Buy Tickets
Shop
Donate
Become A Member

Tag: Poe’s Works

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

Poe’s Great Balloon Hoax – Part 1

This article is an excerpt from Murray Ellison’s VCU MA Thesis on Poe and Nineteenth-Century Science, ©2015

Near the end of his journalistic career, Poe was likely running out of actual science reports to write about that would excite the public’s interest in science as spectacularly as his fictional stories did. Perhaps, by that time, his imagination far exceeded science’s ability to create new inventions. His 1843 “Balloon Hoax” story demonstrated that sensational quasi-scientific newspaper reports could command the public’s attention in ways that even he could have never imagined. By presenting a fictional narrative as if it was an actual front-page news story, Poe captured the attention of a larger segment of nineteenth-century readers than he did in any of his previous journalistic reports. However, this move also seriously damaged his credibility as a serious science reporter. Poe, in this account, also introduced a more skeptical attitude concerning nineteenth-century science than he displayed in his previous journalistic outputs. Therefore, his “Hoax” is a transitional story linking his earlier journalistic writing to his later fictional science narratives.

The extraordinary story of a Transatlantic Balloon crossing was first written by Poe under the pseudonym of John Wise, and was first published in the June 15, 1843, issue of the newspaper, Spirit of the Times, which reported that a “well-known balloonist plans to take a trip across the Atlantic Ocean in the summer of 1844” (Thomas and Jackson 414). A year after, The New York Sun ran a follow-up news report on the balloon trip without mentioning ‘Wise.’ The newspaper’s April 13, 1844 headline read:

The article further reported on this spectacular adventure:

“We stop the press at a late hour, to announce that, by a Private Express from Charleston, S.C., we are just put in possession of full details of the most extraordinary adventure ever accomplished by man.” The “Atlantic Ocean has been actually traversed in a balloon, and in the incredibly brief period of Three Days! Eight persons have crossed in the machine. (457).

The Sun also printed a special edition, the Extra Sun, adding that the crossing was a triumph of Mr. Monck’s flying machine. The Extra also included the names of the passengers along with an illustration (below) of the hot air balloon, the Victoria (458):

New York Times Illustration of the Victoria

On the same day as the Extra Sun’s report, the New York Herald countered that the hoax was “blunderously got up,” and “ridiculously put together” (Thomas and Jackson 460). It added: “About 50,000 of the Extras were sold…We think every intelligent reader will regard this attempt to hoax as not even possessing the character of pleasantry. They added that the celebrated ‘Moon Hoax,’ issued from the New York Sun, many years ago was an ingenious essay; but that is more than can be said of the “Balloon Hoax” (461). The Herald was the first newspaper to give this story the presently used title, but still did not connect it with Poe.

The Sun had previously published a presumed news story by Robert Locke 1835 about British astronomer, John Herschel, stating that he had gone to Cape Hope, South Africa to test his new powerful telescope. Neil Harris writes that the Sun reported that, “Herschel’s success had been beyond his wildest dreams, for the telescope had penetrated the secrets of the Moon, claiming that it had trees, oceans, pelicans, and winged men (69).  Locke’s story sold more than 20,000 copies. A newspaper commentator later boasted that many people “absolutely believed the story” (69). Harris is also one of the many researchers who connected Locke’s “Moon Hoax” with Poe’s “Balloon Hoax.”

The next Poe and Science Blog discusses how Poe and “The Balloon Hoax” were exposed and the effect it had on his writing and reputation.

Selected Sources

Harris, Neil. Humbug: The Art of P.T. Barnum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973.

Thomas, Dwight and David Jackson, Ed. The Poe Log- A Documentary Life of Edgar Allan Poe 1809-1849. Boston: G.B. Hall and Company, 1987.

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

Poe’s Cryptographic Imagination – Part II

Taken from Baltimore Post-Examiner

Modern Computer Solves Poe’s Last Inscrutable Puzzle

Murray Ellison | April 13, 2018

Excerpts from Murray’s VCU Master of Arts Thesis on Poe and Science © 2015.

Poe published several columns on cryptography entitled “A Few Words on Secret Writing.” He explains that advanced puzzles, where the only secret to the code is “locked in the creator’s mind can be very difficult or nearly impossible to solve.” Poe mentions that the acclaimed sixteenth-century English philosopher and scientist Francis Bacon “very properly defined three essentials in secret correspondence.” Bacon’s first essential is that the cipher should “elude suspicion of being a cipher.” Secondly, that its alphabet should be so simple “as to demand but little time in the construction of the epistle.” Thirdly, that it should be “absolutely insoluble without the key.” Poe adds the fourth essential: “With the key, it is promptly and certainly decipherable” (147), perhaps, because he felt that he needed to solve the submitted puzzles in time to have them published in the upcoming issues of his journal articles. He quotes from a letter from a reader who has never been authenticated, named “W.B. Tyler,” who praises Poe’s correct solution to Dr. Charles J. Frailey’s puzzles. This mysterious letter pronounces: “You have exhibited a power of analytical and synthetical reasoning I have never seen equaled… I crown you the king of secret readers” (141). “Tyler’s” letter also proposes two additional challenging ciphers—which, according to Rosenheim, were among the only “legitimate” ones submitted that Poe was never able to solve” (39).

Poe explained in his December 1841 Graham’s article that Tyler’s cipher was indecipherable because it was improperly constructed. Rosenheim supports Poe’s assertion by stating that it was difficult to solve because spaces and punctuation were omitted between the letters and that it was written backward (38). Poe also states that he did not work at Tyler’s second challenge because the many ciphers being submitted to him by his readers “were beginning to take too much of his time” (149). In other words, it did not meet Poe’s fourth condition for legitimate puzzles. Rosenheim initially commented that Tyler’s longer second cipher “remains unsolved—and is likely to stay so for some time.” He wrote that in order “to solve that cipher, one needs to identify up to 156 characters…using six alphabets” (39).

However, after publishing this statement, Rosenheim had reservations about his initial conclusions and decided to determine whether twentieth-century cryptographers could unlock the second and most difficult unsolved puzzle. Rosenheim’s subsequent contest in early 2000, which he called, “The Edgar Allan Poe Cryptographic Challenge, “was supported by a $2500 prize from Williams College for anyone who could solve Tyler’s ciphers. On October 31, 2000, Newswise, an academic science news service of Williams College reported that both ciphers had been solved by a software programmer living in Toronto, named Gil Bronza. According to Rosenheim, it turned out that the second cipher was a polyalphabetic substitution cipher and contained “over two dozen mistakes.” It is ironic that it took a modern computer analyst to decipher the only two unsolved ciphers of the hundreds that readers submitted to Poe. I have been informed by our present-day Curator, Chris Semtner, that Gil Bronza visited the Poe Museum after winning the prize money. Despite Poe’s inability to solve a puzzle proposed by Tyler, or possibly himself, Rosenheim concludes that Poe was one of the most skilled cryptologists in history (Cryptographic Imagination 24). He points out that Poe’s columns on secret codes were also the first ones to be featured in popular newspapers. They generated a continued interest in this topic in and after Poe’s lifetime. Poe’s cipher format has also been proliferated in the present era in newspaper columns like Poe’s called “The Puzzle of the Day.” Poe next demonstrates that his interests in science are diverse, ranging from technical topics about chess and computers and from discussions about pseudo-science to unlocking solutions to deeply hidden puzzles and mysteries.

Selected Sources

Poe, Edgar Allan. The Complete Works of Edgar Allan Poe Volume XIV: Essays and Miscellaneous. Ed. Harrison, James A. New York: T. Crowell, 1902.

Rosenheim, Shawn. The Cryptographic Imagination: Secret Writing from Edgar Allan Poe to the Internet. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1997.

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

Poe’s Cryptographic Imagination – Part I

Egyptian hieroglyphic inscription on wood, from the tomb of the general Horemheb. Saqqara, Egypt, c. 1300 BCE. Louvre Museum, Paris, France.

Poe’s Cryptographic Imagination – Part I

Murray Ellison | February 1, 2018

Excerpts from Murray’s VCU Master of Arts Thesis on Poe and Science © 2015.

Poe continued to demonstrate an interest in unlocking mysteries and secrets in several of the essays and newspaper columns he wrote on secret codes and cryptography. These popular weekly columns offered puzzles, in which readers were invited to propose solutions and suggest additional ones for use in subsequent editions. He then provided the solutions to the ciphers in subsequent issues. Once Poe introduced the topic, readers sent in hundreds of other ciphers. His columns on secret writing became a very popular component of Graham’s Magazine. According to Shawn Rosenheim’s The Cryptographic Imagination, Poe’s four articles in Graham’s on secret writing are among the first published texts on the subject of cryptography. Rosenheim, a scholarly authority on secret codes in science and literature, notes that Cryptology “is composed of two parts: cryptography, the art of making codes, and cryptanalysis, the art of breaking them down” (254).

Poe’s “A Few Words on Secret Writing” first appeared in the July 1841 issue of Graham’s Magazine. As Poe writes, “We can scarcely imagine a time when there did not exist a necessity of transmitting information from one individual to another, in such a manner as to elude general comprehension.” Therefore, “we may well suppose the practice of writing in cipher to be of great antiquity” (Complete Works XIV 114). Poe’s accounts range from how the ancients used hieroglyphics to how the early Greeks used scytala, or wooden blocks, to carry secret messages between officers and messengers. He notes that the modern uses of secret communications started with the invention of letters and printed communications. “Few persons can be made to believe that it is not quite easy to invent a method of secret writing which shall baffle the investigation.” However, he acknowledges that people have different skill levels in solving secret codes. “It will be found that, while one cannot unriddle the commonest cipher, the other will scarcely be puzzled by the most abstruse” (116).

Demonstrating how secret codes may be formed and solved, Poe begins with simple substitution codes, where letters, numbers, and symbols stand for others. For example, he writes that in a systematic substitution code, “z” may stand for an “a,” and “x” for a “b.” In a random code, “a” may stand for “p,” and “b” for other variable letters. Harder to decipher codes, he suggests, may be constructed by using symbols for letters. He notes that there have been many attempts to construct such advanced codes, such as those that have perpetually shifting solutions. Many of them, he says “have about them an air of inscrutable secrecy. It appears almost an impossibility to unriddle what has been put together by so complex a method” (118). Poe’s suggestion that some ciphers have “an air of inscrutable secrecy” appears to be setting readers up for his explaining why he has been unable to perform a workable cryptanalysis on two inscrutable puzzles, which were apparently sent in by a reader named , “Tyler.”
In next month’s column, I will discuss Poe’s explanations on why he couldn’t solve these two puzzles, speculation about whether those puzzles might have been submitted by Poe, and how it took until the year of 2000, prize money by a famous research university, and a modern computer programmer named Gil Bronza to unravel “Tyler’s” almost inscrutable ciphers.

Selected Sources

Poe, Edgar Allan. The Complete Works of Edgar Allan Poe Volume XIV: Essays and Miscellaneous. Ed. Harrison, James A. New York: T. Crowell, 1902.

Rosenheim, Shawn. The Cryptographic Imagination: Secret Writing from Edgar Allan Poe to the Internet. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1997.

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

The Poe & Science Series

Was Poe Convinced that Phrenology is a Science?

Murray Ellison | Jan. 8, 2018

Excerpts from Murray’s VCU Master of Arts Thesis on Poe and Science © 2015

Poe continued his interest in spectacular news stories that blurred the lines between fact and fiction in an 1836 review on this topic: “A Review of Phrenology and the Moral Influences of Phrenology.” During the nineteenth century, there had been many debates among scientists whether Phrenology was a legitimate science or a pseudo-science. Advocates of this belief often used emotional appeals and anecdotal testimonials in order to “prove” that their views were supported by empirical science. This subject also received intense interest from the public and much coverage in the newspapers and magazines that Poe would have been exposed to as a journalist. Thus, it is likely that Poe was assigned by his editor to investigate this topic. Later in 1836, Poe wrote a more extensive report for the Southern Literary Messenger titled, “Phrenology and the Moral Influence of Phrenology,” which has been reprinted in James A. Harrison’s Complete Works of Edgar Allan Poe, Volume VIII.

In this second SLM article, Poe reported on the “General Study” and “Discoveries” of Phrenology that were conducted by Gall, Spurzheim, and others. His account of the works of several of the “prominent” persons conducting research on phrenology demonstrates that he was interested in exploring a broad range of popular science-related topics. However, a careful reading of his commentaries also reveals that he maintained journalistic neutrality on a subject that was being questioned at that time by the public as well as by the professional scientific community. In his report, Poe assures readers that “Phrenology is no longer to be laughed at. It has assumed the majesty of a science; and, as a science, ranks among the most important which can engage the attention of thinking beings” (Collected Writings 8: 252). His use of the wording, “assumed the majesty of a science” indicates that he is enthusiastic about reporting on the subject, while also remaining personally non-committal concerning whether Phrenology is a valid area of scientific investigation. He maintains journalistic neutrality when he reports that the study of this science is “very extensively accredited in Germany, in France, in Scotland, and in both Americas.” He describes how a single lecture, in Scotland by Dr. Spurzheim “gained five hundred converts to Phrenology…Northern Athens is now a stronghold for the faith” (252). His use of the words “converts” and “faith” indicates that he may not have been convinced that Phrenology was as much of a hard science as many of its believers claimed. During this period, most scientists and religious leaders rejected the claims that there were connections between empirically-based fields of science and faith-based spiritual practices. Poe reports that its followers claim that with a well-directed inquiry of Phrenology, “Individuals may obtain, through the science, a perfectly accurate estimate of their moral capabilities…and will be better fitted for decision in regard to a choice of offices and duties in life” (253). It is difficult to determine whether those reporters’ extraordinary claims are serious or “tongue in cheek.” Therefore, his documentation of Phrenology’s classification system could be read as a serious scientific description, or as a satirical expose—depending on whether readers agree or disagree that it is a science.

Poe writes that the study and classification system of Phrenology is often divided into the two main categories of “Instinctive Propensities and Sentiments,” and “Intellectual Faculties.” The former category includes the traits of “Domestic Affections, Preservative Faculties, Prudential Sentiments, Regulating Powers, Imaginative Powers, and Moral Sentiments.” As an example, “Domestic Affectations” include Embraces, Philopregentiveness, Inhabitiveness, and Attachment. The second main category, “Intellectual Faculties,” is divided into “Observing, Scientific, Reflecting, and the Subservient Faculties—which is language.” In another example, “Reflecting Faculties” include Eventuality, Comparison, Causality, and Wit” (254).

Poe concludes his report by noting that studies of Phrenology have emphasized that the particular shape of a person’s head may denote particular talents or dispositions. He writes that “Edinensis” reported that the brain and head of an “Idiot” may be very small and that large headed people may be marked with animal tendencies. He writes that “Gall” claimed that a person who has a skull “Which is elevated or high above the ears…and thrown forward, so as to be nearly perpendicular with its base, may be presumed to lodge a brain of greater power…than a skull deficient in such proportion” (255).

After reading Poe’s journalistic reporting, it is difficult to determine whether he believed in Phrenology. Although he provided several testimonials from people of that “faith,” he provided no personal statement on that subject. Therefore, it is difficult to conclude if Poe’s story was more likely influenced by the public’s interest in Phrenology or by his belief that it was or was not a science. Yet, we can see in Poe’s reports that he revealed many interesting details and flaws about this subject. It must be noted again here, that this topic was considered by many to be a legitimate subject of scientific inquiry in the nineteenth century. Regardless of whether Poe believed these accounts were credible, they provided him with a phrenological framework for the descriptions and features of several characters in his later fictional works, such as “The Tell-Tale Heart,” and “The Fall of the House of Usher.” We shall discuss these characteristics in my later discussions about Poe’s science-based fiction. In next month’s blog, I will begin a two-part series on Poe’s interest in puzzles and Cryptography.

Selected References

Poe, Edgar Allan. The Complete Works of Edgar Allan Poe Volume VIII: Early Criticism I. Ed. Harrison, James A. New York: T. Crowell, 1902.

About the Author

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

Poe & Science with Murray Ellison

Harry Clark’s Illustration of Poe’s Ship in a Whirlpool
Harry Clark’s Illustration of Poe’s Ship in a Whirlpool

“M.S. Found in a Bottle:” A Look at Poe’s Skepticism of 19th-Century Science, Part II

Murray Ellison  |  August 31, 2017

By being unobserved, the unnamed narrator of Poe’s, “M.S. Found in a Bottle” is looking at the relics of science on the ship he is standing on as an outsider. He concludes that much of nineteenth-century science is outdated and largely based on theories of misguided scientists like Francis Bacon and Symmes. He describes the ship as having a “severely simple bow and antiquated stern,” that reminds him of “an unaccountable memory of old foreign chronicles and ages long ago.” The captain’s “gray hairs are records of the past, and his grayer eyes are Sybils of the future. A Sybil is a witch or a harbinger of dark and dangerous times. The narrator observes that the “cabin floor was thickly strewn with strange, iron clasped folios, moldering instruments of science and obsolete long-forgotten charts” (144). Poe believed that the tools of nineteenth-century science could not chart a course to the future and that the captain is sailing to an unknown destination and using outdated maps. The narrator’s assumptions about the inadequacies of the ship are confirmed as the journey reaches the frightening abyss Symmes imagined at the South Pole. Poe exploits and, perhaps satirizes Symmes’s theories and the fears that readers associated with such beliefs when the narrator encounters the Pole’s vortex:

Oh, horror upon horror!—the ice opens up to the right, and to the left, and suddenly we are whirling dizzily, in immense concentric circles, round and round, the borders of a gigantic amphitheater, the summit of those walls is lost in the darkness and the distance. But little time will be left me to ponder upon my destiny! The circles grow small—we are plunging madly within the grasp of the whirlpool—amid a roaring… and thundering of ocean and of the tempest, the ship is quivering—oh God! And—going down (146).

Poe uses the phrase, “whirling dizzily,” to show that those who believe in the systems of nineteenth-century science will soon be whirling around and too dizzy to understand what is happening when new technologies replace their antiquated belief systems. The dark and distant walls of the ship represent the barriers that are blocking progress to a more enlightened future. He regrets that, by associating with this ship and these antiquated ideas, he will have little time to “ponder about his destiny.”

Poe’s narrative flaunts the distinctions between the uncertainties and dangers of nineteenth-century discoveries, as well as his obsessions with death. He uses the term, “immense concentric circles” to mock the “Concentric Circles” theory. The antiquated approaches that scientists have thus far trusted, he suggests, will be inundated by the roaring, “bellowing, and thundering of the ocean and tempest.” The foundations that they have based their beliefs on are “quivering.” Poe’s use of the word, “God,” juxtaposed with “going down,” suggests that he believed that organized religion is also going down along with the antiquated beliefs of nineteenth-century science. However, this usage also indicates that Poe believed in a Supreme Being. The term “whirling dizzily” also indicates that he realized that the Universe is being controlled by a force greater than humans can ever control. As the ship is sucked into the Pole, the narrator thrusts his journal into the sea— hopefully for readers of the future to discover. Although this short story is Poe’s first published work, it foreshadows his most comprehensive views about science and the future of the Universe in his final work, Eureka: A Prose Poem.

Murray Ellison

About The Author

Dr. Murray Ellison received a Master’s in Education from Temple University (1973), a Master’s Degree of Arts in English Literature from Virginia Commonwealth University (2015), and a Doctorate in Education at Virginia Tech (1988). He is married and has three adult daughters. He retired as the Virginia Director of Community Corrections for the Department of Correctional Education in 2009. He is the founder and chief editor of this literary blog and is an editor for the International Correctional Education Journal. He is the Co-Editor of the 2016 book of poetry, Mystic Verses, by Shambhushivananda. He also serves as a board member, volunteer tour guide, poetry judge, and Facilities Planning Committee Coordinator at the Edgar Allan Poe Museum in Richmond Virginia. He teaches literature classes at the OSHER, Lifelong Learning Institute at the University of Richmond; is the organizer and coordinator of The First Fridays Classic Book Club; and is co-founder and organizer, along with Rebecca Elizabeth Jones, of the VCU English Alumni, Working Titles Book Club. Contact Murray at ellisonms2@vcu.edu.

Works Cited

    Gewirtz, Isaac. Edgar Allan Poe: Terror of the Soul, Ed. New York: New York Public Library, 2013.

    Levine, Stuart and Susan F. Edgar Allan Poe: Eureka. Eds. Urbana: University of Illinois, 2004.

    Poe, Edgar A.. Tales and Sketches, 1831-1849. Ed. Thomas O. Mabbott. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1978.

    Poe, Harry Lee. Edgar Allan Poe and the Mystery of the Universe. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2012.

    Pollin, Burton R. “Creator of Words.” Baltimore: Lecture delivered at the Fifty-first Annual Commemoration of the Edgar A. Poe Society, July 7, 1973.

    Seaborn, Captain Adam (pseudonym Captain John Symmes). Symzonia-a Voyage of Discovery. New York: Printed by J. Seymour, 1820.

    Thomas, Dwight and David Jackson, Ed. The Poe Log- A Documentary Life of Edgar Allan Poe 1809-1849. Boston: G.B. Hall and Company, 1987.

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

Poe’s First Published Story about a Shipwreck Foreshadows Eureka: A Prose Poem (Part I of II)

“MS Found in a Bottle” by Harry Clarke

By Murray Ellison

Poe’s first important tale, “MS. Found in a Bottle,” (1833) won the Baltimore Visiter’s first prize for fiction. Poe scholar, Thomas Mabbott calls it a “masterpiece,” contending that “winning the contest set the author on the way to lasting fame” (Tales and Sketches 131). The Visiter wrote that “Poe’s tales are eminently distinguished by a wild, vigorous and poetical imagination, a rich style and a various and curious learning” (Thomas and Jackson 137). “MS.” reveals Poe’s interest in a broad range of science-related topics, including secret writing, conundrums, scientific realism, and life after death. Carlson proposes that the story mocks the popular sea voyages of that period, specifically those of Captain Adam Seward’s (pseudonym for Captain John Symmes) 1820 Symzonia-a Voyage of Discovery. Symmes’ “Theory of Concentric Circles” proposed that the Earth was hollow at both Poles (119). It presumed that a ship approaching the Poles would be sucked into an abyss through the earth. Poe’s selection of the story’s setting indicates that he was aware of the public’s interest in this scientific topic.

Poe reports in the style of a science journalist who is intending to submit his story to a travel or nautical magazine: “Our vessel was a beautiful ship of about four hundred tons, copper-fastened and built at Bombay of Malabar teak. She was freighted with cotton-wool and oil, from the Lachadive islands. Isaac Gewirtz contends that, “Poe’s story was never meant to correspond with the world. The location was selected to flaunt transparent and geographic pretense” (23). Poe writes: “We also had on board coir, jaggeree, ghee, cocoa-nuts, and a few cases of opium” (136), using both scientific and literary language to add to the realism of the story. “The hulk flew at a rate defying computation, before rapidly succeeding flaws of wind, which, without equaling the first violence of the Simoom, were still more terrific than any tempest I had ever before encountered” (138). As the ship advances, the boundaries between reality and imagination become blurred. The narrator’s invisibility to the crew suggests that the entire journey is taking place in his mind, i.e., he can see the crew and captain of the ship, but they cannot see him. He remarks, “About an hour ago, I made bold to thrust myself among a group of the crew. They paid me no manner of attention, and, although I stood in the very midst of them all, seemed utterly unconscious of my presence” (143). By being unobserved, the narrator is looking at the relics of science as an outsider. He concludes that much of nineteenth-century science is outdated and largely based on theories of misguided scientists like Francis Bacon and Symmes.

*This article, which is part of Murray Ellison’s 2015 Virginia Commonwealth University M.A. Thesis on Poe and 19th-Century Science, was first published in www.Litchatte.com on 3/16/2017.

In next month’s Poe Blog, I will discuss the horror of Poe’s tumultuous story as it is experienced by the narrator. I will also comment on how this early Poe story begins to connect his grand theories of the Universe with some of those found in his last published work – Eureka: A Prose Poem.

Works Cited
Gewirtz, Isaac. Edgar Allan Poe: Terror of the Soul, Ed. New York: New York Public Library, 2013.
Levine, Stuart and Susan F. Edgar Allan Poe: Eureka. Eds. Urbana: University of Illinois, 2004.
Poe, Edgar A.. Tales and Sketches, 1831-1849. Ed. Thomas O. Mabbott. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1978.
Poe, Harry Lee. Edgar Allan Poe and the Mystery of the Universe. Waco: Baylor University Press, 2012.
Fifty-first Annual Commemoration of the Edgar A. Poe Society, July 7, 1973.
Seaborn, Captain Adam (pseudonym Captain John Symmes). Symzonia-a Voyage of Discovery. New York: Printed by J. Seymour, 1820.
Thomas, Dwight and David Jackson, Ed. The Poe Log- A Documentary Life of Edgar Allan Poe 1809-1849. Boston: G.B. Hall and Company, 1987.

 

Murray Ellison
Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

The Imp of the Poeverse

Which story does Poe scholar Thomas Ollive Mabbott deem as one of Poe’s “great stories, although not one of the most popular?” There may be many obscure stories coming to mind; however, this particular story falls under the category of Horror and may give us insight into the development of the psychological thriller sub-genre, as well as allow us to further study the psychology of Poe’s mind, if even briefly.

“Imp” as it appeared in Graham’s Magazine.

In July of 1845, Poe’s horrific tale, “The Imp of the Perverse,” was published in Graham’s Magazine. According to American critic Benjamin De Casseres, “We’ve all got that ‘imp’ in us…What or who is this Imp of the Perverse? Poe doesn’t tell us for he cannot…Why should Nature, which does everything to cause us to fight for self-survival, put a voice-or an imp-in our soul that deliberately advises us to destroy ourselves?…You-and I-know that imp” (Mabbott 1217).

