7/23/2019 Dreaming Coleridge http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/dreaming-coleridge 1/26 Dreaming Vol. 7, No. 1, March 1997 Coleridge, Creative (Day)Dreaming, and "The Picture" Susan Luther, Ph.D. 1 Abstract: Meant less as traditional argument than as a scholarly meditation, the essay adopts quasi-fictional strategies of composition to read Coleridges !"he #icture, or the $o%ers &esolution! through 'reuds !Creati%e (riters and Day- dreaming! and other, rele%ant scholarship. )t adopts the locali*ed point of %ie+ of the practicing poet to reflect upon !"he #icture! and interpretation or reading itself considered as forms of daydreaming, gi%ing particular attention to +hat !"he #icture! suggests aout the dynamics and consequences of creati%e +ish-fulfillment +hen the dream of art is dreamt under the sign of /ros. Must the poets muse ecome a figment, a shado+0 )s the daydream of creati%e romance false, or true0 Disclosing to reader and interpreter in turn selected prospects re%ealed +ithin !"he #ictures! interior landscape, the essay sees to preser%e the element of self-disco%ery characteristic of dreaming. )t concludes y reiterating a challenge implicit all along2 +hen are our dreams of interpretation themsel%es truths3 or idle fancies0 KEY !D#: Coleridge; Freud; interpretation; dream poetry; self-projetion; !ish-fulfillment; reati"ity. #s it that poetry is e$plained through itself and %y itself and from itself, its o!n and inaliena%le psyhoanalytial %eha"iors& ' (ois)s Lemlij *1++, 1/ #n 0 Creati"e 2riters and Day-dreaming: 3 Parohial 4ie!0 *5uoted a%o"e/, (ois)s Lemlij reads Freud through the glass of a speifi Peru"ian ulture *the
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
6uehua/ as !ell as the insights of friends !ho are !riters. 7his approah honors
Lemlijs sense that 0the artist in the tas8 of perfeting the su%jet, and the
psyhoanalyst in the tas8 of intensifying it, %oth appeal to reati"e means of
interpretation0 *19+/.
7he present essay pays similar tri%ute to the intersu%jeti"e, literary harater ofanalysis. 0Parohial0 in Lemlijs sense, it too adopts a restrited point of "ie! that
thri"es in the pro"ines: in this ase, the point of "ie! of the reati"e artist'
speifially, of the pratiing poet. Li8e Lemlijs meditation, it impliitly mirrors
and ontrasts its models !ith themsel"es, itself !ith itself, and employs
5uasi-0fitional0 strategies of omposition. 7he result is meant less as traditional
argumentation than as a speulation, an attempt at a form of sholarly poesis: that
is, an e$ploration of some aspets of the interpretati"e landsape re"ealed !hen a
literary te$t is read through theoretial and pratial sholarship of similar theme
%y one !ho has a partiular, 0loal0 or 0loalied0 interest in the proess.
#ts immediate point of departure is Coleridges poem a%out eroti and poetidaydreaming titled 07he Piture, or the Lo"ers <esolution,0 in !hih a lo"elorn
narrator !ho has fors!orn all romanti fanies !anders through a for%idding
!ilderness, only to re-enounter his muse in the preints of fantasy and in a
%irh%ar8 dra!ing she has left %ehind her in the !ood. 3n allegory a%out lo"e,
spirit, self-see8ing, poeti ma8ing and also reading, the first-person, playful-and-
serious dramati monologue startlingly prefigures *or models/ the essay of
Freuds that is intensified *to %orro! his term/ %y Lemlij, 0Der Dihter und das
Phantasieren0 *translated into =nglish as 0Creati"e 2riters and Day-dreaming0;
see Freud 1+>? @1+>A/. Freud ma8es e$pliit the aestheti speulation impliit in
07he Piture,0 namely that literary omposition *espeially of !or8s usually judged to %e 0lesser0 art/ may resem%le day-dreaming. Both aounts emphasie
the theme, or themes, of !ish-fulfillment and esape.
Part one of this essay, 07he Critial Fantasy,0 prepares the ground for an
e$ploration of these themes in relation to Coleridgean and sholarly
*day/dreaming. #t loates !ithin Coleridges !ritings the themes of 0true0 and
0false0 dreaming, of literary prodution, 07he Piture,0 and reading itself as types
of *day/dreaming, !ith notie gi"en to Coleridges distrust of *in modern terms/
0esapist0 reading and the literature that promotes it. 7his setion a8no!ledges
the literary, pro"isional harater of interpretation and ta8es up the point of "ie!of the sholarly poet-reader !ho !ill *so to spea8/ 0dream a dream0: !ho !ill
read Coleridges poem through Freuds essay *and the "ie!s of other ritis/ %y
!ay of !hat 07he Piture0 suggests a%out the !or8ings of and ris8s in"ol"ed in
the poeti *and rereati"e/ tas8. Part t!o, 07he Poem as *Day/Dream,0 %riefly
s8ethes the literary-historial and life %a8ground of 07he Piture.0 #t further
lin8s the poems themes !ith those of Freuds essay, and onsolidates the point of
"ie! of the pratiing poet. 7he setion also inludes a phenomenologial plot-
summary of the poem. 7his plot-summary *in its loomoti"e metaphor, or
storyline/ mimis the struture of 07he Piture0 and of the present essay: it
desri%es a !al8 through the muses demesne !herein ertain features of the
territory at as 0landing-plaes0 *to %orro! a term Coleridge used for some of the
prose e$ursions in his periodial "he 'riend /, and "arious prospets ofinterpretation diso"er themsel"es %y turns to reader and narrator ali8e.
3n em%edded setion, 07he Dream !ithin the Dream,0 pursues the theme of true
and false dreaming !ith partiular referene to the entral sene of 07he Piture,0
!herein the lo"e-!ounded narrator imagines his surrogate gaing at the
refletion of the %elo"ed !oman in a !oodland pool. Part three, 07he Dreamer
and the Dreamed,0 the final setion of the essay, frames su%se5uent senes of the
poem !ithin the memory-traes of other Coleridgean *and ritial/ te$ts, to 5uery
!hether the poems resolution ele%rates a ure of false fany *and dreaming/ %y
true lo"e, or ends in self-delusion. 7he essay onludes %y reiterating thehallenge impliit !ithin it all along: to !hat e$tent does the interpreter, too,
onstrut a pitures5ue, !ish-fulfilling fantasy, seeing not 0truth0 %ut her or his
o!n idolied refletion in the linguisti mirror&
$% T&E C'T'CA A*TA#Y
"he critic must recogni*e that criticism is no longer a question of
metaphor ut of metamorphosis.
3s Da"id (iall *1+?/ points out, Coleridges !ritings on dream ommuniate afundamental unertainty and 0am%i"alene0 a%out the moral status of dreaming,
espeially as it relates to the self. 7his am%i"alene e$tends to his representation
and e$periene of ertain phases of omposition as types of day-dreaming or
0re"erie.0 nfa"ora%ly omparing Elopsto8s Messiah to #aradise $ost , for
e$ample, Coleridge admonishes: 03 poem may in one sense %e a dream, %ut it
must %e a +aing dream0 *my emphasis/. 3n often-5uoted note%oo8 entry of
1?> ta8es the analogy %et!een poetry and dream further, outlining the pro%lem
in stri8ingly modern terms:
Poetry a rationalied dream dealing to @&a%outA manifold Forms our o!n Feelings, that
ne"er perhaps !ere attahed %y us onsiously to our o!n personal Sel"es'2hat is theLear, the thello, %ut a di"ine DreamGall Sha8espere, H nothing Sha8espere.' there are
7ruths %elo! the Surfae in the su%jet of Sympathy, H ho! !e ecome that !hih !eunderstandly %ehold H hear, ha"ing, ho! muh Iod perhaps only 8no!s, reated part e"en
of the Form.9
#n the prefae to 0Eu%la Ehan,0 a poem it desri%es as a 0fragment0 omposed
during 0a profound sleep, at least of the e$ternal senses,0 Coleridge outlines an
am%iguous dream-proess !hose mystery has long tantalied interpretation *1,
/. #n his dreamli8e state, the poet *or prefae-!riter/ laims, he !as gi"en >>
to >> lines or more !hih 0n a!a8ing0 he remem%ered and %egan to reord,
until 0a person on %usiness from Porlo80 arri"ed and 8ept him from his !or8 for
o"er an hour *-/. Fragmented %y this interruption, all %ut a fe! of the
dreams impressions, !e are told,
had passed a!ay li8e the images on the surfae of a stream into
!hih a stone has %een ast, %ut, alasJ !ithout the after restoration of the
latter: 7hen all the harm
#s %ro8en'all that phantom-!orld so fair
4anishes, and a thousand irlets spread,
3nd eah mis-shape the other. Stay a!hile,Poor youthJ !ho sarely darst lift up thine eyes'
7he stream !ill soon rene! its smoothness, soon
7he "isions !ill returnJ 3nd lo, he stays,
3nd soon the fragments dim of lo"ely formsCome trem%ling %a8, unite, and no! one more
7he pool %eomes a mirror. */
#s this narrati"e of the poems origins meant to e$plain'or to enhant& #s 0Eu%la
Ehan: or 3 4ision in a Dream0 to %e read as a type of the traditional, di"inely-
inspired dream "ision& r is it'as the artifat of a 0profound sleep,0 as a perhaps
self-reated refletion'to %e regarded as an 0idle flitting phantasy0 of 0Kis
(ajesty the =go&0
#n 07he Piture, or the Lo"ers <esolution,0 from !hih the lines 5uoted a%o"e
are ta8en, the narissisti inferene %arely su%merged in the prefae omes to thesurfae. Eathleen Co%urn, editor of many of his note%oo8 ram%lings, is surely
right that Coleridge desri%ed 07he Piture0 !hen, in (arh 1?>, he made note
of 03 Poem on the endea"or to emanipate the soul from day-dreams H note the
different attempts H the "ain ones'0 *CN 11 9.1 H n/. 7hat this
emanipation might ha"e had personal signifiane he intimated to his friend
and pu%lisher oseph Cottle in 1?1, !hen he onfessed that 0in my early
manhood in lines, desripti"e of a gloomy solitude, # disguised my o!n
sensations in the follo!ing !ords'0 and then 5uoted 07he Piture.0? 7he poem
e$plores a pro%lem of aesthetis similar to that impliit in the prefae to 0Eu%la
Ehan0 and e$pliitly addressed %y Freud !hen he posited the reati"e !riter as a
"ersion of the 0dreamer in %road day-light 0 *0Der 7rMumer am hellihten 7ag0;
1+>? @1+>A, 1+/. 7hat is, the poet as day-dreamer may repliate the strategies
of the night-dreamer and %uild his omposition upon the saffold of !ish and
*frustrated/ desire.+ 3s a romane !hose hero is a %arely-mas8ed figure for the
artist, 07he Piture,0 e"en more pointedly than 0Eu%la Ehan,0 alls into 5uestion
the dream of art, dreamt under the sign of human eroti passion. 07he Lo"ers
<esolution0 poses a entral dilemma of !hat it alls 0passions dreams0 *l.
