I couldn’t help but think about the Preface to the Lyrical Ballads as I read Shelley’s work. Similarly to Wordsworth, Shelley wanted to create a document that outlined the importance, action, and longevity of poetry through criticism. What I found interesting about this is the differences I found between the two. Wordsworth, for his part, worked on his piece to make it accessible to an audience that he thought the poetry had been pushed away from. He wanted to bring poetry to a vast range of readers and had great faith in all readers. He altered his language and syntax so that his piece would be easily read. I would argue that Shelley does not bear this torch in the same manner. His language could become flowery and verbose. This does not take away from the substance or beauty of what he has created, it only separates certain readings from understanding his points. He also lacks faith in his reader, he believes in poetry as an elevated art. One that only a certain handful can truly comprehend and apply.
The other part that I noticed was Shelley’s use of imagination to create a persuasive argument around the value of poetry. I thought that his reference to the sciences and philosophy as an extension of the imagination used to create poetry was a very eloquent and demanding argument. By speaking the language of those that would normally demote his work, he pulls them into the argument so that they can have a common ground to debate on. And by pulling on concepts of rationalism and realism, he is able to show the value of the imagination as a universal.
Romanticism Blog 