Memorial, Dec., 1886. He prepared but did not deliver a speech for Bologna University, June 12, 1888. He spoke at the Tavern Club, Feb. 22 or 23, 1889. 227 Norton, Letters, I, 347 Norton, Letters, I, 277 Norton, Letters, II, 56, l40a4l Unpublished letter to Frederick Furnivall, Huntington Library, FU 507 Norton, Letters, II, 290-91 Norton, Letters, II, 298 Scudder, pp, cit., II, 352 Norton, Letters, II, 323 Scudder, 22, cit., II, 379 Norton, Letters, II, 366 332_Critic, August 22, 1891, p. 98 Scudder, 22, cit., II, 387 V_ _L 228 Lowell, as vice—president of the .222 Critic, August 22, Egypt Exploration Fund, gave two 1891 addresses: the dedication of a statue of Sir Erasmus Wilson, and a speech at an annual meeting of the Society. (Dates unknown.) He appeared on the stage with The Critic, August 22, Walt Whitman at Madison Square 1891, p. 97 Garden when the "Good Gray Poet" was reading his last tribute to Lincoln. (Date unknown.)