owen barfield readers guide

OwenBarfield:AReadersGuide

I t was once observed by a fa i r ly w ise man . . . that a l l authors , however many books

they wr i te and however long they go on do ing i t , a re a lways rea l ly say ing the same

th ing over and over aga in . I do not knowwhether th is was intendedas an insu l t o f a

compl iment , or mere ly as a neura l s tatement o f fact , as far as I amconcerned, I

shou ld not w ish to deny i t .

The Red iscovery o f Meaning (3 ) .

I t i s o f ten the case that th ink ing people change substant ia l ly . There i s an ear l ier

Wit tgenste in and a la ter Wit tgenste in ; there i s an ear l ier He idegger and a la ter

He idegger , an ear l ier D . H . Lawrence and a la ter D . H . Lawrence; but there 's no

ear l ier Bar f ie ld and la ter Bar f ie ld .

OwenBarf ie ld on C . S . Lewis (1070

Wittgenste in | He idegger | Lawrence

In an August 1998 s tory on C . S . Lewis centenary ce lebrat ions in Oxford , Nat iona l

Pub l ic Rad io reported on‐ locat ion that a un ivers i ty o f f i c ia l had recent ly concededthat

Lewis ’s long‐t imeemployer had in fact t reated h im“shabbi ly” dur ing h is long tenure there

as a never‐promoted “ lecturer .” The spokesmanhad a lso specu lated , we were to ld , that

“profess iona l jea lousy” o f Lewis ’ accompl ishments—espec ia l ly h is great popular i ty—as

scho lar , imag inat ive wr i ter , and Chr is t ian apo log is t was l ike ly the cause .

No un ivers i ty t reated OwenBarf ie ld shabbi ly . Preempted f roma potent ia l

natura l career in teach ing by a speech impediment , a s tammer, which led h imat

one po int in h is l i fe to conc lude that he “d idn ' t want to go on l iv ing” (Owen

Barf ie ld : Manand Meaning ) and pu l led away f romh is idea l i s t ic post ‐Oxford dream

of mak ing i t as a profess iona l wr i ter by h is apparent lack o f success and the needs

The Collected Works of David Lavery 2

of h is fa ther ’s law f i rm, 1Bar f ie ld began, out o f necess i ty but not as a t rue vocat ion , a busy

career as a Londonso l ic i tor f romthe ear ly 1930s to the la te 1950s . I t i s , ra ther , the

inte l lectua l wor ld o f the secondha l f o f the 20th Century—acentury he l ived to see a lmost

in i t s ent i rety—which owes h iman apo logy for pay ing so l i t t le heed to h is br i l l iant

contr ibut ion to the l i fe o f the mind.

The aga inst ‐ the‐gra in , i conoc last ic , ido l ‐smash ing nature of Bar f ie ld 's th ink ing—on

language and ph i lo logy , genet ic psycho logy , poetry , ph i losophy, re l ig ion , the h is tory o f

sc ience , the law . . .—is apparent on every page of h is wr i t ing . H is i s a t roub l ing , a deep ly

unsett l ing mind. H is r i ch ly provocat ive books and essays , indefat igab ly log ica l yet a lways

rad ica l and v is ionary , demandno less than a complete re ‐ th ink ing of v i r tua l ly

everyth ing the 20th Century has cometo ho ld near and dear . Here i s a

th inker , in E . M. C ioran 's sense of the term,2o f the very f i r s t rank .

In Worlds Apart (1963) , Bar f ie ld has one of the part ic ipants in the

book’s s t imulat ing co l loquy (Brod ie , a professor o f phys ica l sc ience) lament to

Burgeon (Bar f ie ld 's a l ter ego) that h is ideas—they have just been debat ing the

e f f i cacy o f the Darwin ian concept ion of evo lut ion , which Burgeonhas systemat ica l ly

re futed—cannot be accepted because to do so would requ ire the complete d is rupt ion , and

then reformulat ion , o f the whole landscape of modern thought .

But have a heart , man! Just th ink what you are say ing! Hard ly a week passes w ithout

somenewbook pub l i shed conta in ing a f resh theory or somedeta i l or other o f geo‐

chemica l h is tory or b io log ica l evo lut ion , or c la iming to thrownew l ight on the whole

process . But no one ever doubts the main out l ines , or that , b i l l ions o f years before

homosap iens appeared, there was a so l id , minera l earth in ex is tence , o f the k ind we

know, howcou ld they? Resounding speeches about i t a l l , de l ivered to the Roya l

Soc iety or the Br i t i sh Assoc iat ion and reported in The T imes—whyman, they are part

o f the landscape!

To such spec ia l p lead ing , Burgeonthen rep l ies .

Do you th ink , then, that I sha l l be g iven castor o i l to dr ink or whipped i f I go about

the p lace say ing the sort o f th ing I have just been say ing to you?

1In the autobiographical essay “Owen Barf ie ld and the Orig in of Language,” Barf ie ld observes that when he entered the law he “v irtual ly ceased pretending to be an author” (Part 2, 14).

2Phi losophers, Cioran once ins isted, only write for other phi losophers; th inkers write for other writers (65).


B rod ie 's honest response i s inst ruct ive :

No [he rep l ies ] . F romwhat I knowof the twent ieth century I th ink someth ing qu i te

d i f ferent w i l l happento you.

And what i s that? [Burgeonasks ]

You wi l l be tota l ly ignored [Brod ie conc ludes] . (79‐80)

Bar f ie ld has not , o f course , been tota l ly ignored. In the last twenty years , severa l

books or parts o f books , monographs , and essays dea l ing w ith Bar f ie ld have appeared,

a lmost ent i re ly in the Uni ted States : R . J . Re i l ly ' s comprehens ive chapter on

"Anthroposophica l Romant ic i sm" in Romant ic Re l ig ion , L ione l Adey 's met icu lous C. S . Lewis ' s

"Great War" w ith OwenBarf ie ld ; Sh i r ley Sugerman's va luab le festschr i f t , The Evo lut ion o f

Consc iousness : S tud ies in Po lar i ty , Roberts Avens ' ec lect ic Imaginat ion i s Rea l i ty : Western

N i rvana in Jung, H i l lman, Bar f ie ld and Cass i rer , Donna Potts ’ author i tat ive Howard Nemerov

and Object ive Idea l i sm: The In f luence o f OwenBarf ie ld , and exce l lent essays ( inc lud ing

severa l in these pages) on h is work by Sugerman, Hocks , Fu lwei ler , Grant , H ipo l i to ,

Kran idas , Tennyson, F l ieger , and Hunter .

