Of course, enthusiasm for Shelley isn’t limited to China. He is generally regarded in English-speaking countries as one of the most important poets of the 19th century, and much praise has been heaped upon him. However, perhaps due to his undoubted greatness as a poet, some have taken to portraying him as a great human being. For example, Louis Untermeyer writes of Shelley in A Concise Treasury of Great Poems, English and American (Simon and Schuster, 1976 edition):
Misjudged as a licentious pagan by a self-righteous world, he was essentially a passionate believer in universal goodness, even in human perfectibility (p. 250).
Untermeyer was undoubtedly a distinguished anthologist with a deep understanding of English poetry, but it would seem to me that his assessment of Shelley’s character is highly debatable, as I believe the following will show.
First, the fact is that Shelley was a man who married one woman—Harriet Westbrook—and then abandoned her for another—Mary Godwin. He subsequently invited Harriet to join them to form, in effect, a polygamous household. Harriet refused and eventually committed suicide. As a result, Shelley lost guardianship over his children by Harriet. He later became infatuated with women other than Mary. A man who was so clearly unfaithful and selfish in his relationships with woman could arguably be called “licentious.” Moreover, though it is strictly true that Shelley was not a “pagan”—since that word has usually implied a believer in the (false) gods of antiquity and Shelley was an atheist—Shelley did idealize Greco-Roman paganism to some extent. In his poem “A New World,” he speaks of how “Saturn and Love their long repose/Shall burst, more bright and good,/Than all who fell, than One who rose/Than many unsubdued.” The phrase “One who rose” clearly refers to the Lord Jesus. In effect, he is saying that the (supposed) gods of classical antiquity are “more bright and good” than Christ, and thus more admirable to him.
Second, despite what Untermeyer seems to imply, there is no logical inconsistency between being a “passionate believer in universal goodness, even in human perfectibility” and a “licentious pagan.” After all, by both his words and actions Shelley clearly rejected Christian doctrine. A key belief in the Christian faith is the inherent sinfulness of mankind. Thus, the world is full of evil and human beings are incapable of achieving moral perfection. If one, like Shelley, rejects such beliefs, it is not difficult to embrace an opposition conclusion—that human beings are basically good and can achieve moral perfection. Moreover, by believing in the essential goodness of human beings, Shelley in effect rejected the notion of sin, including, presumably, sexual sin. Thus, he could absolve himself of any guilt about his infidelities.
In short, however admirable a poet Shelley was, he was hardly an admirable human being, despite what Untermeyer appears to suggest. Too often in the case of artists (or performers) we confuse the greatness of their artistic achievements with the nature of their personal character, or imagine that great artists are somehow “above” the moral rules that apply to “mere mortals.” This is a grave mistake—for we need to remember that one day all—even great artists--shall be judged by the same standards by a perfect Judge.
Image: Percy Bysshe Shelley by Alfred Clint, from commons.wikipedia.org