‘And for thy mess is willing to be killed.
And if the high-swollen Medway fail they dish,
Thou hast thy ponds, that pay thee tribute fish:
Fat aged Carps that run into thy net’
The idea of fish dutifully running into the net willing to be killed is ridiculous, and although he is trying to be flattering to the landowner’s hospitality, it ridicules the flattery and comes across as a mere fantasy.
It is arguable fantasy also occurs where the property is idealized through the comparison to the Garden of Eden in the story of Genesis. This is evident, firstly, by the Lord and Lady having joint dominion over the land and all it’s creatures, similar to Adam and Eve. The Lady of the house is also depicted to be ‘fruitful’ and ‘chaste’ which draws parallels with Eve, as she is said to be the one who was seduced. However, Jonson highlights a distinction between the Garden of Eden and the estate in the poem, which idealizes it as some sort of model of governance. The Genesis story emphasizes the fall of humans from God and the refusal to live in harmony, rejecting the natural order. In this poem, Jonson draws on a distant echo of Genesis, but instead humans and nature enjoy a unity as a result of its idyllic and harmonious state. The country-estate is also unlike the Garden of Eden in the sense that nothing is forbidden. Jonson idealizing the country-estate as the ultimate model of governance, may be viewed as fantasy-like and unrealistic. Other examples of fantasy in the poem are displayed through Jonson’s use of mythical God’s. Jonson writes
‘Thy mount, to which the dryads do resort,
Where Pan and Bacchus their high feasts have made,
Beneath the broad beech and the chestnut shade;
That taller tree, which of a nut was set
At his great birth where all the Muses met’
‘Pan’ is said to be the God of the wild and nature, and Bacchus is the God of harvest, grapes and fertility. Although suggesting these God’s preside here is a fantasy, Jonson is reinforcing the estate’s natural beauty in contrast with the grand estates where the beauty is only man-made. Alastair Fowler writes that by using the ‘taller tree’ Jonson is associating Sidney with the divine Ceaser. This is because it alludes to a martial epigram in which a tree planted symbolizes his lasting memory and harmonious relations to the God. It is a further reach of idealization. However, Fowler also comments that country house poems view ‘man’s estate as the “effect” of he virtues’. If this is the case, although idealized, Jonson is simply praising the Sidney’s on a moral basis.
Although it’s clear many aspects of the poem are exaggerated in order to praise, there is evidence Jonson is being truly sincere. This is demonstrated by the simplicity of its form, shown by the poem’s rhyming couplets and iambic pentameters. This may be a plea for the poem’s sincerity and emphasizes a more realistic view of the estate. This sincerity is further lamented by Jonson’s description of Penshurst itself. He subtly suggests the Sydney’s do not need to push themselves forward to prove their worth, by modestly describing the house by what it is not shown by
‘Thou art not, Penshurst, built to envious show
Of touch or marble; nor canst boast a row
Of polished pillars, or a roof of gold’.
He is indicating the owners are secure enough with their wealth that they do not need to boast about the grandeur of the house itself, and instead he sets up a contrast between the house and the paradise with which it is surrounded by. He is perhaps also suggesting, by amplifying the greatness of the other houses that Penshurst compares favorably with even King’s palaces. Fowler writes that since Penshurst can’t offer such ideal significances physically, this is why Jonson instead credits it with ‘better marks’ or symbols. He suggests Penshurst possesses as much order and symbolism as the prodigy houses, but in land and use rather than architectural display. This is perhaps why he uses some unrealistic examples of life at Penshurst. Jonson writes ‘Now Penshurst, they that will proportion thee, with other edifices, when they see’. Fowler argues that the ‘better marks’ of Penshurst marks of ‘soil air and wood’. Penshurst may not have the grand elements of architectural beauty, so he turns instead to nature’s artistry.
However, through the lines describing what Penshurst is not, we discover the second, less common feature of country house poem; for the poet to express his personal opinions on social values at the time. As a result, realism is depicted as Jonson is demonstrating what he really thinks of society. Fowler comments that in ‘To Penshurst, many readers are aware of a special relation between the ideal and the real.’ Therefore, although subtle, there are many cases in the poem where Jonson uses irony to express his feelings, whilst still praising the estate and the owners by contrasting the ideal state of which Penshurst reflects with other estates and their landowners. Through flattering the owners by admiring their hospitality and domestic skills shown by
‘A waiter, doth my gluttony envy.
