Peering Towards the Absent: Lamentation and Ruskin in Clare’s “Lament of Swordy Well”
On Disappearance
In John Clare’s poem, “Lament of Swordy Well,” a petition of feeling is both made and rejected. The speaker of the poem is Swordy Well, the land which has been enclosed upon and as the land makes a plea to not be forgotten, its absence from the presence of the poem is undeniable. As the speaker is intangible and neither present nor completely absent, the land itself is not in a position to make an expression of feeling as it is not a man. John Ruskin writes in his “Of the Pathetic Fallacy” that “Everything in the world depends upon his seeing or thinking of it, and that nothing, therefore, exists, but what he sees or thinks of” (62). As Swordy Well itself expresses worry that none will remain to see nor think of it, it is the title “Lament of Swordy Well” that expresses Ruskin’s idea of pathetic fallacy in that the land is both lamenting itself, and being lamented by those who position themselves as reader.
It is the editor's decision in titling the poem where Ruskin’s idea of pathetic fallacy can be read as the act of viewing the absent. The empathy in the title is evident, the connection between the reader of the poem and the speaker who is no longer capable of taking its role in the poem. The empathy felt by the editor is clear in the posthumous title, [The Lament of Swordy Well]. The land is making a petition of frustration that it can no longer rely on itself and requires the memory of its past to remain in the mind and hearts of those who remember it as it once was.
The fact that Clare did not have a title for this poem and the last lines, “My name will quickly be the whole, / That’s left of Swordy Well” (lines 207-208) further illustrates the wasteland element of the remnants of Swordy Well. It suggests that the only thing that is left of the once beautiful land is the poem itself. As Swordy Well fears it will exist only as a name, Ruskin’s pathetic fallacy is seen in the land’s emotion, in Clare’s ability to give it a higher capacity of understanding and the editor’s choice in title that makes the reading one charged with emotion, “It is in general a sign of higher capacity and stand in the ranks of being, that the emotions should be strong enough to vanquish, partly, the intellect, and make it believe what they choose” (67).
As poets write from their own emotions to record and anthropomorphize the natural land through examples of the pathetic fallacy, “The Lament of Swordy Well” can be read in different ways. The title suggests both an example of pathetic fallacy in the land’s expression of emotion, but also expresses an emotional reaction of the reader that is separate from the emotions of the land. The word lament has two interesting and unique possible readings. The OED has two definitions for lament, as a noun to mean “an act of lamenting, a passionate or demonstrative expression of grief” (OED) and as a verb, “to express (also, simply, to feel) profound grief; to mourn passionately” (OED). If lament is understood as a verb it can be read as the profound grief one experiences of the loss of “Swordy Well.” This suggests that the editor who added the title after it was written is truly proving Clare’s final lines to be correct, that the lines spoken by Swordy Well are the only remnants of what it once was—that the feeling of grief is coming not from the Well, but from the grief experienced by the reader at the loss of something that only remains as a name.
The editor's choice in titling the poem in such a way that suggests the land is making the lament evokes the question of what remains to be evoked in the audience the land is speaking to. There is a reaction to this choice in words for the title of Clare’s poem. The sensational reaction is a reaction to seeing, as Ruskin writes, “can only be felt when the eye is turned to the object, and as, therefore, no such sensation is produced by the object when nobody looks at it, therefore the thing, when it is not looked at, is not blue; and thus (say they) there are many qualities of things which depend as much on something else as on themselves” (62).
In his example of the color “Blue” Ruskin writes, “a gentian does not produce the sensation of blueness, if you do not look at it. But it has always the power of doing so: its particles being everlastingly so arranged by its Maker” (63). The same is true for the presence of Swordy Well. Despite the fact that it is no longer seen, its presence can still be felt both by its lament as well as its lasting impact on the natural world. The particles of Swordy Well remain despite the land being enclosed, as it was once and always will be part of the natural landscape. Ruskin goes further in his argument that the description and importance we place on things, in this case, Swordy Well, is always presence, and if, upon examining the land, you do not see what the land speaks of, “it is not their fault, but yours” (64). Swordy Well speaks, “I hold no hat to beg a mite / Nor pick it up when thrown, / Nor limping leg I hold in sight / But pray to keep me own.” (Lines 9-11).
This ability for a natural environment to see more than meets the human eye is evident in Swordy Well’s lament, as the land recalls how it once was flourishing with natural life: “I were as proud as they/ I kept my horses cows and sheep / And built the town below” (Clare, lines 68-70). The anthropomorphized land with its ability of sight and consciousness suggests that the narrator is more closely linked to the town than a human might be. Swordy Well is creating a natural history for itself, observing the human impact that is occurring on the earth, and establishing a collective experience from which to tell their tale.
The bracketing around the title means that the title of the poem was added later, likely by an editor. The fact that Clare did not have a title for this poem and the last lines, “My name will quickly be the whole, / That’s left of Swordy Well” (lines 207-208) further illustrates the wasteland element of the remnants of Swordy Well. It suggests that the only thing that is left of the once beautiful land is the poem itself. As poets write from their own emotions to record and remember who they are and to remember who they once were, “The Lament of Swordy Well” can be read in different ways. The word lament has two interesting and unique possible readings. The OED has two definitions for lament, as a noun to mean “an act of lamenting, a passionate or demonstrative expression of grief” (OED) and as a verb, “to express (also, simply, to feel) profound grief; to mourn passionately” (OED). If lament is understood as a verb it can be read as the profound grief one experiences of the loss of “Swordy Well.” This reading allows for the emotional attachment of Ruskin’s pathetic fallacy to be placed upon what is not tangibly there. Clare’s final lines are correct: the lines spoken by Swordy Well are the only remnants of what it once was—that the feeling of grief is coming not from the Well, but from the grief experienced by the reader at the loss of something that only remains as a name. As Ruskin writes, “The only real truth of them is their appearance, or effect upon, us” (62). The only real truth of Swordy Well is the effect the lament has upon the reader, and it is the lamented emotion brought forth by the plea that will secure the legacy of Swordy Well as more than merely a name.