If we draw context from Poe’s story, the imp represents a lingering conscious of doubt and guilt, which ultimately brings the narrator to his psychological demise. The imp also represents contradiction, which Mabbott compares with an inscription in Poe’s early album of verses for “Elizabeth,” stating, “he wrote of his ‘innate love of contradiction'” (1217). Not only was this an early primary source representing this contradiction and the rearing of Poe’s own imp’s head; but there are examples in “The Black Cat” that represent the psychological stress the narrator carries, showing how he contradicts his actions and ultimately indirectly leads the police to the spot of his own crime. This is also comparable to “The Tell-Tale Heart,” which also consequently ends with the narrator revealing his crimes.

According to Christopher Benfey in his article, “Poe and the Unreadable: ‘The Black Cat’ and ‘The Tell-Tale Heart’, “‘The Tell-Tale Heart,’ ‘The Black Cat,’ and ‘The Imp’ all record a confession-a perverse confession since the crimes would otherwise have been undetected…These killers need to confess to the perverse act of having confessed. The fear of the criminals is not the fear of being caught, it is the fear of being cut off, of being misunderstood” (Silverman 37). This is further exemplified by a passage in “Imp”: “Had I not been thus prolix, you might either have misunderstood me altogether, or, with the rabble, have fancied me mad.”

According to Benfey, “Poe’s fascination with the idea of a crime without a clear motive has proved to be one of his richest bequests to later writers,” including Fyodor Dostoevsky with his novel, Crime and Punishment. Benfey concludes his article with a prominent statement, “Poe’s narratives can be read as cautionary tales…These fears are always with us-the fear of love and the fear of isolation. Taken to extremes, they both lead to disaster…To declare oneself safe-as the imp of the perverse tempts us to do-is to be lost” (43).

Perhaps when Poe was writing this “cautionary tale,” he was cautioning not only the reader, but also himself. Drawing perspective from his life in 1845, his career was starting to look up with the success of his poem, “The Raven”; he was attending prominent literary salons; he was described by James Russell Lowell as being “…at once the most discriminating, philosophical, and fearless critic upon imaginative works who has written in America”; and Poe joined the editorial staff of Charles Briggs’ The Broadway Journal (The Poe Log, Thomas, Jackson, 490, 505). This half of the year did not lack hardships for Poe, however, with harsh critics and satirists cracking down on and mocking “The Raven,” Poe’s direct involvement with the infamous Poe/Longfellow/”Outis” scandal; and, without doubt, Virginia’s unsteady health affected Poe psychologically. Although Poe may not have had an “imp” on his shoulder or a “voice” in his head, to our knowledge, the contradicting thoughts he may have had, such as seeing his arguably greatest work be both praised and slandered, as well as seeing the rise and fall of his wife’s health, may have thrown Edgar psychologically off-balance; thus presenting to the public examples of the contradictions he referred to even a decade or so prior with “Elizabeth.”

Over all, what is unique about “The Imp of the Perverse” is the seeming lack of acknowledgment of the story, despite being published just three years after “The Black Cat” and “The Tell-Tale Heart.” The themes of guilt and contradiction appearing in the story were undoubtedly carried over from “The Black Cat” and “The Tell-Tale Heart,” thus showing the evolvement of Poe’s psychological approach between the inner voice and conscious breaking down a wrongful character, consuming the character with contradiction, and ultimately driving the character to unwillingly reveal their torturous actions to a higher authority. Based on evaluating Poe’s psychological approach in “Imp”, we may thus be able to evaluate Poe’s mind, as we discussed earlier regarding his personal life. These significant evaluations of the story and linking it to Poe, as well as the fact that the literary devices Poe used in his story influenced later writers, again, such as Dostoevsky, makes “The Imp of the Perverse” a significant short story in the Poe canon.

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

Poe’s “Oval Portrait: and The Picture of Dorian Gray: the Artist, the Subject, and the Audience*

Poe’s Bride in ” The Oval Portrait” (www.Goodreads.com)

After reading Oscar Wilde’s, The Picture of Dorian Gray (1890), I was struck by how much his theme about the value of art resembled the one found in Poe’s 1842 short fictional work, “The Oval Portrait.” Both stories focus on the relationship between the artist, his subject, and the viewer, or, in the case of literature, the reader.  In Poe’s story, the young artist is driven to paint the ultimate portrait of his beautiful new wife. His goal was to produce a masterpiece that would portray a symbol of youth and vitality that would last an eternity. Poe writes, “As a thing of art, nothing could be more admirable than the painting itself.” The artist writes about the bride (the subject of his art): “She’s  a maiden of rarest beauty, and not more lovely than full of glee; all light and smiles, and frolicsome as the young fawn; loving and cherishing all things; hating only the Art which was her rival; dreading only the pallet and brushes and other untoward instruments which deprived her of the countenance of her lover.” However, she wanted to satisfy her husband and sat idly for days, while the artist was engrossed in his creation. He “turned his eyes from the canvas merely, even to regard the countenance of his wife.” After his last brush stroke, “the painter stood entranced before the work which he had wrought.” Instead of joy, “he grew tremulous, very pallid, and aghast crying with a loud voice, ‘This is Life itself!’ [and] turned suddenly to regard his beloved—She was dead!” Poe’s story shocks readers and forces them to make a judgment on the artist’s values, as well as their own values. Some  might conclude that the story demonstrates that the value of even the most beautiful art is diminished when an artist lives without compassion and positive connection with humanity. Others might conclude that the value of art exceeds the human sacrifice it took to produce it. “The Oval Portrait” also foreshadows the idealistic relationship that modern artists have with their work, as they splash images of their creations across social media and urge people to “Like” them. In many cases, they value their work more than they try to establish and maintain positive human interactions.

Wilde writes, in his Preface of the Picture of Dorian Gray, “We can forgive a man for making a useful thing as long as he does not admire it.” Wilde, like Poe, focuses on the relationship between the artist, his subject, and the reader: In the opening pages, he writes, “As the painter looked at the gracious and comely form he had so skilfully mirrored in his art, a smile of pleasure passed across his face.” The artist was deeply satisfied and even “riveted” by the profundity and beauty shown in his painting. The viewer of the painting, Lord Henry, who also symbolizes the reader, or the critic of art, remarks, “It is your best work, Basil, you must certainly send it next year to the Grosvenor.” The painter remarks that he cannot send it the exhibition, because “I have put too much of myself into it.” Lord Henry, acting as the art critic remarks, “What odd chaps you painters are. You do anything in the world to gain a reputation. As soon as you have one, you seem to want to throw it away.” Although Basil is still interested in having his art recognized, he cannot risk showing Dorian’s portrait because he fears that it will expose the darkness of his soul. The artist believes that he has become too emotionally connected to his subject to allow the purveyors of art to view his creation. Basil was once as scornful of his painting as Poe’s young bride was. However, he becomes enthralled with it after it is finished, and wants to keep it as a symbol of his youth. He makes a Faustian-like request: He wishes to remain eternally young and beautiful, and in his steed, his portrait would age with time. As this a Wilde novel, he is granted his wish. As he ages, he decides that he must hide his painting in the attic for fear that someone might discover that he has found the secret formula to eternal youth. Poe was also consumed with writing about the secret of longevity and eternal life and developed this theme throughout his career in several fictional works, including “Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar,” and “Some Words with a Mummy,” and in his final science treatise, Eureka: A Prose Poem.

Since he is granted long-lasting youth, Basil’s youthful appearance does not change after several decades. However, his life becomes increasingly decadent and even more violent than any character in a Poe story! He heartlessly scorns his lover, Sybil Vane, because she proposes to love Dorian rather than to continue as being a famous Shakespearean actress. In her final stage role, she portrays Juliet, who died an unnecessary death in Shakespeare’s tragedy. When she ceases to be an idealistic object of worship for Dorian Gray, she becomes totally undesirable to him. Dorian’s heartless rejection of her also causes her to commit suicide in real life. Afterward, Dorian and his mentor, Lord Henry, coldly justify that her dramatic death was even more profound than her life would have been as a faded actress and wife of an artist. The scenario with Sybil reminds readers of the wife, in Poe’s story, who was more dedicated to her husband than to his art, and of her the husband, who was more dedicated to his art than to his loving wife. The tragic suicide of Sybil, a word meaning an auspicious omen, foreshadows the tragic downfall of Dorian and, by psychic connection, of Basil, the artist who painted him. Due to Dorian’s decadent human activities, his portrait increasingly begins to mirror his corrupted soul. In the final scenes of the book, he must decide what he is going to do to relieve the guilt he feels when he looks at his hideous portrait. He tries to resolve his tormented soul by killing the artist who painted the work and by destroying the picture. But, does he succeed? Not all that we see in Gray is certain. Readers are as shocked about the conclusion of Wilde’s book as they were about The Oval Portrait. But,  they are not certain if Dorian Gray was conveyed realistically or whether it was entirely imagined in the mind of both the artist and his subject. The creator of the novel, Oscar Wilde, provides little to no clues to help unravel the mysteries of his well-constructed story. Instead, he challenges us to draw our own conclusions. There are several unanswered questions. For example, Did Dorian’s immoral behavior cause the painting to deteriorate? Was there a psychic connection established between the artist and the subject which caused both of them to see the painting in the same way?

Oscar Wilde’s book, Dorian Gray, was also continuing a trend that was pioneered by Poe, which introduced indeterminate endings. In this type of literature, readers had to use their own resources to unravel the loose ends of a story. For example, we do not anything about the relationship between Poe’s artist and his wife before he created his painting. We also don’t know if or how the artist changed after his wife’s death. Readers and literary critics are uncertain whether Gray’s actions caused the portrait to revert back to its former youthful vibrancy, or whether the changes seen in the portrait were only in the minds of Dorian and the artist who created the painting. Wilde wrote that art imitated life and that life imitated art, concluding that readers could understand much about themselves by the ways that they interpreted literature and art. If they thought that the lack of morals caused the tragic destruction of Dorian Gray,then that would be one conclusion about the over-arching theme of the story. However, if they concluded that Dorian lived a full and productive life of hedonistic pursuits, then they might consider that his death could be considered as noble. After all, he did try to reach for eternity. I have stopped a bit short of fully describing the final ending so that readers might explore it and draw their own conclusions about The Portrait of Dorian Gray! However, if you do like that book, I suggest that you also read any of Poe’s stories—many of which had a strong influence on Oscar Wilde’s masterpiece!

*This article was originally posted on Murray Ellison’s, www.Litchatte.com Website.

##############################

 Murray Ellison received a Master’s in Education at Temple University (1973), a Master’s of Arts in English Literature at VCU (2015), and  a Doctorate in Education at Virginia Tech in 1987. He is married and has three adult employed daughters. He retired as the Virginia Director of Community Corrections for the Department of Correctional Education in 2009. Currently, he serves as a literature teacher, board member, and curriculum advisor for the Lifelong Learning Institute in Chesterfield, Virginia, and is the founder and chief editor of the literary blog, www.LitChatte.com. He is an editor for the “Correctional Education Magazine,” and editing a book of poetry written by an Indian mystic. He also serves as a board member, volunteer tour guide, poetry judge, and all-around helper at the Edgar Allan Poe Museum in Richmond Virginia. You can write to Murray by leaving a Comment or at ellisonms2@vcu.edu

Murray  at the Poe Museum
Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

Conducting a Comprehensive Study of Poe’s, Eureka: A Prose Poem

 

Nineteenth-Century Science

 

First, I am going to propose what a researcher might have to do to conduct a comprehensive study of Poe’s 1848 book, Eureka: A Prose Poem. Then, I am going to explain why I decided not to fall into the trap of attempting to evaluate Poe’s final work. As I noted in my previous Poe and Science Blogs, in 2012 and 2013 , I attempted to design a Prospectus on Eureka for my M.A. Thesis in English Literature at the Virginia Commonwealth University. To that end, I worked with Chris Semtner at the Edgar Allan Poe Museum in Richmond and several professors at VCU putting together a few draft versions on a proposal to evaluate Eureka. I spent hours in libraries reviewing articles and even books that scholars had written about Eureka. I transcribed Moon-Notes, a scientific manuscript that Poe had written to assist him with several works he was writing. And finally, I took a trip to New York, to the noted collector, Susan Jaffe Tane’s home, to examine Poe’s personal copy of Eureka. This book is now the most valuable first-edition since it contains hand-edited notes by Poe indicating that he had intended to revise and expand his work in a later edition. It is hard to determine conclusively why Poe decided to attempt to write and publish this comprehensive poetic, historical, scientific, and metaphysical treatise after having established a highly recognizable career as a poet and fiction writer, but there are some clues.

In 1847, after recovering from a serious illness, the death of his wife, and facing the prospects of his own mortality, Poe decided to conduct research on astronomy and cosmology. Perhaps he hoped he might be able to unify the differing theories about the universe that were being advanced by competing disciplines and to publish his conclusions in a single book. By that period, astronomers had developed more powerful telescopes than had been available at any previous time. These instruments could discern details of celestial bodies which were at the far edges of the Solar System and beyond. Undoubtedly, Poe was attempting to gain a greater understanding of the most credible theories about the origins and operational details of the Universe. He was seeking answers to the mysteries surrounding the greater meaning of life and existence. As if those questions weren’t comprehensive and mysterious enough, he also decided to address what happens to humans after they died, a topic which he had often explored in great detail in his previous poetry and science fiction writing.

After he finally published Eureka: A Prose Poem in 1848, he suggested that his book should not be evaluated until after he died (Preface of Eureka). Prior to its publication, he informed his publisher, George P. Putnam, that Eureka would one day found to be “of greater importance than Newton’s discovery of gravitation.”  He considered it the culmination of his life’s work” (Broussard 52). Once Eureka was published, Poe resumed a lecture tour and promoted his book until his death in 1849.  In the Preface, he suggested that though his book is “True,” it should only be read for the “Beauty that abounds in Truth.”

Eureka remains for us as Poe’s most enigmatic work. Even the most ardent Poe experts are baffled when trying to read or understand the book. To this date, no one has been able to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of Poe’s most enigmatic work. Literary critic, Charles Baxter, in Burning Down The House, writes about a literary device that has often been employed by fiction writers, called defamiliarization. In this technique, everyday scenes take place in unexpected settings; or unfamiliar scenes takes place in everyday settings (21). Avid readers of Poe are very familiar with his writing style and literary themes but are often unfamiliar with the subject matter of Poe’s culminating poetic-science treatise. Some critics have noted that Eureka is too scientific for literature and too literary for science. Scientists who have considered Poe’s book have generally not considered him sufficiently qualified to write on complex scientific subjects and literary scholars are often too baffled to attempt to apply the tools of literary criticism on Poe’s science book. Prominent nineteenth-century scientist, Alexander von Humboldt (to whom Poe dedicated Eureka) wrote that “he enjoyed Poe’s latest satire on science” (Levine 118).  Henry Lee (Hal) Poe a descendant of E.A. Poe’s cousin (William Poe) and a prominent E.A. Poe researcher stated that until the last quarter century many researchers were quick to dismiss Eureka as being too difficult to understand. As evidence to that assumption, they concluded that, in Eureka, Poe had “gone around the bend.”  Hal Poe contends that the easiest course, both for Poe enthusiasts and detractors, has been to dismiss the work in its entirety. However, during the modern era, there has also been another growing group of literary, historical, and science researchers who have been willing to take a fresh look at the work (H.L. Poe, ix).

After more than a year of Eureka research, I concluded that to gain a fuller understanding of Poe’s culminating book, I would first need to determine whether Poe’s interest in science in Eureka was an anomaly or a continuation of his previous interest in that topic. Therefore, I shifted my research priority to trace the development of Poe’s science-based themes throughout his pre-Eureka, poetic, non-fiction, and fictional writing. I wondered if an understanding of Poe’s previous works might help me to better understand Eureka. Although I was still enthusiastic about conducting research on Poe and Science, I did not believe that I was ready or able to accept Poe’s challenge of evaluating Eureka almost 170 years after Poe published his book. Several previous researchers had attempted to use traditional methods of critiquing literary or scientific research with Eureka but had produced inconclusive results. Using the pitfalls of these previous research studies as cautionary guidelines, I decided, instead, to construct some questions that other scholars might need to consider before attempting to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of Eureka. I delineated these questions in 2013 both at the William & Mary Literature and History Conference and the Positively Poe Conference at the University of Virginia.

Research Questions about Eureka

  1. What are the major scientific themes embedded in Poe’s poetry, non-fiction, and fictional writing?
  2. Were Poe’s previous science themes continued in Eureka or was his book an anomalous work?
  3. Would an understanding the historical, cultural, and scientific contexts of the nineteenth-century to help modern researchers to better understand Eureka?
  4. How does Eureka help modern scholars to understand how the nineteenth-century public received and interpreted news about science and technology?
  5. What are the major scientific theories that informed Poe as he was writing Eureka?
  6. How did critics respond to Eureka in and after Poe’s lifetime, and what is the validity of their responses?
  7. What are the literary techniques Poe used in writing Eureka and does he follow his own standards?
  8.  What are the theories and conclusions that Poe reached in his treatise?
  9.  What is the significance of Eureka in Poe’s Canon, in English Literature, and in science history?

Re-Assessment of Eureka Needed?

The conclusion I reached after considering these research questions is that for me to complete a comprehensive evaluation of Eureka, I would need to conduct a multi-perspective study, requiring a combination of literary analysis, historical, and scientific research. I concluded that I would not be able to complete such a study within the time that I had  left in my M.A. program. Anyone conducting such a study would need to employ the ingenious inductive, deductive, and ratiocinative methods of Poe’s Detective C. Auguste Dupin to unravel the many seemingly unsolvable puzzles of Eureka. Poe defines ratiocination as the process of reasoning or forming accurate conclusions from known and observed premises as a method of solving complex and seemingly irresolvable mysteries. Ratiocination combines the use of considerable intellect, intuition, and creative imagination. Poe’s previous detective writing and columns on cryptography demonstrate that he was interested in posing and resolving complex problems. He created Dupin as a literary figure to solve the most complex enigmas and conundrums by using the highest form of human discovery available to the human mind. It is possible, then, that Poe wrote Eureka as a puzzle, and left obscure clues for his readers to solve like he done in his earlier cryptography newspaper columns. However, solutions to the puzzles and mysteries Poe posed in Eureka have evaded researchers and readers for almost one hundred and seventy years. In my next Poe and Science column, I will explain why I decided not to focus my M.A. Thesis research on evaluating Eureka but, instead, on the general topic of Poe and Science.

Selected Resources

Baxter, Charles. Burning Down the House: Essays on Fiction. Minneapolis: Graywolf Press, 2008.

Broussard, Louis. The Measure of Poe. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1969.

Daniels, George.  American Science in the Age of Jackson.  NY: Columbia UP, 1968.

Levine, Stuart and Susan F. Levine.  Eureka. Eds. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004.

Ostram, John, Ed.  The Notes of Edgar Allan Poe.  New York: Guardian Press, 1966.

Poe, Edgar Allan.  Eureka A Prose Poem. New York: George P. Putnam, 1848.

____ “Moon Notes,” Scanned copy of eight un-numbered and unordered pages handwritten by Edgar Allan Poe Museum, Richmond, VA:  MS (Museum Catalogue # 2012.2.44). Manuscript

Poe, Henry Lee. Evermore: Edgar Allan Poe and the Mystery of the Universe. Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press, 2012.

Silverman, Kenneth. Edgar A. Poe: A Biography. New York: Harper Collins, 1991.

Thomas, Dwight and David Jackson. Eds. The Poe Log- A Documentary Life of Edgar Allan Poe 1809 – 1849. Boston: G.B. Hall and Company, 1987.            

##############################

 

 Murray Ellison received a Master’s in Education at Temple University (1973), a Master’s of Arts in English Literature at VCU (2015), and  a Doctorate in Education at Virginia Tech in 1987. He is married and has three adult employed daughters. He retired as the Virginia Director of Community Corrections for the Department of Correctional Education in 2009. Currently, he serves as a literature teacher, board member, and curriculum advisor for the Lifelong Learning Institute in Chesterfield, Virginia, and is the founder and chief editor of the literary blog, www.LitChatte.com. He is an editor for the “Correctional Education Magazine,” and editing a book of poetry written by an Indian mystic. He also serves as a board member, volunteer tour guide, poetry judge, and all-around helper at the Edgar Allan Poe Museum in Richmond Virginia. You can write to Murray by leaving a Comment or at ellisonms2@vcu.edu

Murray  at the Richmond Poe Museum

                                                                               

 

 

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

The Critic Who Burned “Fairy-Land”

Editor Nathaniel Parker Willis once burned a manuscript of Poe’s “Fairy-Land.” That seems like pretty harsh treatment from a literary editor; and we wonder why such atmospheric lines as “Dim vales-and shadowy floods- / And cloudy-looking woods” might receive such severe critical feedback? The answer lies in comparing the poem we commonly know with its alternative publishing in Poe’s anthology of poems in 1831.

Poems, 1831

It was no secret that Poe was always at work altering lines and switching words-“Fairy-Land” was no exception.

Our readers may be familiar with the classic verse, which reads,

Dim vales—and shadowy floods—

And cloudy-looking woods,

Whose forms we can’t discover

For the tears that drip all over:

Huge moons there wax and wane—

Again—again—again—

Every moment of the night—

Forever changing places—

And they put out the star-light

With the breath from their pale faces.

About twelve by the moon-dial,

One more filmy than the rest

(A kind which, upon trial,

They have found to be the best)

Comes down—still down—and down

With its centre on the crown

Of a mountain’s eminence,

While its wide circumference

In easy drapery falls

Over hamlets, over halls,

Wherever they may be—

O’er the strange woods—o’er the sea—

Over spirits on the wing—

Over every drowsy thing—

And buries them up quite

In a labyrinth of light—

And then, how, deep! —O, deep,

Is the passion of their sleep.

In the morning they arise,

And their moony covering

Is soaring in the skies,

With the tempests as they toss,

Like—almost any thing—

Or a yellow Albatross.

They use that moon no more

For the same end as before,

Videlicet, a tent—

Which I think extravagant:

Its atomies, however,

Into a shower dissever,

Of which those butterflies

Of Earth, who seek the skies,

And so come down again

(Never-contented things!)

Have brought a specimen

Upon their quivering wings.

The following is what N. P. Willis had to say about this version of the poem:

It is quite exciting to lean over eagerly as the flame eats in upon the letters, and make out the imperfect sentences and trace the faint strokes in the tinder as it trembles in the ascending air of the chimney. There, for instance, goes a gilt-edged sheet which we remember was covered with some sickly rhymes on Fairy-land….Now it [the flame] flashes up in a broad blaze, and now it reaches a marked verse-let us see-the fire devours as we read:
“They use that moon no more,
For the same end as before-
Videlicet, a tent,
Which I think extravagant.”
Burn on, good fire! (From The Editor’s Table’ of the American Monthly for November, here found in The Poe Log, 99).

Critic Nathaniel Parker Willis

Whether Willis truly burned the manuscript the twenty-year-old Poe poured his heart into, or whether he figuratively made this claim to prove a striking point, we may infer that the notice may have burned Poe so severely that it caused him to turn the memorable piece into a less than memorable one. Here is the following revised version found in his 1831, Poems, just two years after Willis’ scathing review,
Sit down beside me, Isabel,

Here, dearest, where the moonbeam fell

Just now so fairy-like and well.

Now thou art dress’d for paradise!

I am star-stricken with thine eyes!

My soul is lolling on thy sighs!

Thy hair is lifted by the moon

Like flowers by the low breath of June!

Sit down, sit down — how came we here?

Or is it all but a dream, my dear?

 

You know that most enormous flower —

That rose — that what d’ye call it — that hung

Up like a dog-star in this bower —

To-day (the wind blew, and) it swung

So impudently in my face,

So like a thing alive you know,

I tore it from its pride of place

And shook it into pieces — so

Be all ingratitude requited.

The winds ran off with it delighted,

And, thro’ the opening left, as soon

As she threw off her cloak, yon moon

Has sent a ray down with a tune.

 

And this ray is a fairy ray —

Did you not say so, Isabel?

How fantastically it fell

With a spiral twist and a swell,

And over the wet grass rippled away

With a tinkling like a bell!

In my own country all the way

We can discover a moon ray

Which thro’ some tatter’d curtain pries

Into the darkness of a room,

Is by (the very source of gloom)

The motes, and dust, and flies,

On which it trembles and lies

Like joy upon sorrow!

O, when will come the morrow?

Isabel! do you not fear

The night and the wonders here?

Dim vales! and shadowy floods!

And cloudy-looking woods

Whose forms we can’t discover

For the tears that drip all over!

 

Huge moons — see! wax and wane

Again — again — again —

Every moment of the night —

Forever changing places!

How they put out the starlight

With the breath from their pale faces!

 

Lo! one is coming down

With its centre on the crown

Of a mountain’s eminence!

Down — still down —   and down —

Now deep shall be — O deep!

The passion of our sleep!

For that wide circumference

In easy drapery falls

Drowsily over halls —

Over ruin’d walls —

Over waterfalls,

(Silent waterfalls!)

O’re the strange woods — o’er the sea —

Alas! over the sea! (Taken from here).

We question Poe’s motives in changing the poem, causing it to become so lengthy and awkward; even a fellow Poe enthusiast was left shaking their head in confusion, stating, “I don’t even recognize that poem. Isabel-?!” Perhaps this alternate “Fairy Land” is truly that-an alternate “Fairy Land.” Thus, shouldn’t it be treated as its own poem and published, perhaps, alongside our final version of “Fairy-Land?” It is noted in Mabbott’s Complete Poems that Poe never republished “Fairy Land” (which is noted here as “Fairy Land [II]”). He may have been ashamed of his lengthy alternative and thus stuck with his original, scathed “Fairy-Land,” pushing its popularity and thus allowing it to be the one contemporary audiences may be more familiar with. This is not to say that both poems have not been published side-by-side, in some cases, since; however, the author of this post would like to point out that two of her own Poe volumes do not contain “Fairy Land” from 1831 Poems.

What do you think about the alternate piece? Do you think both versions should be, or continue to be, published in future Poe anthologies? Which version do you prefer?

 

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

“Lines on Ale” and Other Misattributed Poems

I recently came across a curious poem in a Poe anthology entitled “To Isadore.” I was not familiar with it, but it certainly sounded like Poe’s voice throughout the stanzas, at least so I thought. The publishers sure fooled me, for lo’ and behold, it was deemed as being misattributed to Poe and it had been confirmed that it was not a Poe poem (Mabbott 509). What concerned me most about this situation was that there remain to be slipups even among our popular publishers today. The anthology I found this poem in will go unnamed; however, this post is meant to bring awareness to a few commonly misattributed “Poe poems.”

Going off of the “To Isadore” poem, Mabbott explains in his Complete Poems that an A. M. Ide was thought to be Poe, especially since this Ide had published four poems in The Broadway Journal of 1845, the same journal Poe briefly worked for. Mabbott explains, however, that this young writer was Abijah M. Ide (509). In fact, Ide and Poe had corresponded in a few letters, thus further proving that Poe was not Mr. Ide, and thus marking off the following poems from Poe’s “potential poems” list: “To Isadore,” “The Village Street,” “The Forest Reverie,” and “Annette,” all written by Ide.

“To Isadore” was not the first time I had been fooled by believing I had found a new Poe poem to read. A close second that seems to fool many, including private sellers on various auction websites, is “The Fire-Fiend – A Nightmare,” which can be found in the Saturday Press of November 19, 1859. According to Mabbott, this poem was a hoax by Charles D. Gadette, who later explained in his own pamphlet the truth behind the poem and that it was his own. This did not stop the prestigious Southern Literary Messenger from publishing it again, however, in their July 1863 issue (calling it “The Fire Legend”). Finally, this piece continued to fool audiences, even up until 1901, where James A. Harrison, who published it in a Complete Works of Poe, had discussed the poem with W. F. Gill, who called it “The Demon of Fire” (Mabbott 512).

Thomas Dunn English

A third poem to discuss is “The Lady Hubbard,” which can be found in Godey’s Lady’s Book of 1849. What is striking about this piece is that it has been hypothesized to have been written by Thomas Dunn English, rather than Poe, although scholars, including Ruth E. Finley in The Lady of Godey’s, adamantly attribute it to Poe. We might point out that this has not been the first time English and Poe have been mixed up regarding their writing technique; and English has been so convincing of parodying Poe’s writing that other authors blindly accepted prose sent in by English mimicking and claiming to be Poe. This includes “The Ghost of a Grey Tadpole, by Edgar A. Poe,” published in The Irish Citizen of January, 1844. According to Dwight Thomas in The Poe Log, this was a “clever burlesque of Poe’s fiction by Thomas Dunn English” (450). Later that month, George Lippard, a contemporary of Poe’s, republished the story in the Citizen Soldier, “without comment and presumably without recognizing it as a hoax by English,” according to Thomas (451). We cannot blame Lippard for his mistake, however, as English, who had editorial authority of the Irish Citizen took his own liberties to publish the false piece. Only Poe and English would know better about that story. Another poem that English wrote, mimicking Poe’s style was “The Mammoth Squash,” which also remains to be a confusing selling point for many rare booksellers. Unfortunately, again, Poe did not write this poem, and we would frankly be embarrassed if he had. Originally found in the Aristidean of October 1845, the poem caused Poe himself to rise and refute the poem as being his own in an article in the Broadway Journal of 1845. Rather, Poe directed the poem towards the editor of the Aristidean, Thomas Dunn English. This shows that Poe was even dealing with misattributions during his lifetime.

Our fourth piece is one that Mabbott deemed to be “trash,” a harsh word to use in a scholarly book. Charles Bromback assigned this poem, “First of May,” to Poe in 1917; it was originally found in the Atlantic Souvenir. According to Mabbott, the poem ends by exclaiming, “Then how can I be gay / On this merry first of May? / Ah no! I am sad, I am sad” (505). Mabbott ends his short description regarding this poem with a quip, “It is to its unknown author’s credit that no signature was affixed to this trash.” We will have to agree with Mabbott on this one.

Our final poem is one that is fairly commonly known within the Poe community, “Lines on Ale.” This drinking poem managed to confuse Poe scholars aplenty, and many still attribute it to Poe. He was “an alcoholic” after all, so why wouldn’t he write a few verses in honor of the drink? Unfortunately, this poem has been rejected and is not a Poe poem.

George Arnold, author of “Drinking Wine”

Mabbott had mistakenly claimed it as a Poe poem, stating, “Absolutely complete authentication is not possible, but the piece comes in an unsuspicious way, and I regard it as authentic…” (449). The legend claims that Poe may have written the lines at the Washington Tavern in Lowell, Massachusetts and that the manuscript of this poem hung on the wall of the tavern until around 1920. Even a firsthand account given by Jerry Murphy, a source for Mabbott, claimed to have seen it. However, doubts began to seriously arise in 2013 when, according to the Edgar Allan Poe Society of Baltimore, claims were sent in pointing out strong similarities between Poe’s lines and another poet’s lines. George Arnold’s version, beginning with “Pour the mingled cream and amber,” was first published in 1867, whereas Poe’s version, “Fill with mingled cream and amber,” was supposedly written anytime between 1848-1892 (although it would have had to have been written in 1848 or 1849, considering Poe’s death in 1849, assuming Poe had written it) (EAPoe). Another argument in 2014 explained that perhaps Arnold had plagiarized Poe; however, there is no evidence that proves this either way.

Mabbot’s argument using Murphy’s potentially word-of-mouth claims is not sufficient evidence that Poe would have written this poem, nor is there strictly strong evidence proving that Arnold was the original, and only, author of the poem. If the manuscript still survived, then we might completely know the truth. For now, this poem has been rejected by the Poe community.

Over all, there seem to be many numerous misattributed poems out there, many parodying “The Raven” and “Annabel Lee,” while others claim to have been inspired from Poe’s own voice from the dead. Were you familiar with any of these poems? Were there any that did not make our list? For a complete list, you can visit the following link.

Categories
The Poe Museum Blog

Poe as America’s Unabashed Critic

Poe was notorious for being a harsh critic-he was nicknamed the “Tomahawk Man,” after all. But are you familiar with these particular criticisms?

Check these out:

1) Poe once told a guy to shoot himself. According to Poe scholar Chris Semtner in his book Edgar Allan Poe’s Richmond, Poe wrote a review of author Langston Osbourne’s book, Confessions of a Poet in an 1835 issue of the Southern Literary Messenger. First off, let us explain that the author had included a couple of sentences in his preface explaining that he’d had a gun on standby so he could shoot himself upon the book’s completion. Poe, knowing this, stated,

The author avers upon his word of honor that in commencing this work he loads a pistol, and places it upon the table. He farther states that, upon coming to a conclusion, it is his intention to blow out what he supposes to be his brains. Now this is excellent. But, even with so rapid a writer as the poet must undoubtedly be, there would be some little difficulty in completing the book under thirty days or thereabouts. The best of powder is apt to sustain injury by lying so long “in the load.” We sincerely hope the gentleman took the precaution to examine his priming before attempting the rash act. A flash in the pan — and in such a case — were a thing to be lamented. Indeed there would be no answering for the consequences. We might even have a second series of the Confessions.

Yikes!

2) In an introductory article for The Lady’s Book, entitled “The Literati: Of Criticism-Public and Private,” Poe proceeded to explain the premise of a series of articles he would be releasing. He then commenced, giving us a glimpse to prepare us for the potentially scathing reviews to follow:

Again, of Mr. Longfellow, who, although a little quacky per se, has, through his social and literary position as a man of property and a professor at Harvard, a whole legion of active quacks at his control-of him what is the apparent popular opinion? Of course, that he is a poetical phenomenon, as entirely without fault, as is the luxurious paper upon which his poems are invariably borne to the public eye (40-41).

Not only does Poe call Longfellow a “quack,” a pretty bold move to make, but he also sarcastically implies that Longfellow does entirely have faults, is not a poetical phenomenon, and he mocks the “luxurious paper upon which [Longfellow’s] poems are” written on. Keep in mind that this wasn’t the beginning, nor was it the end, of the “Poe-Longfellow War.” We will allude to this again later in this post.

3) Aside from literary critiques, Poe also went the mile and decided to critique include physical appearances and attributes at the end of some articles. Here’s one of our favorites regarding Margaret Fuller’s appearance in Poe’s eyes:

She is of the medium height; nothing remarkable about the figure; a profusion of lustrous light hair; eyes a bluish gray, full of fire; capacious forehead; the mouth when in repose indicates profound sensibility…but the upper lip, as if impelled by the action of involuntary muscles, habitually uplifts itself, conveying the impression of a sneer” (122).

How flattering.

4) Charles Fenno Hoffman was a common name back in Poe’s time. Hoffman was especially, personally known to Poe through a harsh published review of “Eureka” in The Literary World, for which Hoffman was the editor. Although it may have seemed to Poe that Hoffman was unfair to publish this review of Poe’s allegedly great masterpiece, we feel he had every right to his actions as editor, especially considering what Poe wrote regarding one of Hoffman’s own works, Greyslaer,

“Greyslaer” followed, a romance based on the well known murder of Sharp, the Solicitor-General of Kentucky, by Beauchampe[sic]. W[illam] Gilmore Simms, (who has far more power, more passion, more movement, more skill than Mr. Hoffman) has treated the same subject more effectively in his novel “Beauchampe,” but the fact is that both gentlemen have positively failed, as might have been expected (173)

Poe has effectively disrespected both Hoffman and Simms in a few short lines, making this a double-whammy critique. And, apparently Poe felt the need to mention in a review about Hoffman that even though Hoffman and Simms failed to provide a good novel, Hoffman failed harder than Simms. We say this statement was completely uncalled for.

5) In our same book of Poe criticisms, we found a curious man by the name of William W. Lord. Poe didn’t know who he was either, as his article opens by explaining, “Of Mr. Lord we known nothing-although we believe that he is a student at Princeton College-or perhaps a graduate, or perhaps a Professor of that institution.” (256). This anonymity seems to pull the worst out in Poe, perhaps because if he isn’t acquainted with them, he’ll never see the victim.

A curious passage arises in this critique, as he quotes the following lines from a poem of Lord’s, “And the aged beldames napping,/ Dreamed of gently rapping, rapping, / With a hammer gently tapping, / Tapping on an infant’s skull” (266). Poe goes on to imply that this is a theft of his “The Raven,” as he provides the following stanza for example, “While I pondered nearly napping, / Suddenly there came a rapping, / As of someone gently tapping, / Tapping at my chamber door” (266). He then attacks,

But it is folly to pursue these thefts. As to any property of our own, Mr. Lord is very cordially welcome to whatever use he can make of it. But others may not be so pacifically disposed, and the book before us might be very materially thinned and reduced in cost, by discarding from it all that belongs to Miss Barrett, Tennyson, Keats, Shelley, Proctor, Longfellow and Lowell-the very class of poets, by the way, whom Mr. William W. Lord, in his ‘New Castalia’ the most especially affects to satirize and to contemn (266).

This is how he ends his critique of Mr. Lord,

Invariably Mr. Lord writes didst did’st; couldst could’st, &c. The fact is he is absurdly ignorant of the commonest principles of grammar-and the only excuse we can make to our readers for annoying them with specifications in this respect is that, without the specifications we should never have been believed.

But enough of this folly. We are heartily tired of the book, and thoroughly disgusted with the impudence of the parties who have been aiding and abetting in thrusting it before the public. To the poet himself we have only to say-from any farther specimens of your stupidity, good Lord deliver us! (269).

As for Mr. Lord, whether he was a student or professor, we can guess he did not come out to see the light of day again after reading Poe’s article about him.

6) In regard to Rufus Griswold’s anthology, The Poets and Poetry of America, (you know, the man who attempted to destroy Poe’s reputation), Poe had this to say:

He has omitted from the body of his book, some one or two whom we should have been tempted to introduce. On the other hand, he has scarcely made us amends by introducing some one or two dozen whom we should have treated with contempt. We might complain too of a prepossession, evidently unperceived by himself, for the writers of New England. We might hint also, that in two or three cases, he has rendered himself liable to the charge of personal partiality…(103).

Perhaps he is referring to Charles Hoffman in this case, who had had 45 of his poems featured in the anthology. Poe even points this out in a separate, but relevant criticism and article about Hoffman,

Whatever may be the merits of Mr. Hoffman as a poet, it may be easily seen that these merits have been put in the worst possible light by the indiscriminate and lavish approbation bestowed on them by Dr. Griswold in his ‘Poets and Poetry of America.’ The editor can find no blemish in Mr. H., agrees with everything and copies everything said in his praise-worse than all, gives him more space in the book than any two, or perhaps three, of our poets combined (175).

In Griswold’s anthology, Poe only had three poems featured. Perhaps he was harboring ill feelings?

7) Lewis Gaylord Clark was known for being the editor of The Knickerbocker for many years, as well as another victim held under Poe’s scrutiny-we might also mention that Poe and Clark had quite a rocky relationship. Sometimes Edgar could be downright harsh to those he critiqued, and Gaylord wasn’t an exception, as seen in the following example, “Mr. Clark once did me the honor to review my poems, and-I forgive him…He is noticeable for nothing in the world except for the markedness by which he is noticeable for nothing” (Quinn 502). All we can say is that this critique didn’t go unnoticed by us in the least.

8) Many men did not go unobserved by Poe, and Charles F. Briggs was no exception. Briggs was Poe’s coworker at the Broadway Journal; in fact, Briggs was its founder. However, Poe remained merciless in his installment of “The Literati of New York City,” when he proclaimed that Briggs “has never composed in his life three consecutive sentences of grammatical English. He is grossly uneducated” (EAPoe).

9) Our ninth author sacrificed under the mercilessness of Poe is Joel T. Headley. This reverend, historian, and author was torn apart from first sentence to last under Poe’s evaluation. For example, Poe writes about Headley’s “Sacred Mountains,” stating,

We say that a book is a “funny” book, and nothing else, when it spreads over two hundred pages an amount of matter which could be conveniently presented in twenty of a magazine…that a book is a”funny” book, and nothing but a funny book, whenever it happens to be penned by Mr. Headley (47).

Sufficed it to say that Headley wasn’t going for a comical bent in his “Sacred Mountains.” We might also note that in this same editorial, Poe calls Headley a “quack”-does this sound familiar? (The author of this post would also like to note that she read the book that Poe grossly attacked and can say that she disagrees with Poe’s claims.)

10) Finally, Longfellow was, once more, analyzed under Poe’s seething Tomahawk gaze in an article titled “Mr. Longfellow and Other Plagiarists: A Discussion With ‘Outis’.” As you might recall, an intern at the museum wrote an article last summer about the Poe-Longfellow War, which you can check out here. That being said, we will not go too in depth into the ordeal. However, in this last section of our list, we will discuss this mysterious Outis mentioned in the title.

Have any of our readers heard of this mysterious Outis? Where did he come from, and what were his intentions? Whomever took the title of Outis was most likely trying to play a trick on Longfellow and other readers, we surmise, as it has even been speculated that this Outis was Poe himself.

Outis is Greek for “Nobody” or “No One,” which seems befitting if one were to take on a pseudonym. But why might Poe be this mysterious Outis? We will explain in a blog post soon to come. Meanwhile, we are left with the “Mr. Longfellow…” critique, which is more or less a battle against Longfellow and other plagiarists (just as the title suggests), as well as Poe’s battle against this other mysterious writer who took it upon himself to publish a letter in Longfellow’s defense, all the while mocking Poe. He or she even compares a poem, “The Bird of the Dream” (which, we cannot currently find any records of this ever having existed) to “The Raven.” The point is daft, regardless, as the two poems aren’t even comparable.

“Sweet bird from realms of light, oh! come again to-night, / Come to my window-perch upon my chair- / Come give me back again that deep impassioned strain
/ That tells me thou hast seen and loved my CLARE,” the last stanza quotes, as provided in Outis’ article (EAPoe). However, Outis continues by explaining that he dares not to charge Poe with plagiarism, but proceeds to provide fifteen points explaining what “identities” make this poem comparable to “The Bird of the Dream.”

How does Poe respond? “What I admire in this letter is the gentlemanly grace of its manner, and the chivalry which has prompted its composition. What I do not admire is all the rest. In especial, I do not admire the desperation of the effort to make out a case” (EAPoe).

Why did we choose this article for our last choice? Considering the potential that Outis might be Poe himself, it is comical. We are presented not only with Outis’ criticism of Poe’s works, but also Poe’s rebuttal to Outis. Essentially, Poe is rebuking himself! Perhaps Poe wanted an opponent worthy of himself, so he took up the challenge? Or, perhaps he invented Outis in the hopes that Longfellow would respond to his accusations? There is no denying that it takes someone with great confidence and a sense of humor to critique themselves.

Which was your favorite selection? Were there any critiques that didn’t make it in our list? Feel free to comment below!