I weep in vain_.

It will easily be perceived, that the only part of this Sonnet which is
of any value is the lines printed in Italics; it is equally obvious,
that, except in the rhyme, and in the use of the single word 'fruitless'
for fruitlessly, which is so far a defect, the language of these lines
does in no respect differ from that of prose.

By the foregoing quotation it has been shown that the language of Prose
may yet be well adapted to Poetry; and it was previously asserted, that
a large portion of the language of every good poem can in no respect
differ from that of good Prose. We will go further. It may be safely
affirmed, that there neither is, nor can be, any _essential_ difference
between the language of prose and metrical composition. We are fond of
tracing the resemblance between Poetry and Painting, and, accordingly,
we call them Sisters: but where shall we find bonds of connection
sufficiently strict to typify the affinity betwixt metrical and prose
composition? They both speak by and to the same organs; the bodies in
which both of them are clothed may be said to be of the same substance,
their affections are kindred, and almost identical, not necessarily
differing even in degree; Poetry[9] sheds no tears 'such as Angels
weep,' but natural and human tears; she can boast of no celestial ichor
that distinguishes her vital juices from those of prose; the same human
blood circulates through the veins of them both.

[9] I here use the word 'Poetry' (though against my own judgment) as
opposed to the word Prose, and synonymous with metrical composition. But
much confusion has been introduced into criticism by this
contradistinction of Poetry and Prose, instead of the more philosophical
one of Poetry and Matter of Fact, or Science. The only strict antithesis
to Prose is Metre; nor is this, in truth, a _strict_ antithesis, because
lines and passages of metre so naturally occur in writing prose, that it
would be scarcely possible to avoid them, even were it desirable.

If it be affirmed that rhyme and metrical arrangement of themselves
constitute a distinction which overturns what has just been said on the
strict affinity of metrical language with that of prose, and paves the
way for other artificial distinctions which the mind voluntarily admits,
I answer that the language of such Poetry as is here recommended is, as
far as is possible, a selection of the language really spoken by men;
that this selection, w