Narrator of the Romantics: An Exploration, An Essay That Demonstrates My Analytical Skills
Rae Merkle, 2020
​
It is well known that both Lord Byron and Percy Shelley were not only writers of the same era, but they were
indeed close friends that were in the same writerly circle. It is unsurprising to then say that they both had times where the narrators of their texts reflected one another. Such a topic is indeed a broad one to cover, but the synonymization of the two writer’s narrative characterization does not take a trained eye to see or discern. Both Byron and Shelley go about their narrators in contrasting ways, but the essential core of this specific pair hardly differ. It is because of this that despite the differences they possess with the priorities within the plot of their work, and the resulting tone that furthers this aim, they indeed have similar progressions between the two of their speakers. By comparing stanzas five and six of Lord Byron’s “Canto 1,” with Percy Shelley’s fourth stanza of “Ode to the West Wind,” I plan to explore the similarities between the two authors in how they express the narrator’s ego and self, despite the tonal and thematic differences.
In order to understand how the two narrators express the ego and self, these two twinning characteristics that
they both share must first be understood themselves. Within the definition of the English language, the ego is “The part of the mind that mediates between the conscious and the unconscious and is responsible for reality testing and a sense of personal identity,” while the self is described as “One’s own interests or pleasure,” (Lexico). It is from these terms that we can then begin to explore the similarities of these two narrators created by these two very different authors. Though they are different on the surface, down in the roots they are more similar than they may seem to appear.
Lord Byron being the first of the two, the narrator of Harold within his lengthy cantos reflects the general tone
of self-depreciation that is often seen throughout his writing. He often seems to express his own self-importance in this way, or rather having lack thereof by writing,
“Had sighed to many though he loved but one,
And that loved one, alas! could n’er be his.
Ah, happy she! to ’scape from him whose kiss
Had been pollution unto aught so chaste” (Byron, 5).
It is this self-deprecating manner that the narrator of Harold presents that shows he rather has decided to cast aside ego, for he seems to only grasp the reality of his situation when she finds a way to evade his advances and even goes as far as to renounce the personal self with the comparison of pollution. Instead he seems to wholly invest in the self, pursuing his own pleasure at the expense of his ego, participating in almost an erasure as he later decides to leave his life behind and explore mysterious lands-- where he can find different joys to distract. It is almost as if these two are purposely placed on a sort of scale, this rejection emphasizing that one greatly outweighs the other in favor.
We see this heavy pursuit of the self a couple of stanzas down in the first canto. After the dashing and throwing
away of his ego, he has no other choice but to pursue his own pleasure in a different manner that does not require the personal self or the inherent perception of reality and/or what it has essentially dealt,
“Apart he stalked in joyless reverie,
And from his native land resolved to go,
And visit scorching climes beyond the sea;
With pleasure drugged he almost longed for woe,” (Byron, 6).
He has probable cause to drop to the self from the ego, based on the fact that it stems from rejection or rather an establishment of being unable to pursue, in this case, a woman. It could be contested that what he is pursuing is not in fact personal pleasure or interest, but considering what has caused him to proceed with these actions, it could be evasion-- or rather distraction-- instead because of this. Whatever the case may be, there is a clear difference between the meager value of the ego and the heavy value of the self, largely in part to the way in which Byron approaches with his ironic and deprecating tone, rejecting the personal identity and reality in favor of this pursuit.
Though not sardonic like Byron, Percy Shelley’s own tone seems to shape the way his narrator approaches his
own ego and self. While the latter of the two approaches with a more degrading and foregoing tone, Shelley favors the nearly theatrical to express the workings of his own narrator within “Ode to the West Wind.” Unlike Byron’s progression of the establishment of ego to the emphasis on the self, Shelley instead inverts the two of them. Within his fourth stanza, such can be seen when he starts with, “If I were a dead leaf thou mightest bear; / If I were a swift cloud to fly with thee” (Shelley, IV). In this we see the pursuit of the given self, the pursuit of interest and pleasure. Though instead of being a byproduct, the narrator’s self is what causes the emergence of the ego,
“If even I were as in my boyhood, and could be
The comrade of thy wanderings over Heaven,
As then, when to outstrip thy skiey speed
Scarce seem'd a vision” (Shelley, IV).
Ultimately it is this pursuit of this pleasure that drives him away from blurring the lines of idyllic and realistic. In so doing, he debases himself to lift the subject of his praise, the wind, onto a higher, metaphysical pedestal where he cannot follow-- placing a large gap between them. Unlike Byron’s deprecation for the sake of sarcasm and/or irony, Shelley’s usage is much more adoring for the sake of reverence. In this, he proceeds to speak of himself as unequal, far below the realm of the west wind’s power to further ground him in the natural and raise the wind to the realm of supernatural “Oh, lift me as a wave, a leaf, a cloud! / I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed!” (Shelley, IV). As mentioned before, unlike Byron’s irony and sarcasm via degradation caused by scorned love, in order to further this agenda within the ego, Shelley’s narrator does this to exalt something beyond themselves, rejecting the idea of identity for the sake of revering the west wind.
It then comes into consideration how these author’s works are written to bring about these ends with their
narrators. While Lord Byron’s cantos are meant to be lengthy in order to capture more details and present a more epic-like story, it then allows the narrator’s plight to be more surface level and earthly-- something that can be compensated via the actual narrative itself. In contrast, Percy Shelley’s poems are much more compact in comparison, requiring not a word to be wasted on skin-deep complications in order to achieve the higher meaning that they are meant to bring across in contrast.
Even so, while the two narrators have their given differences, their aims and purposes are intrinsically akin to
each other in varying degrees. It is in this that the difference in length and style actually allows the two to be proportionate to one another. If the narrator’s purposes between these duo authors were to be reduced to their basest form, it can certainly be said that both are in pursuit of something that is unattainable, and so they are ultimately rejected and scorned for doing so. While their goals may be different, it is within this construct of “pursuit and failure,” that sets them together beyond what drives them apart. Even then, ultimately it is these differences that give them the opportunity to be so similar, as stated previously.
Because one is constructed as a narrative and the other a reflection, the resulting inversion of this idea of the ego
and self is what brings them together in the end as correlative. Re-examining the definition of ego, it means “The part of the mind that mediates between the conscious and the unconscious and is responsible for reality testing and a sense of personal identity,” while the self is defined by “One’s own interests or pleasure” (Lexico). In following the bare bones of each of the narrator’s designs, with the idea of “pursuit and failure” in mind, they mirror each other in this way. Both reject the idea of ego, despite the difference in reason. Byron rejects the sense of personal identity and reality by removing his narrator from everyone he once knew, “And from his native land resolved to go, / And visit scorching climes beyond the sea; / With pleasure drugged he almost longed for woe” (Byron, 6). Meanwhile Shelley goes about the rejection of ego through this same avenue, foregoing a sense of personal identity-- as far as reality is concerned-- the earthliness of the wind “If I were a dead leaf thou mightest bear; / If I were a swift cloud to fly with thee” (Shelley, IV). For though one may be in pursuit of the temporal, and the other in pursuit of the ethereal, they both go about the same rise and fall in their efforts.
As for the second of the two qualities, because of this rejection of the ego, both of the given narrators are able to
focus wholly on the self. Even so, the self between these two contrasts with the personal and impersonal, creating an inception of similarities within differences. Harold pursues interests across the sea after his fall/rejection and ultimate personal rejection, considering that the idea of the self being one’s interests and pleasures. Likewise, the unnamed narrator of Shelley’s poem pursues the interest of near worship of the west wind, after rejecting the ego, for the awe that they possess along with the sake of such a pursuit. Just like their approach to ego, their approach to the self is essentially similar.
It is in this that though they may look structurally, tonally, and thematically different, both pursue their matters
in the same manner despite the difference in how they go about it. Think of it as taking two separate paths in a wood only to arrive on the other side with a unified path. While the journey to get to the destination may be similar, the ultimate result is inherently the same between the two of them. With the conclusion of the semi-inception, it almost seems to become an intertwining path, joining and pulling away at different aspects of each.
If they were not so different surface-wise, I do not believe that they would be able to achieve the same outcome
as they have presently. For it is this perceived imbalance that actually creates a sort of equilibrium between the two of them. In a way, both texts participate in a sort of literary equity that makes these narrative similarities possible. Were it not for the superficial aspect of Lord Byron’s long cantos coupled with the similar nature of the starting problem, and the philosophical nature of Percy Shelley’s poems that led them into a deeper conflict to unknowingly match, the difference between the two narrators would have indeed been much greater. It may be coincidence or chance that these two characters fit easily into the mould of one another, but considering the relationship between the two writers, it most likely may be something that they both preferred. Even so, it is now proven that these two speakers share inherent similarities that are very difficult to ignore. Despite given differences, a correlation in structure between the two of these narrators cannot be denied. From their inherent approaches, to their acts and desires, and even to their ultimate downfall and scorn, the narrator of Lord Byron’s “Canto 1,” and the narrator of Percy Shelley’s “Ode to the West Wind” hold surprising similarities that essentially mirror one another within their base roots, up to the more contrasting areas that they possess.
Sources:
1. “Definition of Ego in English.” Lexico, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/ego. Accessed 7, December 2020.
2. “Definition of Self in English.” Lexico, https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/self. Accessed 7, December 2020.
3. Keats, John. “Ode to a Nightingale by John Keats.” Poetry Foundation, Poetry Foundation,
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44479/ode-to-a-nightingale. Accessed 7, December 2020.
4. Byron, George. “Lord Byron – Don Juan (Canto 1).” Genius, https://genius.com/Lord-byron-don-juan-canto-1-
annotated. Accessed 8, December 2020.
