Advertisement

National Differences and National Autonomy

  • Alok Yadav
Chapter
  • 17 Downloads

Abstract

In The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Edward Gibbon distinguishes between the structure of the Roman Empire—forming “one great nation, united by language, manners, and civil institutions”—and the structure of the modern “republic” of Europe, as he styles it, which emerged from the European Christendom of the Middle Ages.1 The strength of this modern European formation was based, in Gibbon’s view, not on unity and homogeneity of “language, manners, and … institutions,” but on national diversity and competition: he comments that, “On the revival of letters, … national emulation, a new religion, new languages, and a new world, called forth the genius of Europe” (1:84). Gibbon’s understanding of the modern European republic of states, and the republic of letters that forms its cultural double, is consonant with the views of other writers discussed in chapter 2. As we saw in that chapter, the notion of the republic of letters, as part of its transnational orientation, constantly calls attention to the diversity of multiple national literary traditions and to the related dynamic of “national emulation.” For Gibbon, “the genius of Europe” emerges out of the competition of nations, religions, languages; and, likewise, the eighteenth-century republic of letters gains its coherence not from a shared culture but from a dynamic of national competition.

Keywords

Eighteenth Century Literary History National Difference Literary Culture English Writer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 1:62 (see chap. 1, n. 47). Subsequent references to this work will be given in the text.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, “Relation de 1’etat present de la Republique des Lettres,” in Samtliche Schriften und Briefe, herausgegaben Preussischen Akademie derWissenschaften, vierte Reihe, Politische Schriften, erster Band, 1667–1676 (Darmstadt: Otto ReichlVerlag, 1931), 568.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Voltaire, Letters concerning the English Nation, “A New Edition” [trans. John Lockman] (London: J. and R. Tonson, 1767), 83–84 (letter 14). Subsequent references to this work will be given in the text.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Friedrich Klopstock, Die deutsche Gelehrtenrepublik (1774), quoted in Daston, “The Ideal and Reality of the Republic of Letters,” 373 (see chap. 2, n. 3).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D’Alembert, Preliminary Discourse to the Encyclopedia, 88–89 (see chap. 2, n. 66). While acknowledging the use the Encyclopedists have made of Ephraim Chambers’s Cyclopedia or an Universal Dictionary ofArts and Sciences (1728), d’Alembert describes Chambers’s compilation as simply a “translation” of various French writings, and positions the project he himself is engaged in as not so much itself a translation of Chambers as a transcendence of his work (109–11). Similarly, in his discussion of the relationship between Bacon’s division of the various branches of the arts and sciences of memory, reason, and imagination, and the classificatory scheme adopted for the Encyclopédie, d’Alembert again walks a fine line between acknowledging derivation from and asserting superiority to the prior work (49–50, 76–77, 159–64). More generally, after a discussion of the achievements of Bacon, Descartes, Newton, and Locke, d’Alembert writes: “We may conclude from all this history that England is indebted to us for the origins of that philosophy which we have since received back from her” (85)—as though the question of national indebtedness were precisely what was at stake in his historical retrospective.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Edwin Cannan, commenting on this issue, remarks of the Wealth of Nations: “Its composition was spread over at least the twenty-seven years from 1749 to 1776. During that period economic ideas crossed and recrossed the Channel many times, and it is as useless as it is invidious to dispute about the relative shares of Great Britain and France in the progress effected” (Wealth of Nations, ed. Edwin Cannan [NewYork: Random House, 1937], lv).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann cite this remark by Pascal and suggest that it may be said to contain “in nuce” the fundamental problem confronted by the sociology of knowledge, the problem of the “amazing variety of forms of thought” in historically and culturally distinct societies (The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge [Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1966], 5).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cf. Howard Weinbrot, “Enlightenment Canon Wars: Anglo-French Views of Literary Greatness,” ELH 60 (1993): 79–100.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Christine Gerrard, in her important study The Patriot Opposition to Walpole: Politics, Poetry, and National Myth, 1725–1742 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), explores the ways in which “the Patriot poets of the 1730s and early 1740s engaged in a process of recovering British cultural as well as constitutional roots,” thus contributing to “current critical debates about the origins of literary nationalism” (121). As I show in this chapter, and more generally in this book as a whole, nationalism in English-language literary culture goes back well before the 1730s.