Bel low| Abrams| Roszak

Nemerov | Bohm| McLuhan


But Bar f ie ld—pra ised by such major f igures on the contemporary in te l lectua l scene

as the nove l i s t Sau l Be l low, l i terary h is tor ian and cr i t i c M. H . Abrams, h is tor ians Theodore

Roszak and Morr is Berman, femin is t ph i losopher Susan Bordo, poet Howard Nemerov ,

phys ic i s t Dav id Bohm, psycho log is t James H i l lman, psychohis tor ian NormanO. Brown, media

theor is t Marsha l l McLuhan, and futur is t Wi l l iam I rwin Thompsonas one of the most

important minds o f th is century—has s t i l l not rece ived anyth ing c lose to the scrut iny h is

ach ievements as wr i ter and th inker deserve . As I wr i te , for example , v i r tua l ly a l l o f h is

books are out o f pr int in h is nat ive land and, even in Amer ica , where h is reputat ion as one

of the century ’s most remarkab le minds was estab l i shed and conf i rmedby a re lat ive ly smal l

core o f admirers , very fewof h is books are nowava i lab le . 3 In a 1969 essay on "Owen

Barf ie ld and the Reb ir th o f Meaning ," Professor G . B . Tennyson of U .C .L .A . observed that the

lack o f a t tent ion to the work o f Bar f ie ld const i tutes "a d isqu iet ing comment on the s tate o f

the academytoday ." But academic ignorance of h is ch ie f ins ights Bar f ie ld had—as wehave

seen—already ant ic ipated .

Th is i s not the p lace , however , for , nor w i l l space permit , , a fu l l expos i t ion and

defense of Bar f ie ld ’s ideas . Th is essay has a much more l im ited purpose: to o f fer in th is

centenary o f h is b i r th—acentenary which a l l o f us whoknewh imhopedhe would l ive to

see—abr ie f readers gu ide to Bar f ie ld ’s l i fe work .

TheSilverTrumpet.London:FaberandGwyer,1925 ;

rpt. Boulder,CO:BookmakersGuild,1986.4

And there was no longer any loathsometoad on

her bed, but there in the midd le o f the chamber ,

h is cha in‐mai l f lash ing s i lver in the moonl ight ,

s tood a beaut i fu l Pr ince . And whenshe arose f rom

her bed, he he ld her in h is arms. Nor d id Pr incess

L i ly ever knowFear aga in , e i ther in the darkness o f

in the dayt ime ( the c los ing words o f The S i lver

Trumpet ) .

3After decades as Barf ie ld ’s American publ isher, Wesleyan U P has begun to

a l low several of i ts t i t les to go out of pr int. 4In a l l my bib l iographical references to Barf ie ld ’s work I am indebted to G. B.

Tennyson’s excel lent b ib l iography (Sugerman 227-38).


The S i lver Trumpet i s a fa i ry ta le and ch i ldren ’s s tory , thought o f very h igh ly by both

C . S . Lewis and J . R . R . To lk ien (and h is ch i ldren) which , Bar f ie ld reca l led , exh ib i ted h is own

deve lop ing romant ic lean ings and was the f i r s t pub l i shed book of a would‐be author . Though

not qu i te a l legory (a l i terary modeBarf ie ld pred icted would be reborn in the age ahead) ,

the ta le does becomean argument for the importance of the “ fee l ing e lement” in l i fe and

i t s inseparab i l i ty formthe rat iona l and log ica l .

HistoryinEnglishWords. London:MethuenandCo.,

1926;seconded., London:FaberandFaber1953;rev.ed.

GrandRapids,MI:Will iamB.EerdmansPublishingCo,

1967.

Language has preserved for us the inner , l i v ing h is tory o f man's

sou l . I t revea ls the evo lut ion of consc iousness . (History in Eng l i sh

Words 14)

Look ing back at th is r i ch , fasc inat ing gu ide to the h is tory o f the western wor ld as

revea led by etymolog ica l re f lect ions on commonEng l i sh words , i t seemsaston ish ing , g iven

i t s erud i t ion and i t s w isdom, that i t cou ld have been wr i t ten by a manbare ly twenty e ight

years o f age . Begun before e i ther h is f i r s t exposure to Rudol f S te iner or complet ion of the

B . L i t t thes is a t Oxford that would turn into Poet ic D ic t ion , History in Eng l i sh Words

neverthe less exh ib i ts ( in Bar f ie ld ’s ownwords) “an impl ic i t theory o f the h is tory o f

consc iousness ,” even though, as he admits , “ I certa in ly wasn ' t wr i t ing w ith that in tent ion in

mind” (OBMM ) .

PoeticDiction:AStudyinMeaning. London:FaberandGwyer,1928;2ndEd.

London:FaberandFaber,1952;reissuedwithanintroductionbyHoward

Nemerov,NewYork:McGraw‐Hill , 1964;3rded.: Middletown,CT:WesleyanU

P,1973;2ndWesleyaned.1984.

Our soph is t icat ion , l i ke Odin 's , has cost us an eye; and now i t i s the language

of poets , in so far as they create t rue metaphors , which must restore th is

un i ty conceptua l ly , a f ter i t has been lost f rompercept ion . Thus , the “before‐

unapprehended'“ re lat ionsh ips o f which She l ley spoke, are in a sense


“ forgotten” re lat ionsh ips . For though they were never yet apprehended, they

were at one t imeseen. And imag inat ion can see themaga in . (Poet ic D ic t ion

86‐87)

In the interv iewconducted dur ing the mak ing of Owen

Barf ie ld : Manand Meaning , Barf ie ld reco l lects howhe cameto wr i te

Poet ic D ic t ion . The product o f a per iod in h is l i fe in h is l i fe in which

h is own“ inte l lectua l schemeof th ings” was , l i ke that o f the t imes

themselves , complete ly mater ia l i s t i c5 ( in ph i losophy and even in

l i terary c r i t i c i sm, l ingu is t ic ana lys i s and log ica l pos i t iv i smre igned

supreme) , the book had i t s beg inn ings in Bar f ie ld ’s recogn i t ion that

the read ing of poetry brought about in h imwhat he would ca l l a “ fe l t

change of consc iousness .”

I began to f ind that I had very sharp exper iences in read ing poetry . Not so much of

whole poems, certa in ly not long poems. But part icu lar phrases , part icu lar l ines ,

seemedto have somek ind—oneuses the word magic , I can ’ t th ink o f any other—but

poetry was beg inn ing to meana lot to me, but more f romthe po int o f v iewof

part icu lar moments then a cons idered cr i t i ca l apprec iat ion of a poemhas a whole as

a work o f ar t . Espec ia l ly metaphor , part icu lar ly metaphor . I t seemedto say th ings to

methat noth ing e lse d id . And i t seemedto be someth ing which was untouchab le by

the over‐ r id ing mater ia l i smof myout look . So I s tar ted to wr i te about that .

A f ter secur ing h is degree at Oxford ( in 1920) , he began to work on what would become

Poet ic D ic t ion as a d issertat ion for a post ‐bacca laureate degree ( rece ived in 1927) ,

eventua l ly pub l i sh ing i t as a book in 1928.6

5For the inte l lectual context in which Poet ic Dict ion was written, see the

chapter ent i t led “The Meaning of Meaning and Poet ic Dict ion” in Doris T. Myers ’s C. S. Lewis in Context and T. A. Hipol i to ’s “Owen Barf ie ld ’s Poet ic Dict ion.” In “Owen Barf ie ld and the Orig in of Language,” Barf ie ld recal ls that Poet ic Dict ion was publ ished at the worst possib le moment for a book of that k ind, just before the beginning of the 1930s, which saw a quite v io lent react ion in l i terary c irc les against anything in the nature of romantic ism . . .” (Part 2, 14).

6In Owen Barf ie ld: Man and Meaning , Barf ie ld humorously recal ls h is pursuit of the degree and complet ion of h is thesis:

After graduat ing I stayed on a year at Oxford to get a B. L i t t , bachelor of l i terature. And you had to do a d issertat ion for that, and I suggested Poet ic Dict ion . I had some di f f icu lty because i t wasn't the k ind of th ing they expected of a scholar doing a d issertat ion. You were expected to write about


Next to Sav ing the Appearances , a book wr i t ten th i r ty years la ter which would rev is i t

someof the inte l lectua l terra in f i r s t exp lored in Poet ic D ic t ion , th is i s probab ly Bar f ie ld ’s

most essent ia l book. Though very much a product o f i t s t ime, Poet ic D ic t ion , Bar f ie ld ’s on ly

work o f t rue l i terary c r i t i c i sm, remains seventy years a f ter i t s in i t ia l pub l icat ion a s t i l l c i ted

s tudy of a l i terary concept , but i t i s much, much more: “not mere ly a theory o f poet ic

d ic t ion , but a theory o f poetry ; and not mere ly a theory o f poetry , but a theory o f

knowledge” (“Preface to the SecondEd i t ion” 14) . 7

RomanticismComesofAge.London:AnthroposophicalPublishingCO,1944 ;

newandaugmenteded., London:RudolfSteinerPress,1966;Middletown,CT:

WesleyanUP,1967.

I t [ the evo lut ion of humanconsc iousness] i s rather as i f a mus ica l

inst rument , which was be ing p layed on . . . an Aeo l ian harp perhaps ,

p layed on by nature herse l f . . . fe l l s i lent for a whi le . And then, a f ter an

interva l , when i t began to soundaga in , i t was no longer mere ly an

instrument , but had becomeaware of i t se l f as such . . . and cou ld i t se l f

take part in the p lay ing of i t se l f . (Romant ic i smComes of Age 234)

OwenBarf ie ld f i r s t heard of the Germanoccu l t ph i losopher Rudol f

S te iner , the founder ( in 1901) o f Anthroposophy, in 1922, 8and he

immediate ly recogn ized that they were th ink ing on the samewave length ,

that the i r heads had “ interpenetrated ,” though he would a lways ins i s t that S te iner was l ight

years ahead. 9Thus began Bar f ie ld ’s l i fe ‐ long “co l laborat ion” with Ste iner and

Anthroposophy, an a l leg iance which has certa in ly been a contr ibut ing factor in the

something, you know, “Was the th ird act of Hamlet real ly written by Shakespeare’s but ler?” or something l ike that. And I th ink that every graduate who is doing a B. L i t t , has a supervisor. And I th ink they f inal ly decided that I better do without a supervisor, because my stuff being so odd anyhow that they couldn’t f i t one in. So I d idn't have a supervisor, I just wrote on. And they gave me the degree al l r ight, anyhow.

7“Apparent ly,” Barf ie ld quips with character ist ic humor, “The author was

determined that the t i t le at least should be unassuming” (“Preface to the Second Edit ion” 14)

8In “Owen Barf ie ld and Orig in of Language” Barf ie ld is undecided as to whether the date was 1922 or very late in 1921 (Part 1, 1).

9”Paradoxical as i t may sound,” Steiner once wrote, “ i t is the truth: the Idea which P lato conceived and the l ike idea which I conceive are not two ideas. It is one and the same idea. And there are not two ideas: one in P lato 's head and one in


in te l lectua l wor ld ’s shunning of Bar f ie ld ’s thought . 10Over the next twodecades , even as he

becamea so l ic i tor in London, Bar f ie ld was to becomeact ive in the Anthroposophica l

movement , g iv ing a var iety o f lectures on d iverse top ics , most o f which were then pub l i shed

in smal l c i rcu lat ion Anthroposophica l organs . Romant ic i smComes of Age co l lected these ,

and other occas iona l p ieces f romthe t ime, becoming , dur ing Wor ld War I I , Bar f ie ld ’s f i r s t

book s ince Poet ic D ic t ion . A later ed i t ion would augment the book with l ike‐minded essays .

Though in s ix ty years o f fa i th fu l adherence to Anthroposophy he never fa i led to

acknowledge Ste iner ’s supremacy , Bar f ie ld , i t nowseemsc lear , d id seek to f ind the means ,

and espec ia l ly the language, to express h is ownkey independent ly ‐arr ived‐at

Anthroposophica l ideas w ithout carry ing i t s occu l t baggage. In Romant ic i smComes of Age

weencounter Bar f ie ld as Anthroposopher re lat ive ly und isgu ised (as w i l l a l so be the case in

a la ter book l ike Unancestra l Vo ice ) , wrest l ing w ith sub jects such as th ink ing and thought ,

the consc iousness sou l and the inte l lectua l sou l , Hamlet , Goethe in our t ime, and “Rudol f

S te iner ’s Concept o f Mind.” I t i s an important Bar f ie ld book, which , whenread a f ter better

knownones l ike Poet ic D ic t ion andSav ing the Appearances , deepens and broadens our

understand ing of Bar f ie ld ’s understand ing of the evo lut ion of consc iousness .

ThisEverDiversePair. London:Gollancz,1950;reissued

Edinburgh:FlorisBooks,1985.

For i f i t i s the Burdens o f th is wor ld whokeep t rad i t ions

a l ive , i t i s the Burgeons whocreate them. The Burdens

cannot make anyth ing ; they can on ly co l lect and preserve .

(Th is Ever D iverse Pa i r 114‐115)

An autob iograph ica l nove l wr i t ten to he lp avert a nervous

breakdown (as Bar f ie ld exp la ins in OwenBarf ie ld : Manand Meaning ) ,

Th is Ever D iverse Pa i r dep icts the uneasy partnersh ip , the po lar

mine; but in the higher sense Plato 's head and mine interpenetrate each other; al l heads interpenetrate which grasp one and the same idea; and this idea is only once there as a s ingle idea. It is there; and the heads al l go to one and the same place in order to have th is idea in them” (quoted in Rei l ly 228; my ita l ics; the quotat ion is from Steiner ’s Myst ics of the Renaissance).

10Patr ick Grant ’s "The Qual i ty of Thinking: Owen Barf ie ld as L iterary Man and Anthroposophist” offers an ins ightfu l reading of Barf ie ld ’s adherence to and departure from the sty le and substance of Steiner ’s thought.


tens ion ,11betweentwoLondonso l ic i tors : the prosa ic , pract ica l ‐minded Burden and h is

inv is ib le , "s leep ing partner" Burgeon, a t heart a poet and dreamer . As such , i t i s a

humorous , whims ica l commentary on , and a surpr is ing ly cand id reve lat ion of , the d i f f i cu l t ies

inherent in Bar f ie ld 's de l icate ba lance of lawand the imag inat ion .

SavingtheAppearances:AStudyinIdolatry.London:FaberandFaber,1957;

reissuedNewYork:Harcourt, BraceandWorld,1965;Middletown,CT:

WesleyanUP,1988.

The ido ls are tough and hard to crack , but through the f i r s t rea l f i s sure we

make in themwe f ind ourse lves look ing , howdeep ly , in to a newwor ld! I f the

e ighteenth‐century botan is t , look ing for the f i r s t t imethrough the o ld ido ls o f

L innaeus 's f i xed and t ime‐ less c lass i f i cat ion into the newperspect ive o f

b io log ica l evo lut ion fe l t a sense of l iberat ion and of l ight , i t can have been

but a cand le‐ f lamecompared with the f i r s t g l impse wenowget o f the fami l ia r

wor ld and humanh is tory ly ing together , bathed in the l ight o f the evo lut ion

of consc iousness . (Sav ing the Appearances 72)

Bar f ie ld ’s most important book (h is ownop in ion and by genera l

consensus as wel l ) was the product o f a newamount o f f ree t ime

for h is in te l lectua l pursu i ts madeposs ib le by d imin ish ing

invo lvement in the law. Sav ing the Appearances , a book madeup of

a var iety o f short but dense ly packed chapters resu l t ing in a “a sort

o f out l ine sketch , w i th one or twoparts completed in greater

deta i l , for a h is tory o f humanconsc iousness , part icu lary the

consc iousness o f western humanity dur ing the last three thousand

years or so” (Sav ing 13) , c rysta l l i zed out o f w ide read ing in

anthropology , h is tory o f sc ience , and ph i losophy. I t i s S ince Bar f ie ld never authored the

magnumopus he once imag ined in a poem,12Sav ing the Appearances wi l l have to p lay that

11See Sugerman’s “Barspecs” for a reading of the book as a depict ion of the

key Barf ie ld ian concept of polar i ty. 12In a poem ent it led s imply “Sonnet,” Barf ie ld confesses


ro le . I t comes c loser than any of h is other works to lay ing out methodica l ly , in less than two

hundred pages , Bar f ie ld ’s “system.” In wr i t ing about Worlds Apart , his next pub l i shed book,

R . J . Re i l ly has taken note of “ the progress ion” Bar f ie ld system intends : an evo lut ion “ f rom

the so l i tude of pr ivate thought , to the s t rengthenedthought that rays out in to the thought

o f the un iverse , to the abso lute d isso lut ion of pr ivate thought in the un iverse , or the

K ingdom—or f romsub ject ive idea l i smto Anthroposophy to heaven” (76) . Sav ing the

Appearances i s the Baedeker for such a journey .

WorldsApart:ADialogueoftheSixties. London:FaberandFaber,1963;

reissuedMiddletown,CT:WesleyanUP,1971.

You wi l l never understand symbols unt i l you have grasped that pre‐h is tor ic

man in h is unconsc ious goes back , not to the an imal k ingdom, as the

n ineteenth century fond ly imag ined, but to a parad isa l s tate whenthere was

no death , because there was no matter . (Worlds Apart 124 , Burgeon i s

speak ing)

In the 1959 Rede Lecture at Cambr idge ( la ter pub l i shed as The

TwoCu l tures and the Sc ient i f i c Revo lut ion ) , Bar f ie ld ’s contemporary C .

P . Snowhad lamented the widen ing gap betweensc ient is ts and

humanit ies , the i r inab i l i ty to understand each other ’s d iscourse , the i r

unwi l l ingness to even seek to communicate with one another . Worlds

Apart i s a book‐ length Socrat ic d ia logue in which Bar f ie ld ’s a l ter ego

Burgeonbr ings together a group of in te l lectua ls—amongthema

l ingu is t ic ana lyst , a rocket sc ient i s t , an evo lut ionary b io log is t (w i th

I am much inc l ined towards a l i fe

of ease And should not scorn to spend my

dwindl ing years In p laces where my sort of fancy

st irs; Perched up on ladders in o ld

l ibrar ies With several quartos pouring off

my knees . . Translat ing Ar iosto into verse . . . Paddl ing about among phi lo logers And dict ionar ies and

concordances!

There on some dark oak table, more and more

Voluminous each day, ye should perceive

My Magnum Opus . . . that one which untwists

Their bays from poets who shirk metaphor

And make r ich words grow obsolete, and leave

Imaginat ion to Psychiatr ists. (A Barf ie ld Sampler 33)


Te i lhard ian lean ings) , a phys ica l sc ient i s t , a professor o f h is tor ica l theo logy , a Freud ian

psycho log is t , and an adherent o f Anthroposophy—tod iscuss the i r d i f fer ing po ints o f v iew.13

No book of Bar f ie ld ’s better exh ib i ts h is o f ten sardonic w it , h i s br i l l iant argumentat ion

(Bar f ie ld repeated ly uses ingen ious reduct io ad absurdumdissect ions to take apart

F reud ian , Darwin ian , and ph i losophica l sacred cows) , or h is ab i l i ty to ar t icu late the enemy’s

ownpos i t ions . In Bakht in ’s terms, Worlds Apart i s “d ia log ica l ,” not just because of i t s genre ,

but because in i t s imag inat ive presentat ion Bar f ie ld ’s essent ia l ideas at ta in a dramat ic

force , and a c lar i ty , not poss ib le in h is other books .

UnancestralVoice. London:FaberandFaber,1965;Middletown,CT:Wesleyan

UP,1966.

Once I was the ancestra l vo ice o f the Father‐wisdom,

the theosoph ia that spoke inart icu late ly through b lood

and inst inct , but ar t icu late ly through the s iby ls , the

prophets , the masters . But at the turn ing‐po int o f

t ime, by that centra l death and reb i r th which was the

t ransformat ion of t ransformat ions , by the open

mystery o f Go lgotha , I was myse l f t ransformed. I am

that anthroposoph ia who . . . i s the vo ice o f each one 's

mind speak ing f romthe depths w ith in h imse l f .

(Unancestra l Vo ice 163; the Megg id i s speak ing)

In part a Socrat ic d ia logue l ike Worlds Apart (Burgeon i s aga in a key character ) ,

Unancestra l Vo ice i s an a lmost imposs ib le ‐ to‐c lass i fy book, which , as I ind icated above, i s

a l so out ‐of ‐ the‐c loset Anthroposophica l , a way of present ing “ the resu l ts o f S te iner ’s super

sens ib le knowledge, w i thout a lo t o f theoret ica l a rguments .”14The book narrates Burgeon’s

13The book is, in part, a k ind of roman à c lef (dia logue à c lef?): the l inguist ic

analyst is a k ind of loosely d isguised A. J. Ayer; the professor of h istor ica l theology is, of course, Lewis; the Anthroposopher (and Waldorf teacher) is Barf ie ld ’s fr iend A. C. Harwood.

14In the Owen Barf ie ld: Man and Meaning interview, Barf ie ld recol lects how Unancestra l Voice came to be written:

I was very deep in the study of Steiner ’s anthroposophy, and had written a book, art ic les and so forth defending his theory of knowledge. But in addit ion to that, i f you read Steiner, he has. . . he gives a l l sorts of results of h is c la ims to super sensib le knowledge. And the results themselves, quite apart from whether you bel ieve him, they real ly are interest ing comments and can


encounter w ith a “d iscarnate be ing ,” the Megg id , whobr ings h imto see the evo lut ion of

consc iousness in S te iner ian terms. Though a supremely cha l leng ing book, the d i f f i cu l ty i s

mit igated in part by the f i c t iona l form, and i t remains a must ‐ read for s tudents o f Bar f ie ld

seek ing to p lumbthe depth of Bar f ie ld the Anthroposopher .

Speaker'sMeaning . London:RudolfSteinerPress,1967.

The task o f homosap iens , whenhe f i r s t appeared as a phys ica l formon earth ,

was not to evo lve a facu l ty o f thought somehowout o f noth ing , but to

t ransformthe unfree wisdom, which he exper ienced through h is organ ismas

g iven meaning , in to the f ree sub ject iv i ty that i s corre lat ive on ly to act ive

thought , to the ind iv idua l act iv i ty o f th ink ing . (Speaker ’s Meaning 113‐14)

In the fa l l o f 1965, Bar f ie ld gave a ser ies o f lectures at

Brandeis Un ivers i ty dur ing a s t int—oneof many in Amer ica a f ter

h is ret i rement —as a v i s i t ing scho lar in the Eng l i sh Department .

Speaker ’s Meaning put those lectures , w i th somes l ight

modi f icat ion , in to the formof a “ l i t t le book.” The s l ightest o f

Bar f ie ld ’s works , i t neverthe less o f fers an approachab le ( i f

repet i t ive) br ie f excurs ion into Bar f ie ld ’s key ideas on language,

many of themart icu lated as ear ly as History in Eng l i sh Words and

Poet ic D ic t ion .

WhatColeridgeThought. Middletown,CT:WesleyanUP,1971;London:

OxfordUniversityPress,1972.

[Co ler idge 's extraord inar i ly un i fy ing mind] was too pa infu l ly aware that you

cannot rea l ly say one th ing correct ly w i thout say ing everyth ing . He was

r ight ly a f ra id that there would not be t imeto say everyth ing before go ing on

to say the next th ing , or that he would forget to do so a f terwards . H is

be taken as pract ica l suggest ions for deal ing with ordinary problems. I had the idea that i t would be a good scheme to present to the world some of the f indings of Steiner without bother ing about just i fy ing at a l l , but just let them read the k ind of result that he arr ives at and judging them according their intr ins ic qual i ty. (http://www.mtsu.edu/~dlavery/obmmint.htm)


incoherence of express ion arose f romthe coherence of

what he wanted to express . I t was a sort o f

in te l lectua l s tammer. (Romant ic i smComes of Age 146)

Bar f ie ld descr ibes What Co ler idge Thought as the “most

academica l ly ambit ious book I ’ve wr i t ten” (OwenBarf ie ld Manand

Meaning ) . The cu lminat ion of a l i fe t ime’s in terest in Co ler idge—as a

young man just out o f Oxford he asp i red to becomethe ed i tor o f

Co ler idge ’s co l lected works , and at h is death , he le f t beh ind an

ed i ted vo lumeof Co ler idge ’s ph i losophica l lectures for The Co l lected

Co ler idge) , What Co ler idge Thought had i t s incept ion in a course Bar f ie ld taught at Drew

Univers i ty in the 1960s . S t i l l o f va lue for ser ious s tudents o f the great Romant ic f igure , i t

neverthe less remains a book inaccess ib le to a l l but the most ded icated readers o f Bar f ie ld .

A long with Rudol f S te iner and Goethe, Co ler idge s tands , a f ter a l l , as one of the major

in f luences on Bar f ie ld ’s whole deve lopment as a th inker ; but h is in terest in Co ler idge was

more than mere ly in te l lectua l . Bar f ie ld i t seems ident i f ied with Co ler idge in another way.

Be leaguered f romh is youth by h is ownprob lemswith s tammer ing , Bar f ie ld empath ized with

Co ler idge 's ownd i f f i cu l t ies w i th ar t icu lat ion , as the ep igraph above would seemto ind icate .

TheRediscoveryofMeaningandOtherEssays.Middletown,CT:WesleyanUP,

1977.

We l ive in a camera c iv i l i zat ion . Our enterta inment i s camera

enterta inment . Our ho l idays are camera ho l idays . Wemake themso by

pay ing more at tent ion to the camera webrought w ith us than to the

water fa l l we are po int ing i t a t . Our sc ience i s a lmost ent i re ly a camera

sc ience . . . . and i t i s a l ready becoming se l f ‐ev ident to camera manthat

on ly camera words have any meaning . (The Red iscovery o f Meaning 76)

L ike Romant ic i smComes of Age, The Red iscovery o f Meaning

assembles occas iona l wr i t ings (most ly f romthe ‘60s and ‘70s) , inc lud ing

someof h is most br i l l iant , and most readab le , p ieces : the t i t le essay for

example , or ig ina l ly commiss ioned by and pub l i shed in The Saturday Even ing Post , “The Harp

and the Camera ,” “Dreams, Myth , and Ph i losophica l Double V is ion” (wr i t ten for a co l lect ion

of essays ed i ted by Joseph Campbel l ) , and “Ph i lo logy and the Incarnat ion ,” Bar f ie ld ’s Rel ig io


Phi lo log i—his exp lanat ion of howh is ph i lo log ica l invest igat ions led h imto f ina l ly accept the

evo lut ionary t ruth of Chr is t ian i ty . A lmost every essay in The Red iscovery o f Meaning meri ts

not on ly read ing but reread ing . No comprehens ive understand ing of Bar f ie ld ’s thought i s

poss ib le w ithout i t . I t i s character i s t ic o f Bar f ie ld ’s modesty that he prefaces The

Red iscovery o f Meaning with the caut ionary warn ing quoted in the f i r s t ep igraph at the head

of th is essay , but though the reader w i l l no doubt f ind in i t s pages the sameo ld Bar f ie ld

mind at work on many of the samesub jects , he or she wi l l l i ke ly conc lude (w ith Lewis ) that

here as e lsewhere the author was unab le to speak on any sub ject w i thout i l luminat ing i t .

History,Guilt, andHabit . Middletown,CT:WesleyanUP,1979.

You can d ig in to the earth with a spade in order to get

beneath the sur face . The spade i s i t se l f a product o f

the earth , but that does not bother you. But i f , by

somemyster ious d ispensat ion , the spade were part o f

the very path of earth you were sp l i t t ing up , you

would be rather nonplused, because you would

destroy the instrument by us ing i t . And that i s the sort

o f d i f f i cu l ty you are up aga inst when i t i s not the earth

you are d igg ing into , but consc iousness ; and when i t i s

not a spade you are d igg ing with , but language. . . .

However qu ick ly you turn around, you can never see

the back o f your ownhead. (History , Gu i l t , and Habi t 21)

L ike Speaker ’s Meaning , History Gu i l t , and Habi t was or ig ina l ly a ser ies o f lectures

(g iven th is t ime in Canada at the Univers i ty o f V ic tor ia and the Univers i ty o f Br i t i sh

Co lumbia) . As G . B . Tennyson notes in h is foreword to the book, History , Gu i l t , and Habi t i s

an exce l lent f i r s t exposure to h is d i f f i cu l t a rguments for the nov ice reader o f Bar f ie ld . The

book reta ins much of the concern for an aud ience ’s comprehens ion of a l i ve ly lecture . The

three essays , “H is tory o f Ideas : Evo lut ion of Consc iousness ,” “Modern Ido latry : The S in o f

L i tera lness ,” and “The Force of Hab i t ,” present , in one sense , a recap i tu lat ion of the ch ie f

ideas o f Sav ing the Appearances in a somewhat more read i ly d igested form, but here the

emphas is i s on h is tory and h is tor ic i smand on d is t ingu ish ing Bar f ie ld ’s ownpursu i t o f an

understand ing of the evo lut ion of consc iousness f romthe work o f the h is tor ian .


Orpheus:APoeticDrama. Ed.JohnC.Ulreich,Jr. WestStockbridge,MA:

LindisfarnePress,1983.

He sha l l ascend Parnassus awake and f ind h is sou l :

Proteus sha l l work uns leep ing for ever , and forms sha l l f low

As the meaning of words a poet has mastered. I t sha l l be so

That Zeus sha l l abandonto Chronos the ant ique s tarry c rown,

And soft ly out o f O lympus the h igh Gods sha l l comedown

Shedding ambros ia l f ragrance in c louds that for ever ab ide ,

And earth sha l l be covered with b lushes and make herse l f sweet as a

br ide .

And her l ight sha l l be l iqu id as honey, her a i r taste good l ike bread

In the mouths o f themthat dwel l upon earth , and a l l sha l l be fed .

(Orpheus 112)

Bar f ie ld had wr i t ten the verse dramaOrpheus in the 1930s , part ly a t the suggest ion

of C . S . Lewis . The p lay was per formedon ly once , in 1948, and remained bur ied in Bar f ie ld ’s

papers unt i l John U lre ich , J r . o f the Univers i ty o f Ar izona, tanta l i zed by Bar f ie ld ’s a l lus ions

to i t , d i s interred i t and saw i t through to pub l icat ion in 1983. U l re ich r ight ly pra ises

Orpheus as " the evo lut ion of consc iousness made f lesh , the th ing i t se l f in human form, the

myth made fact as imag inat ive exper ience" (119) .

OwenBarfieldonC.S. Lewis . Ed.G.B.Tennyson.Middletown,CT:WesleyanU

P,1989.

Though many a v i s i tor to Orchard Row(Bar f ie ld ’s home in Kent

pr ior to the death of h is w i fe Maud in 1980) and to the Walhatch in

Forest Row( the ret i rement hote l in which Bar f ie ld spent h is f ina l years )

cameto ta lk on ly o f Lewis , somet imes l i t t le or no interest in Bar f ie ld ’s

ownach ievements , the ever‐modest Bar f ie ld seemeda lways prepared to

d iscuss “ Jack” instead of Owen. Lewis ’s exemplary “SecondFr iend,” “ the

manwhod isagrees w ith you about everyth ing” (Surpr i sed by Joy 199‐

200) , Bar f ie ld spent a good port ion of the secondha l f o f h is own l i fe ,

both before and a f ter Lewis ’s death in 1963, answer ing quest ions about


andputt ing into wr i t ing h is memor ies and observat ions on h is more famous contemporary .

(As a so l i c i tor Bar f ie ld even took care o f Lewis ’ f inanc ia l matters , which were compounded

by h is la rge earn ings f romthe roya l t ies o f h is best ‐se l l ing books15) . Tennyson’s inva luab le

ed i t ion of OwenBarf ie ld on C . S . Lewis br ings together a l l the important essays and

interv iews in which Bar f ie ld speaks o f h is l i fe ‐ long f r iend. In a most approachab le ,

revea l ing , and cand id book Bar f ie ld confesses that “Lewis was , I be l ieve , the on ly person in

whose company I f requent ly fe l t myse l f to be pa infu l ly s low‐wit ted" (39) . But we learn too

that Bar f ie ld sawa c lear and d is t inct ant i thes is in the i r respect ive pos i t ions : “"Lewis had

the very s t rong fee l ing that you cou ldn ' t re late [ imag inat ion] in any way to t ruth with

destroy ing i t s essence as imag inat ion; he was in love with i t . . . . Yes , he was in Romant ic

love with i t . . . . But I wanted to marry i t . " (137) .

AnOwenBarfieldSampler . Ed.ThomasKranidasandJeanneClaytonHunter.

Albany:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress,1993.

I f Lewis and Bar f ie ld had been asked back in the i r Oxford days what

in the i r fondest dreamsthe future would ho ld for them, i t i s l i ke ly that

they would have both confessed to the des i re to becomecreat ive wr i ters .

Though both endedup ho ld ing downd i f ferent “day jobs ,” Lewis

neverthe less d id becomea creat ive wr i ter , pub l i sh ing nove ls , sc ience‐

f ic t ion , and ch i ldren ’s l i terature , though h is asp i rat ion to be a poet as

wel l never qu i te mater ia l i zed . Though not as pro l i f i c as Lewis , Bar f ie ld ,

too , cont inued to wr i te f i c t ion and poetry , though most o f i t was

completed in the f i r s t ha l f o f h is l i fe . TomKran idas ’ and Jeanne C layton

Hunter ’s AnOwenBarf ie ld Sampler , a t rue labor o f love and the resu l t o f

a t least twodecades o f g lean ing and gather ing , puts together in one

vo lumea substant ia l port ion of Bar f ie ld ’s be l le t r i s t ic wr i t ing , inc lud ing the nove l la “N ight

Operat ion ,” the short s tory “Dope” (which had in i t s day been pra ised by none other than T .

S . E l io t ) , and a good dea l o f Bar f ie ld ’s o f ten exqu is i te ly beaut i fu l , and surpr is ing ly

autob iograph ica l , l y r ic poetry . Kran idas ’s and Hunter ’s in t roduct ion i s one of the best

conc ise overv iews of Bar f ie ld ’s work ava i lab le .

15Burgeon’s deal ings with the character Ramsden in This Ever Diverse Pair (an

obvious a l lus ion to the main character in Lewis ’s Space Tr i logy) record, in an only s l ight ly f ict ional ized manner, Barf ie ld ’s work as f inancia l advisor to Lewis.


In h is monographon C. S . Lewis ' "Great War" with OwenBarf ie ld , L ione l Adey , seek ing to

summar ize Bar f ie ld ’s impact on the thought o f h is century , conc ludes that

Barf ie ld 's . . . works provoke thought about the humanpsyche in ways far beyondthe

scope of l i terary h is tory . Future s tudents o f twent ieth‐century thought may wel l f ind

Bar f ie ld—l ike E inste in or Popper in sc ient i f i c theory , or Bonhoeffer in theo logy—

amongthe d iagnost ic ians o f a profoundchange in humanconsc iousness , one

comparab le to the Reformat ion or En l ightenment . That change i s in a sense an ant i ‐

En l ightenment , in that i t invo lves regard ing mannot as the so le rat iona l be ing in a

sub‐rat iona l Nature , but as an a l ready se l f ‐consc ious be ing learn ing to extend that

se l f ‐consc iousness so as to communicate with and ben ignant ly part ic ipate in a

natura l order that in h is arrogance, turbu lent pass ions and mistaken ph i losophica l

assumpt ions , he has a l l but destroyed.

I t i s d i f f i cu l t to imag ine that a systemat ic reader o f the work o f Bar f ie ld would not reach a

comparab le conc lus ion . And yet , in th is year o f the centenary o f h is b i r th , the on ly hope

that th is might becomethe commonop in ion of the age i s that OwenBarf ie ld turns out to be

what N ietzsche ca l led a “posthumous” man (321) , a prophet not apprec iated in h is own

country or t ime, a v i s ionary vo ice meant for the ages to come.

Works C i ted

Abrams, M.H. "Rev iewof H is tory , Gu i l t , and Hab i t . " Towards 1 .5 (1979) : 27‐29 .

Adey , L ione l . C. S . Lewis ' "Great War" w ith OwenBarf ie ld . Eng l i sh L i terary S tud ies

Monograph Ser ies . Un ivers i ty o f V ic tor ia , 1978.

Avens , Roberts . Imaginat ion i s Rea l i ty : Western N i rvana in Jung, H i l lman, Bar f ie ld , and

Cass i rer . Da l las : Spr ing , 1980.

Bar f ie ld , Owen. “OwenBarf ie ld and the Or ig in o f Language.” Towards 1.2(1978) : 1 ‐7 and 1 .3

(1978) : 13‐15 .

Berman, Morr is . Coming to Our Senses : Body and Sp i r i t in the H idden H is tory o f the West .

NewYork : Bantam, 1990.

Brown, NormanO. Apoca lypse and/or Metamorphos is . Berke ley : Un ivers i ty o f Ca l i forn ia

Press , 1991.

C ioran , E . M. Drawnand Quartered . Trans . R ichard Howard. NewYork : Seaver Books , 1983.

F l ieger , Ver lyn . "Bar f ie ld 's Poet ic D ic t ion and Sp l intered L ight ." Stud ies in the L i terary

Imaginat ion 14 :2 (1981) : 47‐66 .


Fu lwei ler , Howard W. "The Other Miss ing L ink : OwenBarf ie ld and the Sc ient i f i c

Imag inat ion ." Renascence : Essays on Va lues in L i terature 46 .1 (1993) : 39‐55 .

Grant , Patr ick . "Be l ie f in Th ink ing : OwenBarf ie ld and Michae l Po lany i . " S ix Modern Authors

and Prob lemsof Be l ie f . NewYork : Barnes and Noble , 1979: 121‐66 .

___ . "The Qua l i ty o f Th ink ing : OwenBarf ie ld as L i terary Manand Anthroposophis t . " Seven 3

(1982) : 113‐25 .

H ipo l i to , T . A . "OwenBarf ie ld 's Poet ic D ic t ion . " Renascence: Essays on Va lues in L i terature

46 .1 (1993) : 3 ‐39 .

Hunter , Jeanne C layton. "OwenBarf ie ld : A Change of Consc iousness ." The Nassau Rev iew 4 .5

(1984) : 93‐101.

___ . "OwenBarf ie ld : Chr is t ian Apolog is t . " Renascence: Essays on Va lues in L i terature 36

(1984) : 171‐79 .

Kran idas , Thomas. "C . S . Lewis and the Poetry o f OwenBarf ie ld ." The Bu l le t in o f the New

York C . S . Lewis Soc iety 12 .2 (1980) : 1 ‐2 .

_____ "The Def iant Lyr ic i smof OwenBarf ie ld ." Seven: An Ang lo Amer ican L i terary Rev iew . 6

(1985) , 23‐33 .

Lewis , C . S . Surpr i sed by Joy : The Shape of MyEar ly L i fe . NewYork : Harvest , 1956.

McLuhan, Marsha l l . Letters o f Marsha l l McLuhan. Ed i ted by Mat ie Mol inaro , Cor inne

McLuhan, Wi l l iamToye. Toronto ; NewYork : Oxford Univers i ty Press , 1987.

Mead, Mar jor ie L . "Afterword ." The S i lver Trumpet . Bou lder , CO: Bookmakers Gu i ld , 1986:

117‐23 .

Myers , Dor is T . C. S . Lewis in Context . Kent , OH: Kent S tate Un iver is ty Press , 1994.

N ietzsche, F r iedr ich . The Gay Sc ience . Trans . Walter Kaufmann. NewYork : V intage , 1974.

OwenBarf ie ld : Manand Meaning (1997) . Execut ive Producer : G . B . Tennyson. Co‐producers :

G . B . Tennyson and Dav id Lavery . Wr i t ten by : G . B . Tennyson and Dav id Lavery . D i rected

by : Ben Lev in . V ideography by : WayneDerr ick .

“OwenBarf ie ld : Manand Meaning In terv iew.” http ://www.mtsu .edu/~d lavery/obmmint .htm.

The OwenBarf ie ld Wor ld Wide WebS i te . ht tp ://www.mtsu .edu/~d lavery/barf toc .htm

Potts , Donna. Howard Nemerov and Object ive Idea l i sm: The In f luence o f OwenBarf ie ld .

Co lumbia : Un ivers i ty o f Missour i Press , 1994.

Re i l ly , R . J . "Anthroposophica l Romant ic i sm." Romant ic Re l ig ion : A S tudy in the Work o f

OwenBarf ie ld , C . S . Lewis , and J . R . R . To lk ien . Athens : Un ivers i ty o f Georg ia Press ,

1971: 13‐97 .

Sugerman, Sh i r ley . “Barspecs : OwenBarf ie ld ’s V is ion .” Seven 11 (1990) : 73‐85 .


___, ed . Evo lut ion o f Consc iousness : S tud ies in Po lar i ty . Midd letown, CT : Wes leyan U P ,

1976.

Tennyson, G . B . “A B ib l iography of the Works o f OwenBarf ie ld .” In Sugerman, ed . Evo lut ion

o f Consc iousness : 227‐38 .

___ . "OwenBarf ie ld and the Reb ir th o f Meaning ." Southern Rev iew 5 (1969) : 42‐57 .

___ . "OwenBarf ie ld : F i rs t and Last Ink l ings ." The Wor ld & I , Apr i l 1990: 540‐55 .

F ru i t in a b lossom

Andpeta ls in a seed,

Reeds in a r iver ‐bed,

Mus ic in a reed,

S tars in a f i rmament

Sh in ing in the n ight ,

Sun in a ga laxy

And p lanet in i t s l ight ,

Bones in the rosy b lood

L ike land in the sea ,

Marrow in a ske leton—

And I in Me.

( " In ," AnOwenBarf ie ld Sampler

54)

owen barfield readers guide

Documents