180
PARTISAN REVIEW
random; among those given, a number are significantly wrong.
4
In
addition, Empson's prose is often involved to the point where not
only significance but sense is in question; pronouns are deliberately
double in reference, comparisons are carefully left incomplete, abrupt
alterations of subject and jittery generalizations are routine.
Rather more disconcerting than these pervasive and sometimes
purposeful slips is Empson's habit of attributing to Bentley or Pearce
phrases and ideas of his own invention, and of suppressing incon–
venient thoughts which they express. He says, for example, that
Bentley and Pearce agree in finding I 745
Dropped from the Zenith like a falling star
quite impossible, because it alters the prevailingly iambic rhythm. In
fact, neither critic ever discusses the line; they disagree about the
metrics of I 746, but only over tlle pronunciation of "Aegean," not
over the iambic line. With regard to VII 55,
And War so near the Peace of God in bliss
Empson says Bentley emends "Peace" to "Seat" "because the text
implies that the Peace of God was not incapable of being disturbed."
The reason assigned is original with Empson; all Bentley says is that
the accepted reading was "the Editor's fancied Elegancy." There's
a special poignancy to Empson's invention of a motive for Bentley,
because it isn't an appropriate motive. A literal, devout mind would
find it just as unseemly that God's Seat should be disturbed as his
Peace. With regard to X 580 Empson invents a silly argument for
Pearce and denies that he has made any other when in fact he has
a couple of good ones.
These are depressing, pedantic details, of the sort which inspire
pervading distrust of Empson in anyone who has checked him against
an original. But his own generalizations often require more than a
grain of salt. To support his own reading of Satan's speech IV 358
4 Page 150 line 16 read IV 602 for V 602; 158 Jine22 read VI 186 etc.
for V 186 etc.; 166 line 28 read V
729
for V 726; 167 line 7 read V 796
for V 793; line 14 V 837 for V 832; line 29 reference is made to the "stupidly
good" passage IX 465 to describe passages from IV 362, 374. In a specially
odd muddle 160 lines 3-4, Empson quotes IV 785, which is not criticized metric–
ally, with V 786, which is, as if they were joined together in the
poem
and in
the criticisms of it.