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. W. K. Stone, TheArt of Poetry 1750–1820:Theories of Poetic Composition and Style in the Late Neo-Classic and Early Romantic Periods (New York: Barnes and Noble, 1967), 24–25.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Earl Miner, “Introduction: Borrowed Plumage,Varied Umbrage,” in Literary Transmission and Authority: Dryden and Other Writers, ed. Earl Miner and Jennifer Brady (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 3.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    John Oldmixon, Essay on Criticism (1728), ed. R. J. Madden (Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 1964), 46. There is some discussion of this phenomenon in relation to Dryden in John Sherwood’s “Dryden and the Rules: The Preface to Troilus and Cressida(Comparative Literature 2 [1950]: 73–83). Sherwood argues: “One should not be misled by Dryden’s statement that ‘Aristotle with his interpreters, and Horace, and Longinus’ are the authors to whom he owes his ‘lights. ’ These authors were evidently consulted and may be found quoted in the Preface; but Aristotle is almost invariably seen through the eyes of the French ‘interpreters’ [especially Rapin and Le Bossu], and Longinus was evidently known to Dryden chiefly through the translation of Boileau” (75).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Adrien Baillet, Jugemens des savans sur les principaux ouvrages des auteurs. Par Adrien Baillet. (1685). Revas, corriges, & augmentés par M. De la Monnoye de IAcademie Franloise, 7 vols. (Paris: Charles Moette et al. , 1722). References to this work, all taken from the first volume unless otherwise specified, will be given in the text.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sir John Chardin, Voyages en Perse (1670, 1711), quoted. in Warren E. Gates, “The Spread of Ibn Khaldun’s Ideas on Climate and Culture, “Journal of the History of Ideas 28 (1967): 418. Ibn Khaldun had adapted the climatological theory in the fourteenth century to valorize his own society, accepting the traditional argument that a temperate climate produced superior civilization, and merely adding that the Arabian climate was a temperate one (Charles Konigsberg, “Climate and Society: A Review of the Literature,” Journal of Conflict Resolution 4[1960]: 69). Ibn Khaldun’s work was picked up and absorbed by Chardin, who, in turn, was the acknowledged source for Du Bos and an important influence both directly and through Du Bos on Montesquieu’s climatological theory. Thus, “a theory of climate which had reached a dead end in Europe was suddenly revitalized by a contribution from the East, giving a new impetus to western social philosophy” (Gates, “The Spread of Ibn Khaldun’s Ideas,” 422).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    There is an extensive bibliography of scholarship on this subject. For an introduction to it, see James William Johnson, “Of Differing Ages and Climes, “Journal of the History of Ideas 21 (1960): 465–80; Pat Rogers, “North and South,” Eighteenth-Century Life 12. 2 (1988): 101–11; Nussbaum, Torrid Zones (see intro. , n. 8); and Roxann Wheeler, “The Empire of Climate,” in The Complexion of Race: Categories of Difference in Eighteenth-Century British Culture (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), 1–48 (esp. 21–28). For the extension of the theory of climate into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, see Mark Harrison,” ‘The Tender Frame of Man’: Disease, Climate, and Racial Difference in India and the West Indies, 1760–1860,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 70 (1996): 68–93; David N. Livingstone, “The Moral Discourse of Climate: Historical Considerations on Race, Place, and Virtue,” Journal of Historical Geography 17 (1991): 413–34; and Konigsberg (n. 14).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Baillet had argued, previously, that “Il y a de l’injustice a donner a toute une Nation les vices & les defauts que l’on aura remarques dans quelques particuliers, comme a render de bonnes qualités universelles lorsqu’elles ne sont que personelles” (187). This objection against false or premature generahzation should apply equally whether the generalizations are based on climatological or sociocultural hypotheses. It turns out, however, that Baillet objects more to negative characterizations of Europeans than to the making of stereotyping generalizations as such.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    See, e. g. , the discussion in chapter 2 of Saavedra Fajardo’s Republic of Letters, a work that ignores the cultures of northern Europe as insignificant to the world of letters. Swift’s image of “Gothic swarms” coming forth from “Ignorance’s universal north” (in his “Ode to the Athenian Society,” in The Complete Poems, ed. Pat Rogers [London: Penguin, 1983], lines 298–99) captures the traditional prejudice against the northern countries/climates, which equates them with ignorance and barbarity.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    For Johnson’s critique of the climatological theory, see Idler no. 11 (June 24, 1758) and his “Life of Milton. ” Like his contemporaries, Johnson frequently speaks of particular national characteristics, but that he views such characteristics in a sociocultural light, rather than as fixed, innate characteristics, is evident from his remark that “there is no permanent national character; it varies according to circumstances. Alexander the Great swept India; now the Turks sweep Greece” (Boswell, Life ofJohnson, 494 [see chap. 2, n. 101]). For Hume’s views, see his essays “Of National Characters” (1748) and “Of Commerce” (1752) in Essays, Moral Political and Literary (see chap. 2, n. 19).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Addison and Steele, The Spectator, 1:268 (see chap. 1, n. 29). Subsequent references to this work will be given in the text.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dominique Bouhours, The Art of Criticism (1705), intro. Philip Smallwood (Delmar, NY: Scholars’ Facsimiles and Reprints, 1981), 29. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cf. the comments of Matthew Prior in his commonplace book, ca. 1720–21: “I believe no Man now alive is so absolutely Master of the Greek or Latin tongue as to be able to read one Sentence without stopping a little to consider the Grammatical construction of it: add to this that the Customs of these Nations, their Cloathing, their Utensils, their Houses, husbandry, Encampments, their laws, the manner of their pleadings, and the placing their words, their proverbs in common discourse are so different from Ours, that whole Volumes of Critics & Commentators must not only be read but remembered before a Man is master of One oration of Demosthenes or Cicero or One Comedy ofAristophanes or a Satyr of Horace or Juvenal” (The Literary Works of Matthew Prior, 1:1005–06 [see intro. , n. 33]).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dominique Bouhours, Les Entretiens dAriste et dEugene, ed. Rene Radouant (Paris: Editions Bossard, 1920), 57, 55. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Umberto Eco, The Search for the Perfect Language, trans. James Fentress (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995), 86.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    John Oldmixon, The Arts of Logick and Rhetorick (1728) (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1976), 173. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    London Journal (May 1732), quoted in Roger B. Oake, “Political Elements in Criticism of Voltaire in England 1732–47,” Modern Language Notes 57 (1942), 350; Walpole, Yale Edition of the Correspondence of Horace Walpole, 41:148, n. 1 (see intro. , n. 20).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Charles Gildon, The Life of Mr. Thomas Betterton, the late Eminent Tragedian (1710; repr. NewYork: Augustus M. Kelley, 1970).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Petronius, The Works of Petronius Arbiter, in Prose and Verse (1736; repr. NewYork: AMS Press, 1975).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    [John Langhorne], Letters Supposed to have passed between Mr. de St. Evremond and Mr. Waller. Now first Collected and Published (London, 1770).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dryden, “A Character of Saint-Evremond,” 11 (see chap. 2, n. 67).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Saint-Evremond, “A Discourse upon the Grand Alexander,” in Works of Mr. de St. Evremont, 2 vols. (London: Awnsham and John Churchill, 1700), 1:191. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Saint-Evremond, “Reflections upon the Different Genius of the Roman People, at different Times of the Republick,” in Works of Mc de St. Evremont, 1:1–100. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Saint-Evremond, “Upon Tragedies,” in Works of Mr. de St. Evremont, 1:503–04. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Saint-Evremond, “Of the English Comedy,” Works of Mr. de St. Evremont, 1:518–20.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cibber, Apology for the Life of Colley Cibber, 169–70 (see intro. , n. 7).Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Voltaire, An Essay upon the Civil Wars of France extracted from curious manuscripts. And also upon the Epick Poetry of the European Nations,from Homer down to Milton (1728), 104, repr. in Le Bossu and Voltaire on the Epic, ed. Stuart Curran (Gainesville, FL: Scholars’ Facsimiles and Reprints, 1970).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Saint-Evremond, “Upon Comedies,” in Works of Mr. de St. Evremont, 1:509–10 (see n. 30).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Le Bossu, Monseiur Bossus Treatise of the Epick Poem (London, 1695), 2, repr. in Le Bossu and Voltaire on the Epic (see n. 35). Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Francis Douce, Illustrations of Shakespeare and of Ancient Manners, 2 vols. (London: Longman, Hurst, Rees, and Orme, 1807), 2:104–05.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Michel de Montaigne, “Of Custom,” in The Complete Works of Montaigne: Essays, Travel Journal, Letters, trans. Donald M. Frame (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1957), 86.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cibber, Apology for the Life of Colley Cibber, 19–20 (see intro. , n. 7);Thomas Warton, Observations on the Fairy Queen of Spenser, rev. ed. , 2 vols. (1762; repr. NewYork: Haskell House, 1969), 1:4; Robert Dodsley, “Sir John Cockle at Court,” in Miscellanies by the late R. Dodsley, Vol. 1, 2nd ed. (London: J. Dodsley, 1777), 83.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    The notion of national specificity and autonomous self-sufficiency that adheres to the common law tradition is nicely evoked by Sir John Davies in his Irish Reports (1612), where he writes that English customary law is “so framed and fitted to the nature and disposition of this people, as we may properly say it is connatural to the Nation, so as it cannot possibly be ruled by any other Law. This Law therefore doth demonstrate the strength of wit and reason and self-sufficiency which hath been always in the People of this Land, which have made their own Laws out of their wisedome and experience, (like a silk-worm that formeth all her web out of her self only) not begging or borrowing a form of a Commonweal, either from Rome or from Greece, as all other Nations of Europe have done” (quoted in J. G. A. Pocock, The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law: English Historical Thought in the Seventeenth Century [1957; repr. NewYork: W. W. Norton, 1967], 33–34).Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    John Dennis, “Remarks on. Prince Arthur,” in The Critical Works ofJohn Dennis, 1:91 (see intro. , n. 34).Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book the First (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1765), 14.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Charles Gildon, The Complete Art of Poetry, 2 vols. (London: Charles Rivington, 1718), 1:135.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Nathanael Culverwel, in An Elegant and Learned Discourse of the Light of Nature (1652), refers to innate ideas as the “first and Alphabetical notions” that enable us to “spell out the Laws of Nature”: “There are stampt and printed upon the being of man, some cleare and undelible Principles; some first and Alphabetical notions; by putting together of which it can spell out the Law of Nature” (Nathaniel Culverwell, An Elegant and Learned Discourse of the Light of Nature, ed. Robert A. Greene and Hugh MacCallum [Toronto: University ofToronto Press, 1971], 54).Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Samuel Johnson, The Rambler, no. 156 (September 14, 1751), in TheYale Edition of the Works of Samuel Johnson, vol. 5, The Rambler, ed. W. J. Bate and Albrecht B. Strauss (New Haven, CT:Yale University Press, 1969), 66.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    It is worth remarking, perhaps, that Gildon himself writes elsewhere, “as in Physic, so in Poetry, there must be a regard had to the Clime, Nature, and Customs of the People, for the Habits of the Mind as well as those of the Body, are influenced by them” (“An Essay at a Vindication of the LoveVerses of Cowley and Waller” [1694], in Critical Essays of the Eighteenth Century 1700–1725, ed. Willard Durham [1915; repr. New York: Russell and Russell, 1961], 4). Here, the diversity of cultures (of literatures) is in fact produced, in part, by the diversities of nature, including those of climate. So, even for Gildon, the notion of “uniformity” across ages and nations is an extreme position.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    John Dennis, “The Advancement and Reformation of Modern Poetry,” in The Critical Works ofJohn Dennis, 1:202 (see intro. , n. 34).Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    John Dennis, “Remarks on. Prince Arthur,” 1:96. Subsequent references to this work are provided in the text.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    John Dennis, “The Impartial Critick,” in The Critical Works ofJohn Dennis, 1:11. Subsequent references to this work are provided in the text.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sir William Davenant, “Preface to Gondibert,” in Critical Essays of the Seventeenth Century, ed. J. E. Spingarn, 3 vols. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1957), 2:20.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    John Dryden, All for Love, ed. David M. Vieth (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1972), 17.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Samuel Butler, “Upon Critics Who Judge of Modern Plays Precisely by the Rules of the Antients,” in Satires and Miscellaneous Poetry and Prose, ed. Rene Lamar (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1928), 61.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    [Elkanah Settle], A Farther Defence of Dramatick Poetry (London: Eliz. Whitlock, 1698), 28.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    When Saul Bellow asserts, “Who is the Tolstoy of the Zulus? The Proust of the Papuans? I’d be glad to read them” (quoted in Lawrence Levine, Highbrow/Lowbrow: The Emergence of Cultural Hierarchy in America [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988], 256), he suggests a conditional claim along these lines: show me the African Tolstoy, then I will recognize the claims of African literature. Across the long eighteenth century, English-language writers understand that a similar demand directed by the French at English drama can only be satisfied if the claims of English literature are first accorded a measure of respect; otherwise, the demand will always only turn up a series of barbarian failures, including most of all that of Shakespeare. If Bellow understood better the historical dynamics through which European cultures achieved recognition, especially the Englishlanguage tradition in which he writes, he might be less inclined to pose as a kind of grand inquisitor of the claims of non-European cultures.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    George Farquhar, “A Discourse upon Comedy, in Reference to the English Stage. In a Letter to a Friend,” in Eighteenth-Century Critical Essays, ed. Scott Elledge, 2 vols. (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1961), 1:85. Subsequent references to this work will be given in the text.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    John Hayward, ed. , The Letters of Saint Evremond (London: Routledge, 1930), 163–64.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Colley Cibber, The Careless Husband, ed. William W. Appleton (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1966), epilogue, lines 2–3. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Monsieur Bossus Treatise of the Epick Poem, 18 (see n. 37).Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Pope, “Essay on Criticism,” in Poems ofAlexander Pope, ed. Butt, lines 711–22 (see intro. , n. 7). Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    John Dryden, Prologue to The Tempest, Or The Enchanted Island, in The Works ofJohn Dryden, vol. 10, Plays: The Tempest, Tyrranick Love, An Evenings Love, ed. Maximillian E. Novak (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1970), lines 5–8 (italics reversed).Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    John Dryden, Preface to Albion and Albanius, in The Works of John Dryden, vol. 15, Plays: Albion and Albanius, Don Sebastian, Amphitryon, ed. Earl Miner (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1976), 4–5.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    I have discussed Farquhar earlier; Sir Richard Blackmore, in the preface to his Paraphrase on the Book of Job (1700), disputes in very similar terms the authority granted to Homer and Virgil as models of what epic poetry must be: “But upon what Authority is this imposed on the World? What Commission had these two Poets to settle the limits and extent of Epick Poetry, or who can prove they ever intended to do so?. ‘Tis therefore to be wish’d that some good Genius, qualifyd for such an Undertaking, would break the Ice, assert the Liberty of Poetry, and set up for an Original in Writing in a way accommodated to the Religion, Manners, and other Circumstances we are now under” (quoted in David Womersley, ed. , Augustan Critical Writing [London: Penguin, 1997], xxii—xxiii).Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Advertisements from Parnassus (1704), quoted in Paul Spencer Wood, “The Opposition to Neo-Classicism in England between 1660 and 1700,” PMLA 43 (1928): 193. Otway assumes the place occupied by Tasso in the original version of this story.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Henry Fielding, The History ofTom Jones A Foundling, intro. Martin C. Battestin, ed. Fredson Bowers, 2 vols. (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1975), 1:77–78 (bk. 2, chap. 1).Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Horace Walpole, The Castle of Otranto, A Gothic Story, ed. W. S. Lewis (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964), 12. Subsequent references to this work will be given in the text.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Goldsmith, Enquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning in Europe, 294 (see chap. 2, n. 28). Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Montesqieu, The Spirit of the Laws, trans. Anne M. Cohler et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 315. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Warton, Observations on the Fairy Queen of Spenser, 1:15 (see n. 40). Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Henry Boyd, trans. , The Divina Commedia of DanteAlighieri, 3 vols. (London: T. Cadell Jun. and W. Davies, 1802), 1:1–2. One might compare the opening part of Boyd’s statement quoted in the text with the assertion of one of John Dennis’s characters in The Impartial Critick (1693): “the Authority of Aristotle avails little with me, against irrefutable Experience” (The Critical Works ofJohn Dennis, 1:21 [see intro. , n. 34]). After more than a century of reiteration, the appeal from Aristotle to “Nature” or to actual literary “Experience” might indeed be said to have “grown familiar. “Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Leslie Stephen, English Literature and Society in the Eighteenth Century (1904; repr. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1962), 2. Subsequent references to this work will be given in the text.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Katie Trumpener, Bardic Nationalism: The Romantic Novel and the British Empire (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1997), 142.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    John Dryden, “Dedication of the Aeneis,” in The Works ofJohn Dryden, vol. 5, Poems: The Works of Virgil in English 1697, ed. William Frost andVinton A. Dearing (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1987), 267–341. References to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Prior, Preface to Solomon on the Vanity of the World, in Literary Works of Matthew Prior, 1:309 (see intro. , n. 33).Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Edward Young, “A Discourse on Lyric Poetry” (1728), in The Complete Works, Poetry and Prose, of the Rev. Edward Young, 2 vols. (London: William Tegg and Co. , 1854), 1:419.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Bernard Mandeville, The Fable of the Bees, ed. F. B. Kaye, 2 vols. (1924; repr. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund, 1988), 2:297.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    [George Lyttelton], “An Epistle to Mr. Pope. From Rome, 1730,” in A Collection of Poems in Six Volumes. By several Hands (London: J. Dodsley, 1775), 2:37–38.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    James Thomson, The Seasons, ed. James Sambrook (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981), “Autumn,” line 22.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Joseph Addison, “A Discourse of Ancient and Modern Learning,” in The Miscellaneous Works of Joseph Addison, ed. A. C. Guthkelch (London: G. Bell and Sons, 1914), 458–59. Subsequent references to this work will be given in the text.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Joseph Addison, “Letter from Italy,” in The Miscellaneous Works of Joseph Addison (see previous note).Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Joseph Warton, An Essay on the Genius and Writings of Pope, 5th ed. , 2 vols. (London: W. J. and J. Richardson et al. , 1806), 1:4–5. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Royall Tyler, Prologue to The Contrast: A Comedy, intro. Thomas J. McKee (NewYork: Burt Franklin, 1970), xxxviii (original in italics).Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Chinweizu, Onwuchekwa Jemie, and Ihechukwu Madubuike, Toward the Decolonization ofAfiican Literature: African Fiction and Poetry and Their Critics (1980; repr. London: KPI Limited, 1985), 172.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    William Mason, ed. , The Poems of Gray, To which are prefixed Memoirs of his Life and Writings (York: Printed by A. Ward, 1775), 90–91.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Goldsmith, The Collected Works of Oliver Goldsmith, 1:113 (see chap. 2, n. 28).Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Elizabeth Montagu, An Essay on the Writings and Genius of Shakespeare, compared with the Greek and French Dramatic Poets. With Some Remarks upon the Misrepresentations of Mons. de Voltaire (1769; repr. NewYork: Augustus M. Kelley, 1970), 57.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Nicholas Rowe, The Tragedy of Jane Shore, ed. Harry William Pedicord (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1975), 9 (prologue). Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Samuel Johnson, Lives of the English Poets, ed. George Birkbeck Hill, 3 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905), 2:69.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Jonathan Swift, Correspondence of Jonathan Swift, D. D., vol. 1, Letters 1690–1714, ed. David Woolley (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1999), 239; Joseph Addison and Richard Steele, The Tatler, ed. Donald F. Bond, 3 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), no. 4 (April 19, 1709); Addison and Steele, The Spectator, no. 5 (March 6, 1711) (see chap. 1, n. 29).Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    See Mita Choudhury, “The Italian Incursions and ‘English’ Opera,” in Interculturalism and Resistance in the London Theater, 1660–1800, 35–60 (see intro. , n. 8). William Hogarth’s very popular print “The Bad Taste of the Town” (also referred to as “Masquerades and Operas”) (February 1723/24) is a notable example of this contemporary critique of the taste for Italian operas. Ronald Paulson offers an extended reading of this work in his study of Hogarth (Hogarth, vol. 1, TheModern Moral Subject1697–1732 [New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1991], 74–90), interpreting it inGoogle Scholar
  91. terms of Addison’s privileging of an aesthetics of “common sense” in the Spectator and in terms of Hogarth’s own aesthetic preference for “nature” or “life” over “the opera’s rendition of form” (76). The nationalistic emphasis of Hogarth’s engraving is noted by Paulson but is more pungently expressed in Nikolaus Pevsner’s summary comment that in this work Hogarth “castigate[s] Raphael and Michelangelo together with Italian opera for the neglect of home-made English art, represented by the works of Shakespeare, Jonson, Dryden, Congreve, and Otway carted away on a wheelbarrow as waste-paper” (The Englishness of English Art [1956; repr. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, 1964], 26).Google Scholar
  92. Addison’s influence on Hogarth is clear enough, but one might also point to a more proximate antecedent in Leonard Welsted’s “A Prologue occasioned by the Revival of a Play of Shakespeare” (1721), which specifically evokes a scene of Shakespeare (and English drama more generally) being ousted from public favor by “alien toys,” such as French tumblers and Italian opera singers:Google Scholar
  93. To low provincial Drolls, in crowds, you run, By foreign modes and foreign nonsense won; To see French Tumblers three long hours you sit, And Criticks judge of capers in the Pit. What art shall teach us to refine your joys, And wean your sickly taste from alien toys? For this we toil, and in our cause engage Th’immortal Writers of an earlier age: Fond labour! antient sense must quit the field, And Shakespear to the soft Bercelli yield: Whence is this change in nature! one would swear That Eunuchs were not form’d to lead the Fair. (lines 39–52)Google Scholar
  94. Welsted’s equation of foreign arts with castrated masculinity (“Things that are not Men” [line 56]), in contrast to traditional English “True Masculinity” (line 54), strikes a characteristic note of this discourse of cultural nationalism.Google Scholar
  95. 91.
    Richard Steele, The Tender Husband, ed. Calhoun Winton (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1967), 78.Google Scholar
  96. 92.