But gives me what I call, and lets me eat;
He knows below he shall find plenty meat’
Jonson is perhaps criticizing the system through the indication that other estates are not as generous as this. He is insinuating not many would treat their servants and guests this well. By ignoring the main purpose of the country house poem, the irony is revealed. By stating in the first few lines that Penshurst was not built to impress and revealing the modesty of the owners, Jonson is effectively criticizing this tendency to boast wealth, which was relevant in his society. ‘Touch’ refers to an expensive form of marble of which was common for grand mantelpieces in order to impress. Jonson is implying the Sidney’s were not ones to boast, but that this is a problem in society. Another example of this is emphasized by ‘Nor, when I take my lodging, need I pray / For fire or lights or livery: all is there’. As he is praising the security and comfort to be found at Penshurst, he is as a result subtly criticizing this is not the case at other estates.
It is clear through the use of mythical God’s, the unrealistic willingness for the creatures to be killed and eaten and the idealization that fantasy occurs in the poem. However, according to Fowler ‘idealism was obligatory in the panegyric mode, and was to become a general requirement of the country house poems’. It seems understandable Jonson would want to flatter and exaggerate as much as possible, after all, he wanted to sustain his patronage. It is perhaps arguable that idealism is used too much in the poem, and that it doesn’t give an accurate description of the estate of Penshurst. G.A.E Parfiit writes that ‘the only hints of anything non-ideal are there for contrast’. The question therefore has to be raised whether the description is truly believable, or only fantasy-like. What is clear however, is the fact that through these idealizations Jonson is depicting the problems and wants to create, in verse his belief in the moral good that should be sustained in society. The aspects of Penshurst that are greatly emphasized could therefore be said to relate to a contemporary belief or problem.
Bibliography
-
Jonson, Ben, ‘To Penshurst’, The Norton Anthology of English Literature (Eighth edition vol.1) (New York: W.W. Norton & Company 2006) pp.1434-35
-
Evans, Robert, Literature as Equipment for Living: Ben Jonson and the poetics of Patronage (CLA Journal 1987): p.2
-
McGuire, Mary Anne C, ‘The Cavalier Country-House Poem. Mutation on a Ben Jonson Tradition’ Studies in English Literature 1500-1900, (Winter 1979): p.94
-
Fowler, Alastair The ‘Better Marks’ of Jonson’s To Penshurst [accessed 18th March 2012] pp. 270-81
Robert Evans, Literature as Equipment for Living: Ben Jonson and the poetics of Patronage (CLA Journal 1987): p.2
Mary Anne C. McGuire, ‘The Cavalier Country-House Poem. Mutation on a Ben Jonson Tradition’ Studies in English Literature 1500-1900, (Winter 1979): p.94
Ben Jonson, ‘To Penshurst’, The Norton Anthology of English Literature (Eighth edition vol.1) (New York: W.W. Norton & Company 2006) p.1434
Alastair Fowler, The ‘Better Marks’ of Jonson’s To Penshurst [accessed 18th March 2012] p.281
Ben Jonson, ‘To Penshurst’, The Norton Anthology of English Literature (Eighth edition vol.1) (New York: W.W. Norton & Company 2006) p.1434
Alastair Fowler, The ‘Better Marks’ of Jonson’s To Penshurst [accessed 18th March 2012] p.270
Alastair Fowler, The ‘Better Marks’ of Jonson’s To Penshurst [accessed 18th March 2012] p.280
Ben Jonson, ‘To Penshurst’, The Norton Anthology of English Literature (Eighth edition vol.1) (New York: W.W. Norton & Company 2006) p.1435
Alastair Fowler, The ‘Better Marks’ of Jonson’s To Penshurst [accessed 18th March 2012] p.279
Alastair Fowler, The ‘Better Marks’ of Jonson’s To Penshurst [accessed 18th March 2012] p.279