Fearful Symmetry: A Study of William Blake

W.J. Keith is a retired professor of English at the University of Toronto and author A Sense of Style: Studies in the Art of Fiction in English-Speaking Canada.

Northrop Frye’s first book, Fearful Symmetry, appeared in 1947 and
revolutionized the serious study of William Blake, establishing him as,
beyond doubt, a major figure in the British poetic and visionary
tradition. It has long become a critical classic, and the present
edition applies to it the latest in editorial sophistication.

I remember, when first encountering Fearful Symmetry as a graduate
student, getting the uneasy impression that it was more difficult than
Blake. An exaggeration, no doubt, but returning to the book after well
over 40 years, I can still understand the reaction. Moreover, I find
that Frye might even have sympathized. In his preface to the Italian
translation, reprinted here, he calls it “the longest and most
difficult of all my books,” and acknowledges in a 1962 edition that,
if he were to write it again, he would “probably write a more
conventional book, more concerned with the reader’s superficial
difficulties with the text and designs.”

This is an edition, however, for Frye specialists rather than for the
general reader. It prints the most accurate text, incorporating
corrections and improvements in later editions, and even introduces
convincing emendations. In addition, Frye’s own notes are helpfully
supplemented. But the improvements are, perhaps inevitably, achieved at
a price. A simple note reads “M, pl.38 [pl. 24, l.23], K2:358 [E
134],” which will surely bemuse all but the most persistent. Moreover,
the pagination of the original edition—unchanged in the three
subsequent editions—is indicated in square brackets throughout the
present text. This is editorially justifiable, but, for me, to encounter
“the per[5]centage of mental breakdowns” is merely distracting.

The book is edited by Nicholas Halmi, but the learned and informative
introduction is, oddly, by Ian Sinclair. We are told that it was written
“on short notice,” but the circumstances are never explained, and
Sinclair is not identified. This is a further mystery that adds an
editorial layer of complexity to an already complicated text.

Still, even if few people need the details, it is good to know that
such an edition exists.