    Cf. Steele’s comment in a letter of October 7, 1708 to J. Keally: “The taste for Plays is expired. We are all Operas, performed by eunuchs every way impotent to please” (Correspondence of Richard Steele, ed. Rae Blanchard [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1941], 25). This was a particularly common element in the critique of foreign arts (as inimical to English masculine virility), as we have already seen with Welsted’s “Prologue” of 1721. So, too, the author of To the FL_nble SirJB (1734), referring to “French Dancers and Harlequins,. Effeminate Eunuchs, and Sod[omitica]l Italians,” exclaims that English is “so debauch’d with Effeminacy and Italian airs. [that] we daily see our Male Children. dwindle almost into Women” (quoted in Kathleen Wilson, “The Good, the Bad, and the Impotent: Imperialism and the Politics of Identity in Georgian England,” in The Consumption of Culture, ed. Ann Bermingham and John Brewer [London: Routledge, 1995], 243). Similarly, the author of Satans Harvest Home (1749) associates the Italian opera’s “Corruption of the English stage” with other “corruptions” of aristocratic manners, such as the “Contagion” of men kissing each other and their degeneration into “enervated effeminate Animal[s]” given to “unnatural Vices” (quoted in Michael McKeon, “Historicizing Patriarchy:The Emergence of Gender Difference in England, 1660–1760,” Eighteenth-Century Studies 28 [1995]: 321, n. 68, 311).Google Scholar
  97. 93.
    On the logic of the mean in “neoclassical” literary culture see Edward Pechter, Drydens Classical Theory of Literature (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975) and Joshua Scodel, Excess and the Mean in Early Modern English Literature (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002).Google Scholar
  98. 94.
    The editors of The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, vol. 4, The Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), H. B. Nisbet and Claude Rawson, acknowledge the inadequacy of the traditional “classic to romantic” narrative but their response is to eschew categorizing labels altogether rather than to offer a counter-narrative (“The present volume has in general sought to avoid categorisations, whether of the traditional or revisionist varieties” [xv]—the reference being to Northrop Frye’s replacement of “preromanticism” with the notion of an “age of sensibility”). But as I argued at the start of this chapter, such attempts to bury well-established narratives under a mound of silence are bound to fail. If one wants to prevent the constant return of the dead, one needs to drive a stake through its heart by offering an account that could take its place as an explanatory narrative of literary historical change across the period in question.Google Scholar
  99. 95.
    Douglas Lane Patey, “The Institution of Criticism in the Eighteenth Century,” in The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, vol. 4, The Eighteenth Century, 22 (see previous note). In another essay in this volume, Patey does acknowledge that French “cultural nationalism” had already reached a kind of climax in the 1670s and 1680s (“Ancients and Moderns,” 36).Google Scholar
  100. 96.
    William Collins, “Oriental Eclogues,” in The Works of William Collins, ed. Richard Wendorf and Charles Ryskamp (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), 2–3 (italics reversed).Google Scholar
  101. 97.
    One might compare Collins’s remarks with Aphra Behn’s comment in her “epistle dedicatory” to Oronooko (1688): “If there be any thing that seems Romantick, I beseech your Lordship to consider, these Countries do, in all things, so far differ from ours, that they produce unconceivable Wonders; at least, they appear so to us, because New and Strange” (The Works of Aphra Behn, vol. 3, The Fair Jilt and Other Short Stories, ed. Janet Todd [Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1995], 56 [original in italics]).Google Scholar
  102. 98.
    Hugh Blair, “Critical Dissertation on the Poems of Ossian,” in The Poems of Ossian and Related Works, ed. Howard Gaskill (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1988), 345. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  103. 99.
    In his History of English Poetry (1781),Thomas Warton is able to quote with approval Hobbes’s dictum that, “In a good poem both judgment and fancy are required; but the fancy must be more eminent, because they please for the EXTRAVAGANCY, but ought not to displease by INDISCRETION” (quoted in Earl Wasserman, Elizabethan Poetry in the Eighteenth Century [Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1947], 231).Google Scholar
  104. 100.
    Richard Hurd, Letters on Chivalry and Romance, intro. Hoyt Trowbridge (Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 1963), 63. Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text.Google Scholar
  105. 101.
    Gerrard, The Patriot Opposition to Walpole, 121 (see n. 9). See, e. g. , such important works as Walter Jackson Bate’s From Classic to Romantic: Premises ofTaste in Eighteenth-Century England (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1946), Norman Maclean’s “From Action to Image: Theories of the Lyric in the Eighteenth Century,” in Critics and Criticism:Ancient and Modem, ed. R. S. Crane (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952), M. H. Abrams’s The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1953), and Rene Wellek’s A History of Modern Criticism 1750–1950, vol. 1, The Later Eighteenth Century (New Haven, CT:Yale University Press, 1955). But the narrative logic I am discussing is so pervasive as to be found almost anywhere.Google Scholar
  106. 102.
