Fancy and Imagination by Coleridge

Biographia Literaria:

Biographia Literaria is a work of great value, but it too suffers from the usual faults of Coleridge. As its name signifies, it
pretends to be a record of the poet’s literary upbringings, but there is little consecutive narrative; there is too much of
philosophizing and too many side issues and digressions.
However, chapters XIII and XIV stand remarkable in English Criticism, where Coleridge elaborates his concept of
‘Imagination’ and also differentiates it from ‘Fancy’. Moreover, in chapter XVII, which is considered to be a ‘digression’
by many scholars, he analyses Wordsworth’s theory of Poetic Diction in a masterly fashion.

Theory of Imagination:
Coleridge’s view on the nature and function of Imagination are brought out clearly in chapter XIII and XIV. According to
Coleridge, Imagination has two stages, Primary and Secondary. Further, he elaborates the way in which Imagination
distinguishes from Fancy.

Primary Imagination:
In chapter XIII of Biographia Literaria, Coleridge considers Imagination,
“…either as Primary or Secondary.”
By Primary Imagination he means:
“…the living power and prime agent of all human perception.”
However, Primary Imagination is merely the power of receiving impressions of the sense, both in their parts and as a
whole. It is an unconscious and involuntary act of the mind; the human mind receives impressions and sensations from
the world outside, and imposes some sort of order on those impressions so that the mind is able to form a clear image
inside, of the outside world. It is in this manner that clear and coherent perception becomes possible.
But it must not be forgotten that the Primary imagination is universal and thus is excisable to all.

Secondary Imagination:
Secondary Imagination, on the other hand, may be possessed by others also, but it is the peculiar and distinctive
attribute of the artist. Secondary Imagination, Coleridge considers as:
“…an echo of the former (i.e. Primary Imagination), co-existing with the conscious will.”
Secondary Imagination is thus, more active and conscious in its working, which requires the will, volition and conscious
efforts. However, it works upon what is perceived by the Primary Imagination; its raw material is the sensations and
impressions supplied to it by the Primary Imagination.
With an effort of the will and intellect, Secondary Imagination selects and orders the raw material and re-shapes and re-
models it into objects of beauty. This very process of re-shaping and re-modeling is considered by Coleridge as
‘Essemplastic’, that is:“…a shaping and modifying power.”
By its Essemplastic Stress, Secondary Imagination re-shapes objects of the external world and steeps them with a glory
that never was on sea and land. Thus, Secondary or Esemplastic Imagination is an active agent which:“…dissolves,
diffuses and dissipates in order to create.”
The Primary Imagination and Secondary Imagination do not differ from each other in kind. The Primary Imagination, on
the other hand, is universal, while the Secondary is a peculiar privilege enjoyed by the artist.

Imagination and Fancy:

Coleridge, further, distinguishes Fancy and Imagination. Unlike, Primary and Secondary Imagination, Fancy and
Imagination differ in kind. Fancy is not a creative power at all. It is…“…no other than a mode of memory
emancipated from the order of time and space.”
It combines what it perceives into beautiful shapes, but like the Imagination it does not fuse and unify. Coleridge
considers the difference between them as: “…the difference between a mechanical mixture and a chemical compound.”
In a mechanical mixture a number of ingredients are mixed up, but they do not lose their individual properties. They still
exist as separate identities. In a chemical compound, on the other hand, the different ingredients combine to form
something new. The different ingredients no longer exist as separate identities. In short, a chemical compound is an act
of creation; while a mechanical mixture is merely a bringing together of a number of separate elements.
In the same way, Imagination creates new shapes and forms of beauty by fusing and unifying the different impressions it
receives from the external world. Whereas, Fancy is a kind of memory that arbitrarily brings images together, they
continue to retain their separate and individual properties.
For Coleridge, Fancy is the ‘drapery’ (dress) of poetic genius, but Imagination is its very soul, which forms all into one
graceful and intelligent whole and for the same reason he calls Imagination:
“…a magical and synthetic power.”
Chapter XVII
In this chapter, Coleridge takes up the problem of Poetic Diction and examines Wordsworth’s view regarding it. In the
beginning, he agrees with Wordsworth that the early poets were influenced by genuine feelings and real passions, and
wrote in a language which was involuntarily rich in metaphors and figures of speech. He also agrees that the later poets
had no real feelings and passions and they only tried to copy their metaphors and figures of speech as adornments to
their language. But he observed that:
“…Wordsworth has over emphasized this fact.”
Then, Coleridge exposes many weaknesses of Wordsworth’s theory. In fact, he was the first critic to pounce upon
Wordsworth’s Poetic Diction. He lays four points to prove Wordsworth’s theory incomprehensible.
i) He points out first that a language so ‘selected’ and ‘purified’, as Wordsworth recommends, would differ in no
way from the language of any other men of common senses. After such a ‘selection’ there would be no difference
between the rustic language and the language used by men in other walks of life.
ii) Secondly, Wordsworth permits the use of meter, and this implies a particular order and arrangement of words.
If meter is to be used, the order of words in poetry is bound to differ from that of prose. It does differ, even in the
poetry of Wordsworth himself. So Coleridge concludes that:
“…there is, and there ought to be, an essential difference between the language of prose and metrical composition.”
iii) Thirdly, Coleridge objects to the use of the word ‘real language’. He writes: “Every man’s language varies,
according to the extent of his knowledge; of the activities of his faculties and the depth or quickness of his feelings.”
Moreover, everyman’s language has first, its individuality, second, the common properties of the class to which he
belongs and finally, words and phrases of universal use. No two men of the same class or of different classes ‘speak’
alike first, because their natures are different and second, their classes are different. Consequently, Coleridge
substitutes the word ‘ordinary’ for ‘real’ and argues that the language of every person has to be purged of its
uncommon and accidental features before it can become the ordinary language of man and fit for poetry.
iv) Lastly, Coleridge says that the case does not become more tenable by the addition of the words,
“…in a state of excitement.” For the nature of man’s words, where he is strongly affected by joy, grief or anger must
necessarily depend on the number and quality of the general truths, conceptions and images, and of the words
expressing them, with which his mind had been previously stored. And if there is a paucity of ideas, says Coleridge, there
will be only meaningless repetitions:
“For, the property of passion is not to ‘create’ but to set in increased activity.”
Limitation:
When in mood, Coleridge could create works of highest order, but he was incapable of sustained and persistent labour.
He could work only by fits and stands; as a result, Ancient Mariner, is the only complete work that he has left behind.
In his critical theories, particularly his views are too philosophical; he is a critic not easy to understand. Often it is
fragmentary and unsystematic. George Watson observes in this connection:
“As a descriptive critic, his achievement is brilliant but sporadic.”

Despite the fragmentary nature of his work, he is now regarded as the most original critic of England. It is, interesting to
note that, Coleridge’s aesthetics could not appeal to the generation of
Victorians, to whom any system of aesthetics was of much interest. It is only in the 20th century that his literary
criticism has truly been understood, and recognition and appreciation have followed.
However, today his reputation stands very high, and many go to him for inspiration and illumination.