Coleridge's critical autobiography, part memoir of his own reading and friendships and part sustained argument with the philosophy and poetics of his age. Its most influential chapters draw the distinction, still current in literary criticism, between Fancy, which only aggregates and associates fixed images already given to it, and Imagination, which the primary form calls the living power and prime agent of all human perception, a repetition in the finite mind of the eternal act of creation in the infinite I AM, and whose secondary form a poet exerts deliberately to dissolve and recreate experience into new unity. The book is also where Coleridge asks a reader to grant a work of fiction a willing suspension of disbelief.
Facts
Classification
Original Language Composed, From (Year) Learn More
Fancy and Imagination
This article records tradition as it has been passed down and reported. Its sources are not yet part of the atlas's verified catalogue.
In chapters thirteen and fourteen of Biographia Literaria, Coleridge draws a distinction that English criticism has never fully set down since. Fancy, in his account, is a mode of memory freed from ordinary rules of time and space but still working only with fixed, ready made images, arranging and associating what it is given without changing it. Imagination, by contrast, comes in two forms. The primary imagination is simply the living power behind all human perception, present in every act of seeing the world at all, which Coleridge calls a repetition in the finite mind of the eternal act of creation in the infinite I AM. The secondary imagination is what a poet exercises deliberately: an echo of the first, coexisting with the conscious will, that dissolves, diffuses and dissolves experience again in order to recreate it, struggling always to unify what it works on even when the material resists. The distinction gave nineteenth and twentieth century criticism a working vocabulary for judging when a poem is doing more than decorating a stock idea with fixed ornament, and it shaped how later critics, the American New Critics among them, argued for organic form, the idea that a good poem is not a container for a paraphrasable idea but a single unified thing that could not exist any other way. Coleridge himself borrowed heavily from German idealist philosophy, Schelling above all, in building the distinction, and scholars have long debated how much of chapter thirteen is translation rather than his own argument. The distinction he left behind outlasted that argument.
Connections
Associated With
Source The Norton Anthology of World Literature
Authored By
Source Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Biographia Literaria (1817)Samuel Taylor Coleridge
In Genre
Source Encyclopaedia Britannica
Long-Form Articles
In the Other Atlases
- Also in Geography Atlas: United Kingdom, originated there.
- Also in Language Atlas: English, original language there.
Sources
1. Wikipedia: Biographia Literaria
WikipediaLead paragraphQuote, Lead paragraph
The Biographia Literaria ('literary biography') is a critical autobiography by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, published in 1817 in two volumes. Its working title was 'Autobiographia Literaria'.
View the Source 2. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Biographia Literaria (1817)
Samuel Taylor Coleridge, 1817ch. 13
The primary IMAGINATION I hold to be the living power and prime agent of all human Perception, and as a repetition in the finite mind of the eternal act of creation in the infinite I AM.
- Authored By: Samuel Taylor Coleridge
Encyclopaedia Britannica
The Norton Anthology of World Literature
W. W. Norton & CompanyAssociated With: Romanticism
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between Fancy and Imagination in Coleridge's Biographia Literaria?
Fancy only aggregates fixed images; Imagination perceives and creates.
In the Biographia Literaria Coleridge treats Fancy as a faculty that only aggregates and associates fixed images already given to it. Imagination is the more creative power. Its primary form he calls the living power and prime agent of all human perception, a repetition in the finite mind of the eternal act of creation in the infinite I AM. Its secondary form is exerted deliberately by a poet to dissolve and recreate experience into new unity. The distinction is discussed in chapter 13 and is still current in literary criticism.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.