THE HARMONY OF VIRTUE

V. 3. The Historical Method233deduce from that knowledge. We proceed from the milieu tothe poem, instead of arguing from the poem to the milieu. Yetthe latter is the only fair method; for it is not the whole of themilieu that affects the man nor every part of it that affects himequally; the extent to which it affects him and the distribution ofits various influences can only be judged from the poem itself.We know from literary history that Marlowe and Kyd and otherwriters exercised no little influence on Shakespeare in his youngand callow days; and it may be said in passing that all poets ofthe first order and even many of the second are profoundly influencedby the inferior and sometimes almost worthless workwhich was in vogue at the time of their early efforts, but theyhave the high secret of mental alchemy which can convert notmerely inferior metal but even refuse into gold. It is only poetsof a one-sided minor genius who can afford to be aggressivelyoriginal. Now as literary history, as psychology, as part of theknowledge of intellectual origins, this is a highly important andnoteworthy fact. But in the task of criticism what do we gain byit? We have simply brought the phantoms of Marlowe and Kydbetween ourselves and what we are assimilating, and so disturbedand blurred the true picture of it that was falling on our souls,and if we know our business, the first thing we shall do is tobanish those intruding shadows and bring ourselves once moreface to face with Shakespeare.The historical method leads besides to much confusion andis sometimes a veil for a bastard impressionism and sometimesa source of literary insincerity or at the best anaemic catholicity.As often as not a critic studies, say, the Elizabethan age becausehe has a previous sympathy with the scattered grandeurs, thehasty and vehement inequalities, the profuse mixture of flawedstones, noble gems and imitation jewellery with which that schooloverwhelms us. In that case the profession with which he startsis insincere, for he professes to base his appreciation on study,whereas his study begins from, continues with and ends in appreciation.Often on the contrary he studies as a duty and praisesin order to elevate his study; because he has perused all andunderstood all, he must sympathise with all, or where is theproof of his having understood? Perfect intelligence of a man's