Commentary
Introduction
Of this pair of sonnets DGR wrote to his brother (15 September 1869) that
they “are merely picturesque, and . . . stupid people are sure to like
[them] better than better things
” (see
Fredeman,
Correspondence, 69. 156
).
His judgment is shrewd, as one realizes immediately when the sonnets are
compared to the pair he wrote for his own painting
<xref doc="a.s40.rap">The Girlhood of Mary Virgin</xref>
.
In the latter case, a clearly articulated set of
ideas governs the deployment of the pictorial details, whereas here the
treatment is indeed, as DGR says, more “picturesque”.
Nevertheless, the sonnets—and in particular
the first of the two—exemplify very well
DGR's peculiar gift for turning various types of
words (especially nouns, verbs, adjectives) into
a “picturesque” state: so that different
syntactic forms acquire the qualities of other forms. Terms like
“harsh
” and “shrewd
” here operate with a certain nominal
force, as does the verb “ramps
”; and of course the noun
“salt
” is forced to operate in adjectival form. The startling
words “geomaunt and teraphim
” epitomize the sophistication
of the treatment: these are nouns, but their substantive elements are so
recondite that they become, as has often been noted, atmospheric and
adjectival in their primary syntactic function.
The second sonnet
is not a verbal rendering of the pictorial details but a report on
the emotional and psychic content of the scene (a) as it is experienced
by Angelica, and (b) as Angelica's experience is sympathetically
recreated by the poet. That act of recreation is as much an
interpretation of the Ingres painting as it is an imagining of
Angelica's state of mind and feelings at the climactic moment of
the action. That the scene represents a threat of rape scarcely needs
to be said: DGR's gothic details in the octave are meant to stand as an
objective correlative for the psychic catastrophe being undergone
(by Angelica, but through her by the viewer/reader as well).
Indeed, the textual injunctions in the octave
appear to signal an observer's attitude to the painting. Seen in this
way, the sestet then becomes a reflection on the aesthetic repose
that (in DGR's argument of images here) one ought to realize as
a function of even the most thrilling and energetic work of art. Seen in
another (sexual) way, it represents a kind of post-coital lassitude;
and it hardly needs mentioning that the poem is setting in the reader's
way a series of disturbing and even outrageous complications.
The phallic action of the scene scarcely needs comment.
However, one wants to see very clearly that a certain equation is being
drawn in DGR's re-presentation between Ruggiero and the orc.
Textual History: Composition
DGR sent a manuscript copy of the
sonnets in a letter to his
brother on 18 October 1849, where they are headed with the title
“Last Visit to the Luxembourg. Roger Rescuing Angelica; by
Ingres” (see
Fredeman,
Correspondence
49. 19
).
Textual History: Revision
DGR revised the MS text of the sonnets when he came to publish them
in the
<xref doc="a.ap4.g415.1.4.rad" workcode="39-1849">Germ</xref>
in 1850. But the revisions were not extensive, and when
he again moved them through the print process that eventuated in their
publication in the 1870
<xref doc="a.1-1870.1stedn.rad" workcode="39-1849">Poems</xref>
, the texts remained very close to the
<xref doc="a.ap4.g415.1.4.rad" workcode="39-1849">Germ</xref>
texts. Nonetheless there are differences and these are reflected in the manuscript copy made by WMR many years later. This is an important document because it preserves a set of revisions that represent DGR's later changes to the work. The autograph manuscript from which these revisions derive was certainly available to WMR when he was editing his brother's work for his first (1886) collected edition, because that text gives the revised version of the sonnet, not the 1850.
Reception
Patmore read the sonnets in November 1849, after DGR had returned
from his trip to Europe with Hunt, and “was much struck with
the character they possess of being descriptive of a painting
”
(see Fredeman,
<hi rend="i">The P.R.B. Journal</hi>
23
).
Iconographic
Behind both picture and sonnets stands the
iconography of the damsel in distress, so affecting to Victorian
sensibilities. DGR's poems rather shockingly emphasize the physical and
sexual character of such an image constellation, and the complex
relations that bond the figures in such a scene together.
Printing History
First published in the
<xref doc="a.ap4.g415.1.4.rad" workcode="39-1849">Germ</xref>
no. 4 (30 April 1850),
as the last two of the six
<xref doc="a.8a-1850.raw">Sonnets for Pictures</xref>
printed there.
DGR reprinted them in the Penkill
Proofs, where the text is virtually
the same as the text published in the 1870
<xref doc="a.1-1870.1stedn.rad" workcode="39-1849">Poems</xref>
, the culmination
of the proof process begun with the Penkill Proofs. DGR was hesitant
about including this pair of sonnets in the volume but eventually decided
in their favor.
Pictorial
There are several versions of this subject by Ingres
and each is significantly different. DGR's sonnets, as his title indicates,
reflect upon the painting then in the museum of the Luxembourg
palace (but moved to the Louvre in 1878). On 4 October
1849 DGR wrote to his brother about Ingres and his work. He praised
“a ceiling by Ingres [in the Louvre]
which contains some exceedingly good things.
This fellow is quite unaccountable. One
picture of his in the Luxembourg is
unsurpassed for exquisite perfection by
anything I have ever seen, and he has others
for which I would not give two sous
” (see
Fredeman,
Correspondence
49. 17
).
Literary
Like the original painting, DGR's sonnets derive from
Ariosto's
<xref doc="a.ariosto001.rad" link="dead">
<hi rend="i">Orlando Furioso</hi>
</xref>
Canto X. The second
sonnet, in fact, as Baum notes, draws more from
Ariosto than it does from Ingres. “In Ariosto, however, the orc is
not killed, but is subdued by the enchanted shield until the damsel can
be rescued
” (Baum,
<hi rend="i">Poems, Ballads and Sonnets</hi>
166n)
.
The second sonnet also recalls Poe's manner of constructing a scene of
exquisite textual/psychic intensity, in both poetic and prose works.
Bibliographic
Gregory,
<hi rend="i">The Life and Works of DGR</hi>
II. 109-110
Stein,
<hi rend="i">Ritual of Interpretation.</hi>
, 137-140