I have read the Biographia Literaria many times. I am of the opinion that Coleridge had the most profound understanding of what poetry is 15 years post Lyrical Ballads, and Wordsworth could not look beyond his success as a poet to understand where Coleridge was coming from. I believe Coleridge outgrew Wordsworth as an intellectual, but his addiction contributed to his low self-esteem. I see the Biographia Literaria as Coleridge's apologia of his literary career.
Hi , this has really helped me with my understanding of this piece. Thank you so much. But I was hoping you would speak more on Coleridge's view of the difference between poetry and a poem and what poetry is exactly to him.
Cf. What Coleridge writes in Bk. 1, Ch. 9: “In spite therefore of his own declarations, I could never believe, that it was possible for him to have meant no more by his Noumenon, or Thing in itself, than his mere words express; or that in his own conception he confined the whole plastic power to the forms of the intellect, leaving for the external cause, for the materiale of our sensations, a matter without form, which is doubtless inconceivable.”
"The Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the deep"-Gen 1:2 God is certainly present and active in His Creation especially in and through His Spirit, as well as His Word (Is 55:11) and Wisdom (Prov 8:22-31). This is seen everywhere in Scripture "Heaven is my throne the earth is my footstool"-Is 66:11, "Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?"-Ps 139:7 the Psalmist wonders. The answer is nowhere, neither in heaven above, nor the ends of the earth nor the depths of Sheol. To maintain the Divine Transcendence as equivalent to a Divine absence is contrary to the universal teaching of the Old and New Testament and the whole Jewish and Christian Tradition which teach at least some form of Divine Omnipresence. Indeed St. Paul quotes a pagan poet approvingly, "In him we live and move and are." That is a pretty thoroughgoing description of the omnipresence (and associated especially with life, movement, and being). That Wordsworth like that pagan poet would have such an insight should not be surprising, especially as St. Paul says in Romans 1 that God's invisible attributes and power are known through Created things.
sir, i think if we view coleridge,s definitions of primary and seconday imaginations by not putting god there but rather as fundamental human instinct to perceive things, from a psychological point of view rather than theologian, i think that would be more helpful.
sir, coleridge keep using the word"truth".What does he mean by this "truth", i mean what is "truth" referring to here? What is this thing that coleridge calls "truth"?
@@LitProf sir in the beginning of lecture, you are talking about Truth that basically Coleridge has used in his lecture. My question is what does Coleridge calls "Truth". what does "truth" in Coleridge,s perspective mean?
Thank you so much for providing this lecture online. Greatly helpful. 🙏
Thank you sir scott.I am from other side of the globe studying literature(from asia)and your lectures are what i look forward to.thank you.♥︎
I have read the Biographia Literaria many times. I am of the opinion that Coleridge had the most profound understanding of what poetry is 15 years post Lyrical Ballads, and Wordsworth could not look beyond his success as a poet to understand where Coleridge was coming from. I believe Coleridge outgrew Wordsworth as an intellectual, but his addiction contributed to his low self-esteem. I see the Biographia Literaria as Coleridge's apologia of his literary career.
Very good teacing thank you somuh.
Hi , this has really helped me with my understanding of this piece. Thank you so much. But I was hoping you would speak more on Coleridge's view of the difference between poetry and a poem and what poetry is exactly to him.
Poetry is metrical language.
So the primary imagination works with the noumena, but secondary imagination works with phenomena?
Your explanation is that of the Kantians. Coleridge himself dissents from Kant’s view.
@@LitProf I see, thank you
Cf. What Coleridge writes in Bk. 1, Ch. 9:
“In spite therefore of his own declarations, I could never believe, that it was possible for him to have meant no more by his Noumenon, or Thing in itself, than his mere words express; or that in his own conception he confined the whole plastic power to the forms of the intellect, leaving for the external cause, for the materiale of our sensations, a matter without form, which is doubtless inconceivable.”
31:14 bookmark
Nice lecture 👌👌
Many thanks! Please like and share.
@@LitProf definitely
By the way sir can I have your what's app number please?
Sir please can you provide notes to your lecture. Student form Nepal.❤️
"The Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the deep"-Gen 1:2 God is certainly present and active in His Creation especially in and through His Spirit, as well as His Word (Is 55:11) and Wisdom (Prov 8:22-31). This is seen everywhere in Scripture "Heaven is my throne the earth is my footstool"-Is 66:11, "Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?"-Ps 139:7 the Psalmist wonders. The answer is nowhere, neither in heaven above, nor the ends of the earth nor the depths of Sheol. To maintain the Divine Transcendence as equivalent to a Divine absence is contrary to the universal teaching of the Old and New Testament and the whole Jewish and Christian Tradition which teach at least some form of Divine Omnipresence. Indeed St. Paul quotes a pagan poet approvingly, "In him we live and move and are." That is a pretty thoroughgoing description of the omnipresence (and associated especially with life, movement, and being). That Wordsworth like that pagan poet would have such an insight should not be surprising, especially as St. Paul says in Romans 1 that God's invisible attributes and power are known through Created things.
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise;
Coleridge was actually two years younger than Wordsworth.
True
sir, i think if we view coleridge,s definitions of primary and seconday imaginations by not putting god there but rather as fundamental human instinct to perceive things, from a psychological point of view rather than theologian, i think that would be more helpful.
I think he is clearly informed by theological categories, and is not simply psychologizing.
But many people agree with you.
sir, coleridge keep using the word"truth".What does he mean by this "truth", i mean what is "truth" referring to here? What is this thing that coleridge calls "truth"?
I don't know where the 'here' you at referring to is.
@@LitProf sir in the beginning of lecture, you are talking about Truth that basically Coleridge has used in his lecture.
My question is what does Coleridge calls "Truth".
what does "truth" in Coleridge,s perspective mean?