    Thus, e. g. , regarding Henry Mackenzie’s description of Robert Burns as a “Heaven-taught ploughman” in his famous review of the latter’s poems in 1786, Robert Crawford notes: “his discussion of natural literary genius is of a piece with the view of genius put forward by [Hugh] Blair and other eighteenth-century teachers of Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, and dates back at least to the seventeenth-century Reflexions sur la Poetique dAristote (1674) by Rene Rapin, who writes of a poet’s ‘elevation of Soul that depends not on Art or Study, and which is purely a Gift of Heaven, and must be sustain’d by a lively Sence andVivacity’ ” (“Robert Fergusson’s Robert Burns,” in Robert Burns and Cultural Authority, ed. Robert Crawford [1996; repr. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1997], 2). (One might, indeed, trace this view back to Bede’s description of Caedmon.) Likewise, regarding the twin principles of “historical” criticism—that in interpreting a work we must place it within the cultural context of its own age, and that in evaluating it we must attend to the literary conventions and expectations that prevailed when it was written—Hoyt Trowbridge remarks that neither of these ideas “was at all novel” in the hands of the Wartons and others in the late eighteenth century: “Wellek,Wasserman, and Wimsatt and Brooks [have shown] that similar statements were made by sixteenth-century Italian defenders ofAriosto, by Chapelain and Dryden in the seventeenth century, and by Hughes, Upton, and other commentators on Shakespeare, Spenser, and Ben Jonson in the eighteenth century. The same slogans were applied to Hebrew poetry by Lowth, to Homer by Blackwell and Wood, and to the Greeks and Romans generally by Gibbon, but the finest statement of these ideas, as well as their most impressive exemplification in practice, was probably the preface and notes of Dr. Johnson’s edition of Shakespeare (1765)” (Hurd, Letters on Chivalry and Romance, intro. Trowbridge, iv-v [see n. 100]).Google Scholar
  107. 103.
    See, e. g. , the important work of Edward Pechter on Dryden’s criticism (n. 93), and Emerson R. Marks’s studies of neoclassical criticism, Relativist andAbsolutist:The Early Neoclassical Debate in England (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1955) and The Poetics of Reason: English Neoclassical Criticism (New York: Random House, 1968).Google Scholar
  108. 104.
    With regard to this point, and the more general issue at stake in this section of the chapter, see Ralph Cohen, “Some Thoughts on the Problems of Literary Change 1750–1800,” Dispositio 4 (1979): 145–62; A. D. Harvey, “Neo-classicism and Romanticism in Historical Context,” in his Literature into History (NewYork: St. Martin’s Press, 1988), 125–70; Clifford Siskin, The Historicity of Romantic Discourse (NewYork: Oxford University Press, 1988); Robert J. Griffin, “The Eighteenth-Century Construction of Romanticism: Thomas Warton and the Pleasures of Melancholy,” ELH 59 (1992): 799–815; Griffin, Wordsworths Pope: A Study of Literary Historiography (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995); David Fairer, “Historical Criticism and the English Canon: A Spenserian Dispute of the 1750s,” Eighteenth-Century Life 24 (2000): 43–64; andTerry, “Classicists and Gothicists:The Division of the Estate,” in Poetry and the Making of the English Literary Past 1660–1781, 286–323 (see chap. 1, n. 18). As Griffin states in his 1992 essay, what we need to understand is “not how mirror became lamp, but how this particular episode of literary history came to be constructed in that way” (802).Google Scholar
  109. 105.
    John Keats, “Sleep and Poetry,” in The Oxford Authors: John Keats, ed. Eleanor Cook (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), line 181.Google Scholar
  110. 106.
    Wasserman, Elizabethan Poetry in the Eighteenth Century, 35 (see n. 99). Subsequent references to this work will be provided in the text. (More recently, Margaret Anne Doody’s The Daring Muse: Augustan Poetry Reconsidered [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985] implicitly develops certain continuities between Elizabethan and Augustan poetry by reexamining the characteristics of the latter poetic mode.)Google Scholar
  111. 107.
    R. S. Crane has sought to preserve some of this sense of things in his essays on the history of criticism in the eighteenth century. He refers to “a more or less common framework of characteristic fundamental terms and distinctions which critics throughout the period, for all their disagreements on points of doctrine or appreciation, found it natural to utilize in the statement of their questions and the justification of their answers” (“On Writing the History of Criticism in England 1650–1800,” in The Idea of the Humanities and Other Essays, 2 vols. [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967], 2:167). Crane’s account of “neoclassical” criticism is an important contribution to my own understanding of “critical pluralism,” but his larger narrative of a shift from this “neoclassical” criticism to “romantic” aesthetics reinstalls the traditional narrative of a linear shift from one set of critical concerns to another new one. We are left with the familiar narrative of a movement from classic to romantic, even though Crane has usefully reinterpreted what the basic characteristics of this “classic” critical mode were.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Alok Yadav 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alok Yadav

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations