to all those who are interested in the “folk” and their poetry—the contemporary folk of the great cities and their urban muse—i would recommend a little-known journal called mcglennon’s pantomime annual. this periodical makes its appearance at some time in the new year, when the pantos are slowly withering away under the influence of approaching spring. i take this opportunity of warning my readers to keep a sharp look out for the coming of the next issue; it is sure to be worth the modest twopence which one is asked to pay for it.
mcglennon’s pantomime annual is an anthology of the lyrics of the panto season’s most popular songs. it is a document of first-class importance. to the future student of our popular literature mcglennon will be as precious as the christie-miller collection of elizabethan broadsheets. in the year 2220 a copy of the pantomime annual may very likely sell for hundreds of pounds at the sotheby’s of the time. with laudable 56forethought i am preserving my copy of last year’s mcglennon for the enrichment of my distant posterity.
the folk poetry of 1920 may best be classified according to subject-matter. first, by reason of its tender associations as well as its mere amount, is the poetry of passion. then there is the poetry of filial devotion. next, the poetry of the home—the dear old earthly home in oregon or kentucky—and, complementary to it, the poetry of the spiritual home in other and happier worlds. here, as well as in the next section, the popular lyric borrows some of its best effects from hymnology. there follows the poetry of recollection and regret, and the poetry of nationality, a type devoted almost exclusively to the praises of ireland. these types and their variations cover the folk’s serious poetry. their comic vein is less susceptible to analysis. drink, wives, young nuts, honeymoon couples—these are a few of the stock subjects.
the amorous poetry of the folk, like the love lyrics of more cultured poets, is divided into two species: the poetry of spiritual amour and the more direct and concrete expression of immediate desire. mcglennon provides plenty of examples of both types:
57when love peeps in the window of your heart
[it might be the first line of a shakespeare sonnet]
you seem to walk on air,
birds sing their sweet songs to you,
no cloud in your skies of blue,
sunshine all the happy day, etc.
these rhapsodies tend to become a little tedious. but one feels the warm touch of reality in
i want to snuggle, i want to snuggle,
i know a cosy place for two.
i want to snuggle, i want to snuggle,
i want to feel that love is true.
take me in your arms as lovers do.
hold me very tight and kiss me too.
i want to snuggle, i want to snuggle,
i want to snuggle close to you.
this is sound; but it does not come up to the best of the popular lyrics. the agonized passion expressed in the words and music of “you made me love you” is something one does not easily forget, though that great song is as old as the now distant origins of ragtime.
the poetry of filial devotion is almost as extensive as the poetry of amour. mcglennon teems with such outbursts as this:
58you are a wonderful mother, dear old mother of mine.
you’ll hold a spot down deep in my heart
till the stars no longer shine.
your soul shall live on for ever,
on through the fields of time,
for there’ll never be another to me
like that wonderful mother of mine.
even grandmamma gets a share of this devotion:
granny, my own, i seem to hear you calling me;
granny, my own, you are my sweetest memory ...
if up in heaven angels reign supreme,
among the angels you must be the queen.
granny, my own, i miss you more and more.
the last lines are particularly rich. what a fascinating heresy, to hold that the angels reign over their creator!
the poetry of recollection and regret owes most, both in words and music, to the hymn. mcglennon provides a choice example in “back from the land of yesterday”:
back from the land of yesterday,
back to the friends of yore;
back through the dark and dreary way
into the light once more.
back to the heart that waits for me,
warmed by the sunshine above;
back from the old land of yesterday’s dreams
to a new land of life and love.
59what it means, goodness only knows. but one can imagine that, sunk to a slow music in three-four time—some rich religious waltz-tune—it would be extremely uplifting and edifying. the decay of regular churchgoing has inevitably led to this invasion of the music-hall by the hymn. people still want to feel the good uplifting emotion, and they feel it with a vengeance when they listen to songs about
the land of beginning again,
where skies are always blue ...
where broken dreams come true.
the great advantage of the music-hall over the church is that the uplifting moments do not last too long.
finally, there is the great home motif. “i want to be,” these lyrics always begin, “i want to be almost anywhere that is not the place where i happen at the moment to be.” m. louis estève has called this longing “le mal de la province,” which in its turn is closely related to “le mal de l’au-delà.” it is one of the worst symptoms of romanticism.
steamer, balan?ant ta mature,
lève l’ancre vers une exotique nature,
exclaims mallarmé, and the folk, whom that most exquisite of poets loathed and despised, 60echo his words in a hundred different keys. there is not a state in america where they don’t want to go. in mcglennon we find yearnings expressed for california, ohio, tennessee, virginia, and georgia. some sigh for ireland, devon, and the east. “egypt! i am calling you; oh, life is sweet and joys complete when at your feet i lay [sic].” but the southern states, the east, devon, and killarney are not enough. the mal de l’au-delà succeeds the mal de la province. the folk yearn for extra-mundane worlds. here, for example, is an expression of nostalgia for a mystical “kingdom within your eyes”:
somewhere in somebody’s eyes
is a place just divine,
bounded by roses that kiss the dew
in those dear eyes that shine.
somewhere beyond earthly dreams,
where love’s flower never dies,
god made the world, and he gave it to me
in that kingdom within your eyes.
if there is any characteristic which distinguishes contemporary folk poetry from the folk poetry of other times it is surely its meaninglessness. old folk poetry is singularly direct and to the point, full of pregnant meaning, never vague. modern folk poetry, as exemplified in mcglennon, is almost 61perfectly senseless. the elizabethan peasant or mechanic would never have consented to sing or listen to anything so flatulently meaningless as “back from the land of yesterday” or “the kingdom within your eyes.” his taste was for something clear, definite and pregnant, like “greensleeves”:
and every morning when you rose,
i brought you dainties orderly,
to clear your stomach from all woes—
and yet you would not love me.
could anything be more logical and to the point? but we, instead of logic, instead of clarity, are provided by our professional entertainers with the drivelling imbecility of “granny, my own.” can it be that the standard of intelligence is lower now than it was three hundred years ago? have newspapers and cinemas and now the wireless telephone conspired to rob mankind of whatever sense of reality, whatever power of individual questioning and criticism he once possessed? i do not venture to answer. but the fact of mcglennon has somehow got to be explained. how? i prefer to leave the problem on a note of interrogation.
