ABSTRACT
Mrs. Orr speaks of Browning’s care in his writing and his attention to detail, which she sees as a “curious contrast” to “the irresponsible, often strangely unquestioned, impulse to which the substance of each poem was due” (1908, 361). I am equally interested in her comment regarding one of Browning’s later works: namely, that “I think he often tried to remedy by mere verbal correction, what was a defect in the logical arrangement of his ideas. They would slide into each other where a visible dividing line was required” (347). Orr sees this as evidence of aging and decline, yet I would argue that it is a feature of the longer early narratives as well. What Orr identifi es as a “defect” in the arrangement of ideas or sequential thought may in fact be the mark of a cognitive difference which distinguishes both Browning’s thinking style and his manner of composing. To grasp that difference is to begin the task of moving towards a new way of reading Browning’s creative work.