11+, C# 1, /: !ho is the dreamer& 2hose, and !hat, is the dream& 3nd:
!here is it& For !ords on a page are no dream.
#n their introdution to a reent olletion of essays on dream and literature,
Carol Shreier <uppreht and Eelly Bul8ley de"elop an e$tended metaphor of0oneiroritiism,0 of dream-interpretation itself as a 8ind of dreaming *1++, 1-
1/. 7o Coleridge also, the reader may %e aounted dreamer : 0our state,0 he
says, 0!hile !e are dreaming differs from that in !hih !e are in the perusal of a
deeply interesting No"el, in the degree rather than in the Eind0 * $ectures , 99/.
Kene the dreaming reader, no less than the day-dreaming no"elist or poet, may
%e a fantasist, an esapist, aught in solipsisti !ish-fulfillment. 03s to the
De"otees of the Cirulating Li%raries,0 Coleridge notes aidly,
# may not ompliment their Pastime, or rather 4ill-time, !ith the name of &eading . Call itrather a sort of %eggarly Day-dreaming, in !hih . . . the mind . . . fi$es, reflets, H
transmits the mo"ing phantasms of one mans Delirium so as to people the %arrenness of a
hundred other trains @of assoiationsA . . . under the same mor%id 7rane, or 0 suspended 5nimation0, of Common Sense, and all definite Purpose. * $ectures 1, 1/
Iuided %y morally rigorous te$ts li8e those of Plato and his suessors, ho!e"er,
readers, Coleridge allo!s, may profita%ly engage in 0ats and energies of reati"e
7hought, H <eognition' of onsious re-prodution of states of Being0
*CN + 1?.19/. Does the dream then ome to us through the gate of i"ory, or
the gate of horn&
#n many respets 07he Piture0 models Freuds paradigm of !riting as reati"e
!ish-fulfillment. 3t the same time, li8e Freuds analysis, muh literary ritiism
*inluding the present essay/, and the prefae to 0Eu%la Ehan,0 it resides in !hat
(eredith S8ura desri%es as the 0gap %et!een !hat the te$t @of literature and
dreamA seems to mean and the e$tra meaning it seems to imply0 *1+?>, 9/. Nor
does 0the Piture0 hold its reader harmless in the mirror of interpretation. 2hat
follo!s, then, is one readers train of thin8ing a%out some of the figurati"e and
"oational issues raised %y 07he Piture,0 onei"ed as a !a8ing dream a%out
daydreaming that inludes a possi%ly distempered *see l. 9, C# 1, 1/ dream-
!ithin-the-dream, and that alls us to onsider the authority and "e$ed
pro"enane of the dream-image itself.
+% T&E P!E A# (DAY)DEA
Coleridge !rote 07he Piture,0 or at least ompleted and pu%lished it, in 1?>. #t
first appeared in "he Morning #ost of Septem%er 9, 1?>, and !as reprinted
in "he #oetical &egister, and &epository of 'ugiti%e #oetry for 1?> *1?>/. Ke
re"ised and e$panded it for inlusion in his olletion of poems titled 6iylline
$ea%es *1?1/. #n 1?1 and olleti"e editions thereafter 07he Piture0 appeared
of the pratiing poet, then, 07he Piture0 presents an allegory of reati"e no less
than eroti desire, !hose implied or, in Freuds dream-terms, latent ontent
addresses 0the su%tleties of inspiration0 *Eelly @1+A, +/. 2ithin the poem
reati"e day-dreaming and eroti day-dreaming fulfill eah other, so that 07he
Piture0 illuminates the human dilemma in terms of the aestheti one, and the
aestheti one in terms of the human: it posits a figural, psyhologial and philosophial pro%lemati of and for the artist. 7he dreams !ish-fulfillment,
then, in"ol"es the desire of art for art, the desire of the artist for inspiration, and
the pro%a%le dependeny of %oth, as (arshall Suther *1+9, 19/ suggests, upon
the (use-imago !ho athets them.1
3 primary 0pattern memory0 or te$tual proess !ithin !hat might %e regarded as
its 0te$tual unonsious0 onfirms that the latent, or metaphori ontent of 07he
Piture0 impliates literary *day/dreaming. For Coleridges poem does not dra!
only from Coleridgean materials. Diretly %ut silently, it turns upon the narrati"e
premise of Salomon Iessners idyll 0Der feste 4orsat0 *the fi$ed <esolution/, a pastoral, eroti *and traditionally ironi/ fare!ell to lo"e.1? Iessners !andering
narrator, indulging in the lush delights of eroti melanholy, follo!s the ourse of
a stream through an e$terior and interior landsape stri8ingly similar to that
!hih Coleridge desri%es. Bidding fare!ell to the dar8 and the fair, to stately
(elinde and 08leine Chloe,0 he omes upon a maidens footprint in the sand;
melanholy "anishes, and he follo!s the maidens trae *0Spur0/, thin8ing ho!
passionately, if he finds her, he !ill em%rae and 8iss her *0J !enn ih dih
faende, in meinen 3rm !yrd ih dih dry8en, und dih 8yssenJ0, 1./1+
Coleridges 0Piture0 transumes Iessners *esapist&/ esprit , suppresses its eroti
moti"e and transforms it into a omple$ refletion on states of mind, espeiallythose of the reati"e artist-as-lo"er !hose muse-lo"er is in turn ingested %y the
Ehan.0 #ts transumption in the prefae emphasies that the sene in"ol"es not
only the dreams of lo"e, %ut of reati"ity.
The Dream ithin the Dream
7he narrators e$pliitly-stated, or manifest, dream for himself is emanipation,
freedom from lo"es *day/dreams. Kis method of pursuing it is that of Iessnerslo"er, rereated as philosopheme: self-loss in the !ilds of nature *or, for the poet,
self-loss in the !ilderness of "erse/. But one may !onder just !hat the 0ne! joy0
really is that 0Be8ons0 him 0on, . . . G Playmate, or guideJ0 *ll. -11, 6$, 1?/.
Nor is it long %efore the figure of 0Lo"e0'the pastoral, eroti moti"e'returns,
0ensnared0 in the "ery fany of e$pulsion: in the form of a sul8y Cupid !ho is
neigh%ourhood to the rela$ing (alaria of the (ysti Di"inity, !hih affets
to languish after an e$tintion of indi"idual Consiousness'the si8ly state!hih # had myself desri%ed in one of the Poems in the Si%ylline Lea"es
'the Lo"ers <esolutions'!ho si8 in soul
2orships the Spirit of unonsious Life
#n tree and !ild-flo!er. . . . *C$ 9, /
#n 5ids to &eflection, he had imaged a similar malady in terms that stri8ingly
reall the mirror-trope of 07he Piture.0 ne need not read %a8!ard *or
for!ard/ in this !ay, ho!e"er, to identify the youths si8ness as the sign of the
spiritual "oid, of the soul de"oid of its affirming image of the other.
2ithin the poem, the religious dilemma *the 0falling out of Iod0/ ta8es shape as
*or is displaed !ithin/ its personal, seular and reati"e onse5uene.? 7he first
part of the dream-!ithin-the-dream posits a greater reality 5uotient *so to spea8/,more 02ill and Stri"ing after furtherane in grae0 *C$ 9, /, a more ati"e
and %alaned passage %et!een inner and outer forms, onsious and unonsious,
that foretells the possi%ility of a suessful narrati"e onsummation. #n the
alternate future here presented, ho!e"er, the narrator a%andons his dou%le to a
ontemplation that an only inspirit the 0"aant %roo80 !ith a halluination, an
infernal !raith, a 0Naiad0 of personifiation'the 0Spirit of unonsious Life.0+
7he dream opens the rupture in onsiousness apparent from the %eginning of the
poem, the split %et!een a onsious dreaming self !ho manifestly assoiates
the thorny landsape !ith 0joy,0 a 0joy0 identified !ith emanipation from
passions dreams, and a latent self !ho dreams of passion and is, in fat,
attempting a 8ind of spiritual suiide. 3t dreams end, the 0part-ego0 the narrator
!ould e$lude from the sene ma8es "isi%le his o!n spiritual state in the present
moment of the narrati"e, imaged as a ondition of narissisti stasis.
7he first part of the dream-!ithin-the-dream, then, may %e ta8en to image the
return of the 0master-passion0 *l. 11, 6$, 1?/ as a healing influene, and to hint
at the su%se5uent ourse of the narrati"e, !hen the narrator !ill 0lay hold0 of the
impliit seular and aestheti 0 #romises.0 7hat is, the dream-idylls first
mo"ement presents a 8ind of 0true,0 al%eit still am%iguous, poeti dreaming. #ts
seond mo"ement may %e ta8en as a !arning against false dreaming, the0rela$ing (alaria of the (ysti Di"inity0 in !hih a lo"er, or poet, see8ing 0an
e$tintion of indi"idual Consiousness,0 !orships a figment of his *or her/ o!n
unonsious or half-onsious ma8ing. 07he Piture0 suggests that poeti
dreaming held fast %y its o!n idolatrous, 0purely0 aestheti, self-refle$i"e desire
for desire, for the refleted image, may resem%le nothing so muh as the
nightmarish 0distemper0 or 0delirious 4ision,0 the 0Somnam%ulism, or frightful
<e"erie, or /pilepsy from accumulated feelings0 as Coleridge one remar8ed in
Charles Lloyd *C$ 1, /. 7he onse5uene of the muses e$ile'or departure'
may %e the soul si8ness or "isionary solipsism that translates muse into (use-
imago, and %anishes all the !orld.>
7he ease !ith !hih the dream turns upon itself, !ith !hih it and its figuressplit and reunite and slip from one 8ind of !ish-fulfillment into another, suggests
that the entral am%iguity *re/mediated %y the dream, the Platoni dilemma, may
%e radially ir resol"ea%le. nly the (use-imago, the dreamed, *the o%jet; the
poem as !ords-on-a-page/ annot dream: and yet, as the atheting dou%le of
psyhi energy, the trope in-ha%its, and inspires, reati"e *day/dreaming. 7he
split female figure displays the pro%lem: the desire of the lo"er as a person is
direted to!ard the person of the %elo"ed; %ut the *reati"e/ desire of the poet is
and must al!ays %e direted to!ard the %elo"eds inspiring 0shado!,0 to!ard
idealiation. 0#dyll,0 as Iessners 04orsat0 onludes, ends !here em%rae
%egins *and "ie-"ersa/. 7he onditions of art re5uire the artist to play NarissaGus.1 (oreo"er, just as night-dream %eomes 0reality0 in the daylight
!orld only !hen the dreamer a!a8ens, so is it only in the rupture'!hen the
unonsious %eomes onsious of itself again and 0the harm G #s %ro8en0'
that art, as artifat, an appear.
-% T&E DEAE A*D T&E DEAED
2hen is play-ating re%u8ed %y reality& 2hen is fitionaliing presumptuous& 2hathappens after playating&
2ole Soyin8a
Does the poem resol"e its dilemma of true and false dreaming& For <aimonda
(odiano, the narrators self-healing is e"ident in the youths a%sene from the
poem after the dream-!ithin-the-dream, and in the narrators response to the
piture. 3s a real o%jet, it ontrasts !ith the 0false0 images he has !orshiped;
diso"ering it, he does not *apparently/ relapse into fantasy. #nstead, his
0journey . . . finally a5uires a true destination, the reunion !ith another human
%eing0 *1+?, +/. =d!ard Eessler *1++/ ta8es a different "ie! of the tenor of
the narrators delusions; %ut he, too, agrees that the poems denouementrepresents a positi"e outome. Eessler o%ser"es that 0the spea8er realies !hat
Narissus failed to see: that representation is not Being, and that passion direted
to!ard the phenomenal self produes a destruti"e Phantom0 *9/.
3 Freudian "ie! of the poem as !a8ing dream !ould ha"e to agree that in one
sense it demonstrates ho! 0Coleridge an use his self-refletion as a means to
rediret his passion to!ard a !orld of <eality 0 *Eessler, 9/; that 0the narrators
strategy of letting the youth fall into dangerous modes of self-deeption . . .
reo"er@sA his o!n sanity and freedom0 *(odiano, +1/. 3t poems end, all denials
seem to ha"e eased; the landsape of isolation has %een left %ehind, and a
0gladsome0 mood suffuses the sene. 2ithin the arrested narrati"e, the dream of
arrest has re-moti"ated ation; onfronted !ith the soul-si8ness of his dou%le,
the narrator renounes lethargy'al%eit, at first, in the figure of denial. Li8e Nor%ert Kanold in ensens 8radi%a, he heeds the !a8e-up all from his
unonsious !ithout at first fully assimilating its impliations. But the return of
*reati"e/ day-dreaming is aomplished !hen the narrator arri"es at the sene of
literally 0disparted !aters,0 and imagines their reunion on the other side of a
di"iding ro8 in idylli terms, as the rene!ed ommunion of t!o lo"ers spirits,
0=ah in the other lost and found0 *ll. 1, 19; 6$, 1, i$/.
Freud notes that 0e"ery psyho-analyti treatment is an attempt at li%erating
repressed lo"e0; %y these terms, the poem as !a8ing dream and the narrators
day-dreaming ha"e fulfilled the 0model of a ure %y lo"e0 *1+> @1+>9A, +>/.07he Piture0 resol"es in !hat Coleridge referred to in the note%oo8 entry on
Plato and Plotinian philosophy 5uoted earlier as an 0ahndung0 or 0in!ard
omening,0 a 0tremulous feeling of the heart,
as if it heard or %egan to glimpse something !hih had one %elonged to it,its Lord or its Belo"ed'e"en as a man reo"ering gradually from an
alienation of his Senses or the udgments on %eginning to reollet the
ountenanes of his 2ife, (other, Children, or Betrothed'0 *CN +
1?.19 f>/
Kis false dreams of solitude and self-immolation, the shade of art as narissisti
image-!orship, disappear !ithin a familial landsape of 0%roo8 and %ridge, andgrey stone ottages0 *l. 1; 6$, 1/; the figure of art as the unloo8ed-for gift
!hih must %e returned; and the prospeti"e *hene soulfully present/
ompanionship of the 0maid0 and artist in !hom muse and (use-imago
reom%ine. #n the artifat of human omposition, its o!n dou%led image, 07he
Piture0 finds itself: reati"e dreaming reprodues dreaming; dream and art, in
mutual atalysis, promote rene!al. 7he narrator has diso"ered e$atly !hat the
poet, the 0dreamer in %road daylight,0 !ould !ish to find: a su%jeti"e o%jet to
%e gi"en %a8 to the <eader, espeially to the one reader !hose reeption matters
most. 7he romane of reati"e desire is onsummated %y pu%liation in "he
Morning #ost, "he #oetical &egister and 6iylline $ea%es, and in the pri"atetransription of Sara Kuthinsons o!n hand. 7he gift of inspiration has %een
aepted, and returned; the poems dream for its o!n future has pro"en true.
But the epigraph to the Lo"e-Poems in 6iylline $ea%es reser"es a ne!
understanding only to their author-presenter, not to the *implied/ former self !ho
is their protagonist. Nor, !ithin its o!n narrati"e onstrut, does 07he Piture0
onlusi"ely suggest it has done anything other than simply present 0the
endea"or to emanipate the soul from day-dreams H note the different attempts
H the "ain ones'O *CN 11 9.1/. 3 person truly free of 0passions dreams,0
no longer 0dreaming hopes G Deliious to the soul,0 !ould simply ha"e left the
piture !here it lay *l. 11?, ?-; 6$, 1, 11/. (oreo"er, its latent ontent
%etrays the s8eth itself as a displaed em%lem of *te$tual/ day-dream and desire.
#t depits the ottage ne$t to the !aterfall !here the narrator is standing, 03ndlose %eside its porh a sleeping hild, G Kis dear head pillo!ed on a sleeping
dog0 *ll. 1-, 6$, 1/. 3s (odiano suggests, the 0piture %y itself arries a
positi"e message0; its 0realism . . . indiates that the artist !as engaged in a
onsious reprodution of an o%jeti"e reality and not in a self-indulgent play
!ith her o!n fanies0 *n. 1>?, +; +/. #f the dream-!ithin-the-dream may %e
ta8en as the poems mind, then the s8eth is its heart. But it is no footprint in
the sand, human and soon to %e erased. 3 piture has more masterly am%itions.
Further, as ipher painted in %erry juie on the s8in of that natural o%jet, the
0!eeping %irh,0 the dra!ing is 07he Pitures0 sign or signature for itself: just
as the dream-!ithin-the-dream ontains the narrati"e and psyhi mo"ement of
the poem up to that point, and so is also its refletion or dou%le. 7he "isual o%jet
'the 0urious piture0'no less than the mirror-sene presents an ironi,
synonymiing resorption of the poeti te$t itself, here under the olophon
of muta #oesis *see CN + f+"/.
(oreo"er, its sentimental su%jet engages the poets if not the artists fanies: the
ottage is a reurrent Coleridgean motif, a figure of 0domesti %liss,0 as (ihael
Eelly *1+/ points out, 0!ith numerous predeessors and suessors0 *??; see
?-+>/. 7he figure of the hild and dog also ha"e Coleridgean te$tual analogues.
7hey appear in a note%oo8 entry of (arh, 1?1>, that onsolidates a memory, ormemories, of time spent !ith Sara and (ary Kuthinson at So8%urn and,
espeially, at Iallo! Kill, !here Coleridge "isited in the summer of 1?>1 and, of
most signifiane here, in (arh of 1?> *see C$, -, ?? and n., +/. #n
demonstrating to 0an #dolater of Kume H Kartley0 that he !ell understood 0the
"ast e$tent and multifold ati"ity of the 5ssociati%e 'orce,0 Coleridge onfided
to his note%oo8, he addued many e$amples !hih %rought to mind 0 $e+ti, the
Cirassian
*and as %y this same fore joined !ith the assent of the !ill most
often, tho often too "ainly %eause !ea8ly opposed %y it, #
ine"ita%ly %y some lin8 or other return to you @SaraA . . . the for e"er and e"er Feeling of youG'7he fireG(ary, you, H # at Iallo!-KillG
'or if flamy, refleted in hildrens round faes'ah !hose
hildren&'a dog'that dog !hose restless eyes oft athing the
light of the fire used to !ath your fae, as you leaned !ith your
head on your hand and arm, H your feet on the fender G . . .
3 similar idylli sene inluding (ary and Sara appears in 1?> in the 04erse
Letter0; in a separate poem de"oted to it, 03 Day-Dream0; and as a displaed
transformation in 07he Day Dream,0 pu%lished in"he Morning #ost on to%er
1+, 1?>, some si$ !ee8s after 07he Piture0 appeared there.9 Both entering
dream-moments re-figure, in disguise, this proess of te$t and memory: in the
youths fantasy *of the "irgins open palm, pressing her hee8 and %ro!; herel%o!, resting on the tree/, and in the diso"ered artifat of its presene, the
piture itself. 7he told and re-told day-dream, then, an %e ta8en as the primary
Coleridgean 0pattern memory,0 in %oth the te$tual and personal senses, !hih is
transformed and re-dupliated !ithin 07he Piture,0 and upon !hih the poems
!ish onstruts its o!n 0piture of the future.0 Dreaming %egets dreaming; his
diso"ery of the piture sets the narrator to imagining again, this time ho! he
!ill return the s8eth *no! the prete$t for his rene!ed hopes/ and enjoy the
ompanionship of #sa%el. 7he 5uestion of psyhologial dependeny upon desire
and its 0"ain0 pursuit; of reati"e desire upon *unfulfilled/ eroti or romanti
desire; of the artists desire upon his pro- and intro-jetion of a (use-imago'as
!ell as the latent religious pro%lem of the artists, and the (use-imagos,
relationship to the Di"ine # 3('is not resol"ed.
7he irresolution, or ontinuous dissol"e, of reati"e *day/dreaming ahie"es
ironi, literal representation in the split te$t of the sene of 0disparted !aters0
reunited.? 7he te$tual =rror, the am%iguity of the %elo"ed #mage, also remains
figurati"ely present in #sa%el. 7his 0di"inest maid0 and 0daughter of Ienius0
more %eautiful than Sappho still seems to stand %efore the narrator more 0li8e a
thought0 than a person, 03 dream remem%erd in a dream0 *0<eolletions of
Lo"e0; 6iylline $ea%es, 19>/. 7he at of naming itself, of onferring upon herthe 0master0 "oation of artist *l. 1?, 6$, 1/ a%sol"es her of typologial
anonymity %ut e$pliitly dra!s her into arhetypal reati"e myth, the old story in
!hih 3laeus !oos the fairest'and most elusi"e'of them all. 7he pro%lem of
0attration to the transendent and ideal0'the moti"e of 0nympholepsy0 *see
Per8ins 1++>, 1>>/'has hardly %een o"erome. 7he poem does not simply
o%ser"e the proesses of romanti day-dreaming, or of the reati"e 0dreamer in
%road daylight0: it ironiies them, and alls into 5uestion the "ery figure of
dreaming itself, !hih, li8e the other figures in the poem, dou%les %a8 upon the
reader. For, as the o%jet of his amorous pursuit, #sa%el represents the poets
entire 0potential audiene0'!ho, in Stuart Koods metaphor, may ha"e a "irtuale$istene in the !riters dream-eonomy 0li8e Freud sitting in"isi%ly at the head
of the ouh, at one a presene and an a%sene0 *1+?+, /. #n the immediate
eonomy of reading, ho!e"er, it is the narrator himself !ho ats as the *future/
interpreters most o%"ious dou%le. 7he riti !ho see8s to address the poems
mysteries ine"ita%ly repliates his ations: pursuing the muse, dreaming
refletions upon refletions, retrie"ing the piture, attempting to return it *to
presented or re!orded anothers !ords, rather than just emphasied the non-literal 5uality of denotation or the reei"ed harater of ertain ideas, terms, or
onepts./ (any terms are also enlosed !ithin dou%le 5uotation mar8s meant to
signify the meanings so-alled or so to spea8. Both strategies are meant in part
to a8no!ledge that in a sense our ta$onomies, ho!e"er effiaious, still 0ha"e
something prearious and %arren a%out them,0 as Freud puts it *1+> @1+>9A, /.
<ie-Sayre and Sayre *1+?/, + *emphasis mine/.
See 0f the Fragment of Eu%la Ehan,0 in Christael *1?19; fas. rpt. 1++1/, >-
, the te$t to !hih # shall refer hereafter, and Shneider *1+/, - .
of the imagination harateried %y an espeially strong element of aprie,
*lo"e-/li8ing, !ish-fulfillment, or potential self-deeption *as in 0she fanies
herself a poet0/. For ontemporary interpretations and e$tensions of Freuds
theory and for ommentary on the distintion in psyhoanalysis %et!een modes
of e$periening meant %y the differently-nuaned terms 0phantasy0 and 0fantasy0
see the essays in Person, Fonagy and Figueira *1++/.
Freuds most omplete analysis of the literary dream is to %e found in his study of
ensens 8radi%a *1+> @1+>9A/, from !hose method of *re/turning upon the plot
# %orro!. 7he study also onisely e$plains Freuds theory of dream-
interpretation, inluding suh onepts as manifest and latent ontent,
ondensation and displaement *see, e. g., +, , 9/.? Collected $etters, "ol. *1++/, ed. =. L. Iriggs, ++. Kereafter # shall refer to
Coleridges letters as C$.+Freud suggests that the play-ating of the hild translates itself into the
daydreaming of the adult, !ho must *unli8e the hild/ oneal his fantasies or
suffer e$pulsion from the rights and pri"ileges aorded adult status. nder the
liense of fition, ho!e"er, the reati"e !riter may indulge his daydreams or
fanies *usually eroti or suess-oriented or %oth/ to their gratifiation and our
o!n. 7he !riter, in a sense, dreams for us and permits us to enjoy our o!n day-
dreams !ithin the proteted one of reading.1> See 6iylline $ea%es *1?1; fas. rpt. 1++>/, 1?- and $i, hereafter ited
as 6$, from !hih # shall heneforth 5uote, %y line and page num%ers. # ha"e
supplied line num%ers that ta8e into aount the insertion re5uired %y the =rrata;
follo!ing line ?, these num%ers differ %y one from those in C# 1, 9+-, due toa further insertion made in the te$t of 1??.11 See C$ , letters > and 1; see also letters , , and 9. (ihael Eelly
*1+/ instruti"ely interprets 07he Piture0 in the onte$t of Coleridges letters
and note%oo8 entries, espeially those of 3ugust 1-+, 1?> *CN 1>-1?/.1 See 2halley *1+/ for a disussion of Coleridges 03sra0 poems *that is, those
!ritten a%out Sara Kuthinson/ and 0Saras Poets.0 See 1-19 for the te$t of 07he
Piture0 *9/, !hih 2halley suggests Sara may ha"e transri%ed in 3ugust-
Septem%er 1?>.1
See 3dair *1+9?/, 1+-+9; Shul *1+9/, 1-+; Suther *1+9>/, >-; arlott*1+9/, +->; and <uoff *1+?+/, 1?-+1, !ho interprets the te$t of 1?> as it
enters the dialogue of other Coleridgean and 2ords!orthian te$ts of the period.
See also 2eissman *1+?+/, !ho %elie"es Coleridges lo"e for Sara Kuthinson
itself !as a displaed "ersion of his lo"e for 2illiam 2ords!orth.1 3lternati"ely: <ejoiing in his li%eration from 0passions dreams,0 an
emanipated lo"er !anders through a harsh landsape that Cupid, he assures
himself, !ould ne"er fre5uent. Ko!e"er, his fany of ho! the god of lo"e !ould
%e punished %y the loal spirits if 0in sullen mood0 he dared in"ade their territory
leads the narrator to imagine, in ontrast, a deluded lo"er not unli8e his former
self !ho gaes at the refletion of a 0stately "irgin0 in a !oodland pool. 7he
narrator imagines her frustrating the de"otions of the 0poor youth0 %y tossing
flo!er-heads into the stream, %efore she "anishes into the !ood. 7he narratorfurther imagines the youth transfi$ed %eside the pool in futile 0lo"e-longing,0
!hile he himself follo!s the !oodland stream he has rested %y until it ta8es him
0into light.0 Presently he finds a %irh%ar8 s8eth !hose style re"eals it is a
piture dra!n and left %y his o!n %elo"ed #sa%el. Ke resol"es to find her and
return it to her, and to 0guide0 her home through the dar8ening !ood "ia a path
he 8no!s 0leads straight!ay G n to her fathers house.01 See CN > 1.? @ 3pril 1?>A: 0(y Dreams no+ al!ays onneted in
some !ay or other !ith #sulia.0 3s noted a%o"e, in Freuds paradigm 0a piee of
reati"e !riting, li8e a day-dream, is a ontinuation of, and a su%stitute for, !hat!as one the play of hildhood0 *1+>? @1+>A, 1/. 7he often playful tone of
07he Piture0 and its referenes to play a8no!ledge this. But although one
might therefore tra8 the footsteps of the (other-imago, and the hilds arhai
relationship !ith her, throughout the poem, it is the more adult dream of the
muse # !ish to onsider here.19 7he literary *day/ dream is perhaps unli8e the un!ritten fantasy in that it
usually in"ol"es an e$tended, formally-santioned temporal progression *that is,
ompositions long proess of "ision and re-"ision/, eah phase of !hih may %e
moti"ated and inspired %y further te$tual and personal 0moments0 in a 8ind of
endless dissol"e. 7hus no definiti"e ontainment of reati"e e$periene is possi%le !ithin the figure of reati"e *day/dreaming. 7he present disussion is
neessarily minimal in terms of the many interte$tual dialogues the poem
suggests.1 7o !hat degree might the on"entional typology of the elusi"e muse-lo"er
figurati"ely represent not only the inommensura%le otherness of language *the
ultimate (use&/, %ut some pro%a%le psyhi neessity of reati"e *day/dreaming&
7hat is, to !hat e$tent do poets *and poems/ of a ertain temperament
unonsiously in"ent, and ha%itually in"ol"e others in, Platoni life-dramas
designed to feed reati"e *day/dreaming& 3nd !hen does suh dreaming %eome0esapist0 or destruti"e& Suh 5uestions are impliit in 07he Piture.0 *#ronially
for the 0poor youth,0 Coleridge honored Platoni or 0Plotino-platoni0
philosophy preisely %eause, he !rote, 0it ne"er suffers, muh less auses or
e"en oasions, its Disiples to forget themsel"es, lost and sattered in sensi%le
%jets disjoined or asdisjoined from themsel"es0; see CN +./
1? See Iessner *19; rpt. 1+/, 0Der "este 4orsa,0 1>-, from !hih # shall
5uote. # shall ite page rather than line num%ers; it is a prose poem. See also
Da"is *1+9+/, 1>->9.1+ hJ #f only # found you, ho! # !ould hug you and 8iss youJ>
See Shul *1+9/, !ho argues that Coleridge transforms the on"entionalied pastoral oneption and plot of Iessners piee into a dramati representation of
the psyhology of illusion *0self-deeption0/. 07he Piture0 an thus %e seen as a
satiri, ironi judgment passed upon pastoral on"ention; yet it is e"en more a
0amouflage@dA . . . self-re"elation0 *1>/ of psyhi 0am%iguity0 *1/.1 See Freud *1+>? @1+>A/, 1?, and Eelly *1+/, ?. 7he pu%lished "ersions of 1?> and that in 6aras #oets maintain the
su%junti"e, and de"ote only se"en lines to Cupids ignominy. Coleridge e$pands
upon the smallest hint in Iessner: 0Le% it !ol, 3morJ dein Pfeil !ird mih hier
niht finden . . .0 *1/. *Fare!ell, Lo"eJ our arro! !ont find me here./Iessners narrator !anders !ith 0"er!undeter Fuss0; Coleridges imagines that
0#f in sullen mood G Ke @Lo"eA should stray hither, the lo! stumps shall gore G Kis
dainty feet0 *ll. ?->, 6$, 1+/. 7his transformation of the passage, !ith its sly
jo8e at Iessners e$pense and its e$tension of the impliit pun on metrial feet,
emphasies the poems element of *self/parody and Cupids identity as a self-
projetion of Coleridges o!n narrator. nly yesterday you daned a%out me gaily in a !hite summer-fro8, as the
!a"es dane here in the sunlight. <uoff *1+?+/ notes the Coleridgean 0pattern
memory0 of images imported into 07he Piture0 from the 04erse Letter0 to Sara
Kuthinson, inluding the %reee, ro%in, and figure of the "irgin refleted in the pool. Ker appearane may %e interpreted as 0an ela%orate displaement of one of
the entral senes of the 4erse Letter0 *1??; see 1?-??/. 7his sene reappears,
again transformed, in the images of #sa%els %irh-%ar8 piture; see %elo!. Freud *1+>? @1+>A, 1>/ notes 0the inlination of the modern !riter to split up
his ego, %y self-o%ser"ation, into many part-egos, and, in onse5uene, to
personify the onfliting urrents of his o!n mental life in se"eral heroes.0 0n Prophey in Sleep,0 trans. 2. S. Kett *1+; re". 1+, ?/. See also 0n
Dreams,0 9. # am inde%ted to Bar%ara 7edlo8 *1++, / for alling my
attention to 3ristotles e$planation.9 See Punters 0Narissism and ontamination: Christa%el 0 *1+-/. See also
<ajan *1+?>, >-+/, 0#mage and <eality in Coleridges Lyri Poetry.0 <ajan
disusses in detail Coleridgean narissism, self-projetion, and the pro%lemati of
image, !ith partiular referene to the on"ersation poems and their e$tension in
late "erses suh as 0Constany to an #deal %jet.0 See also Eessler *1++/ on
=d. ohn Beer *1++/, 3phorism TTT4#, 11?-1+. See also Eessler *1++/, 9,
!ho 5uotes the passage and notes its narissisti impliations for 07he Piture.0? #s the religious dilemma atually a metaphor for the psyhologial, personal
one'or the personal for the religious& #n other !ords: is Iod the sign or
displaed image of the earthly parent *or amnioti %liss/'or "ie-"ersa& For the present purposes, # shall assume the immediate referene of the term Iod to %e
Iod, and the muse to represent Iods earthly dou%le *the soul/.+ Compare !ith the 0Si8ness0 and 0misera%le feeling0 of the 0lo"e-stri8en
"isionary0 in thrall to 07he 4isionary Kope0*6$, 1-9; C# 1, 19/.> #n 07he Piture,0 ean-Pierre (ileur points out, 0refletion indiates the
unertain relationship %et!een nature and desire0 *1+?, ?9/. (ileur reser"es for
refletion in 0Eu%la Ehan,0 ho!e"er, a resonane # !ould e$tend to 07he
Piture0 as !ell:
#n Eu%la Ehan, it @refletionA indiates the unertain relationship %et!een desire'espeially desire for self-image or onfirmation'
and poetry. 7he permanent loss of the refletion and the irre"ersi%le
distur%ane of the alm surfae of the poem represent the
transmutation of the intense, mutual gae of the self and lyri poetry
into a series of displaed pro%lematis of unertain relation: