Sensitive Negotiations: Indigenous Diplomacy and British Romantic Poetry by Nikki Hessell (review)

IF 0.4 3区 文学 0 LITERATURE
Sarah Comyn
{"title":"Sensitive Negotiations: Indigenous Diplomacy and British Romantic Poetry by Nikki Hessell (review)","authors":"Sarah Comyn","doi":"10.3138/ecf.35.2.328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Framed by two personal and intergenerational diplomatic events surrounding ongoing treaty negotiations in Aotearoa New Zealand, Sensitive Negotiations asks readers to move beyond the aesthetic implications of poetic quotation to consider not only the political and legislative but also the ethical demands made by the repetition of lines of Romantic poetry across the settler colonies. Employing her own citational bookends—“It’s all diplomacy. It’s all a negotiation”—Nikki Hessell explicitly challenges Romantic scholars, particularly those working in settler colonies, to pay attention to the “living legacies of the poetry we study” and to ask ourselves, “At what price our aesthetics?” (xv, 221, 19, 59). Such a challenge requires us to study and teach the settler colonial history and its ongoing injustices that are entwined within Romanticism, while it also encourages us to move beyond the fetishization of artistic individuality and originality. Emphasizing the “rhetorical sovereignty” of Indigenous diplomatic agents from the nineteenth century onwards, Hessell situates the citation of Romantic poetry within the “petitioning and treating culture[s]” of Indigenous community (4).1 This situatedness of Romantic poetry within Indigenous-settler diplomatic history treats poetic citation as a “boundary marker” that troubles both the genre of diplomacy and Romantic authenticity (1), allowing Hessell to build on Manu Samriti Chander’s work in rethinking our critical understandings of imitation and derivativeness.2 Treating poetry as a diplomatic text, Hessell reframes, for instance, the “unoriginality” of Mississaugas Ojibwa writer George Copway’s Running Sketches (1851) to demonstrate instead how, if read within its “wider Indigenous diplomatic history,” Copway’s frequent quotations of Byron’s Childe Harold (1812–18) are illustrative of a purposively jarring collage meant to juxtapose and thus align bureaucratic reportage with poetic citation (107). Flipping the analytical lens, Hessell shows how Copway deploys Byron as a “useful diplomatic text,” thereby rescuing Running Sketches from Bernd C. Peyer’s critical censure of banality (107).3","PeriodicalId":43800,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth-Century Fiction","volume":"35 1","pages":"328 - 330"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eighteenth-Century Fiction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/ecf.35.2.328","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Framed by two personal and intergenerational diplomatic events surrounding ongoing treaty negotiations in Aotearoa New Zealand, Sensitive Negotiations asks readers to move beyond the aesthetic implications of poetic quotation to consider not only the political and legislative but also the ethical demands made by the repetition of lines of Romantic poetry across the settler colonies. Employing her own citational bookends—“It’s all diplomacy. It’s all a negotiation”—Nikki Hessell explicitly challenges Romantic scholars, particularly those working in settler colonies, to pay attention to the “living legacies of the poetry we study” and to ask ourselves, “At what price our aesthetics?” (xv, 221, 19, 59). Such a challenge requires us to study and teach the settler colonial history and its ongoing injustices that are entwined within Romanticism, while it also encourages us to move beyond the fetishization of artistic individuality and originality. Emphasizing the “rhetorical sovereignty” of Indigenous diplomatic agents from the nineteenth century onwards, Hessell situates the citation of Romantic poetry within the “petitioning and treating culture[s]” of Indigenous community (4).1 This situatedness of Romantic poetry within Indigenous-settler diplomatic history treats poetic citation as a “boundary marker” that troubles both the genre of diplomacy and Romantic authenticity (1), allowing Hessell to build on Manu Samriti Chander’s work in rethinking our critical understandings of imitation and derivativeness.2 Treating poetry as a diplomatic text, Hessell reframes, for instance, the “unoriginality” of Mississaugas Ojibwa writer George Copway’s Running Sketches (1851) to demonstrate instead how, if read within its “wider Indigenous diplomatic history,” Copway’s frequent quotations of Byron’s Childe Harold (1812–18) are illustrative of a purposively jarring collage meant to juxtapose and thus align bureaucratic reportage with poetic citation (107). Flipping the analytical lens, Hessell shows how Copway deploys Byron as a “useful diplomatic text,” thereby rescuing Running Sketches from Bernd C. Peyer’s critical censure of banality (107).3
《敏感谈判:本土外交与英国浪漫主义诗歌》,Nikki Hessell著(综述)
《敏感谈判》以围绕新西兰奥特亚正在进行的条约谈判的两个个人和代际外交事件为框架,要求读者超越诗歌引用的美学含义,不仅要考虑政治和立法,还要考虑移民殖民地浪漫主义诗歌的重复所提出的道德要求。妮基·赫塞尔(Nikki Hessell)用她自己引用的书尾——“这都是外交。这都是谈判”——明确挑战浪漫主义学者,尤其是那些在定居者殖民地工作的学者,要关注“我们研究的诗歌的活遗产”,并问自己,“我们的美学要付出什么代价?”(xv,221,19,59)。这样的挑战要求我们研究和教授与浪漫主义交织在一起的定居者殖民历史及其持续的不公正现象,同时也鼓励我们超越对艺术个性和独创性的崇拜。强调自十九世纪以来土著外交代表的“口头主权”,Hessell将浪漫主义诗歌的引用置于土著社区的“请愿和对待文化”中(4)。1浪漫主义诗歌在土著定居者外交史中的这种地位将诗歌引用视为“边界标记”,困扰着外交流派和浪漫主义的真实性(1),允许Hessell在Manu Samriti Chander的作品的基础上重新思考我们对模仿和衍生性的批判性理解。2将诗歌视为一种外交文本,Hessell重新定义了Mississaugas Ojibwa作家George Copway的《奔跑的素描》(1851)的“非独创性”,如果在其“更广泛的土著外交史”中阅读,科普韦对拜伦的Childe Harold(1812-18)的频繁引用说明了一种有目的的不和谐拼贴,旨在将官僚报告文学与诗歌引文并置,从而使其与诗歌引文相一致(107)。黑塞尔颠覆了分析的视角,展示了科普韦如何将拜伦部署为“有用的外交文本”,从而将《奔跑的素描》从伯恩德·C·佩耶对平庸的批评中拯救出来(107)。3
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信