English Romantic Poetry’s Clash of the Generations

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Michael J. Neth
{"title":"English Romantic Poetry’s Clash of the Generations","authors":"Michael J. Neth","doi":"10.1080/10848770.2023.2174287","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Jeffrey Cox’s new book takes as its guiding thesis the rejection of the widely-held view of Wordsworth (1770-1850) as a poet whose only substantial work was produced from 1798 until about 1808. This account was fathered by Wordsworth’s Victorian reviver Matthew Arnold in the Preface to his edition of Wordsworth’s poems (1879) and accepted tacitly or explicitly by generations of important critics since then. Cox adduces a recent example in Kenneth Johnston’s well-known 1998 The Hidden Wordsworth: Poet, Lover, Rebel, Spy, in which we read that “Wordsworth the Romantic poet ‘died’ when he read the recently completed Prelude to Coleridge in January 1807.” The problem with this notion is that Wordsworth―the longest-lived of the major Romantic versifiers―survived another forty-two years after 1808 and continued to write new poems until eight years before his death. And, though not the focus of Cox’s book, there is the added fact that during his last four decades Wordsworth constantly, one might almost say obsessively, returned to his earlier poetry, in many instances creating multiple revisions. Posterity has not been kind to most of these, for in later years Wordsworth was given to altering the strongest poems of his “golden prime,” as Arnold called it, by diluting their religious nonconformism in sometimes painfully discursive ways. Cox aims to examine in detail many of the original poems from the later, post-1808 volumes published by Wordsworth. He contextualizes them by arguing that they contain challenges to the poetry of the writers of the so-called Cockney school (Keats, Leigh Hunt, and the critic William Hazlitt). For brevity’s sake, he also subsumes Hunt’s aristocratic friends Shelley and Byron, as well as Shelley’s friend Thomas Love Peacock, under this pejorative label coined by Tory critics to diminish the poetry of Keats and Hunt because of its working-class origins. (The Whig and even radical politics of the young aristocrats made them equally reprehensible to the Tory literary establishment.) These writers of the Secondor Younger-Generation of British Romantics (Wordsworth and Coleridge and, latterly, Blake, comprise the principal First-Generation figures) had uniformly admired Wordsworth for the fervent pro-French Revolution stance of the poetry of his Great Decade but came to despise what they perceived as his abandonment of egalitarian political ideals in the later poetry, especially his long philosophical poem, The Excursion","PeriodicalId":55962,"journal":{"name":"European Legacy-Toward New Paradigms","volume":"28 1","pages":"527 - 532"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Legacy-Toward New Paradigms","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10848770.2023.2174287","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Jeffrey Cox’s new book takes as its guiding thesis the rejection of the widely-held view of Wordsworth (1770-1850) as a poet whose only substantial work was produced from 1798 until about 1808. This account was fathered by Wordsworth’s Victorian reviver Matthew Arnold in the Preface to his edition of Wordsworth’s poems (1879) and accepted tacitly or explicitly by generations of important critics since then. Cox adduces a recent example in Kenneth Johnston’s well-known 1998 The Hidden Wordsworth: Poet, Lover, Rebel, Spy, in which we read that “Wordsworth the Romantic poet ‘died’ when he read the recently completed Prelude to Coleridge in January 1807.” The problem with this notion is that Wordsworth―the longest-lived of the major Romantic versifiers―survived another forty-two years after 1808 and continued to write new poems until eight years before his death. And, though not the focus of Cox’s book, there is the added fact that during his last four decades Wordsworth constantly, one might almost say obsessively, returned to his earlier poetry, in many instances creating multiple revisions. Posterity has not been kind to most of these, for in later years Wordsworth was given to altering the strongest poems of his “golden prime,” as Arnold called it, by diluting their religious nonconformism in sometimes painfully discursive ways. Cox aims to examine in detail many of the original poems from the later, post-1808 volumes published by Wordsworth. He contextualizes them by arguing that they contain challenges to the poetry of the writers of the so-called Cockney school (Keats, Leigh Hunt, and the critic William Hazlitt). For brevity’s sake, he also subsumes Hunt’s aristocratic friends Shelley and Byron, as well as Shelley’s friend Thomas Love Peacock, under this pejorative label coined by Tory critics to diminish the poetry of Keats and Hunt because of its working-class origins. (The Whig and even radical politics of the young aristocrats made them equally reprehensible to the Tory literary establishment.) These writers of the Secondor Younger-Generation of British Romantics (Wordsworth and Coleridge and, latterly, Blake, comprise the principal First-Generation figures) had uniformly admired Wordsworth for the fervent pro-French Revolution stance of the poetry of his Great Decade but came to despise what they perceived as his abandonment of egalitarian political ideals in the later poetry, especially his long philosophical poem, The Excursion
英国浪漫主义诗歌的代际冲突
杰弗里·考克斯的新书以拒绝人们普遍认为的华兹华斯(1770-1850)是一位从1798年到1808年创作了唯一实质性作品的诗人的观点为指导。这一说法由华兹华斯的维多利亚时代复兴者马修·阿诺德在其版本的华兹华兹诗歌序言(1879年)中提出,并被此后几代重要评论家默许或明确接受。考克斯在肯尼斯·约翰斯顿1998年著名的《隐藏的华兹华斯:诗人、情人、反叛者、间谍》中引用了一个最近的例子,我们在信中读到“浪漫主义诗人华兹华斯在1807年1月读到最近完成的《柯勒律治序曲》时‘去世’了。”这个概念的问题是,华兹华思——主要浪漫主义诗人中寿命最长的一位——在1808年后又活了四十二年,并继续创作新诗歌,直到去世前八年。而且,尽管不是考克斯这本书的重点,但还有一个额外的事实,在他最后的四十年里,华兹华斯不断地,人们几乎可以说是痴迷地,回到了他早期的诗歌,在许多情况下,他进行了多次修订。后人对其中的大多数都不友善,因为在后来的几年里,华兹华斯习惯于改变他“黄金时期”最强烈的诗歌,正如阿诺德所说,他用有时痛苦的话语方式淡化了这些诗歌的宗教不合规性。考克斯的目标是详细研究华兹华斯出版的后来的1808年后的许多原创诗歌。他将它们置于语境中,认为它们包含对所谓考特尼派作家(济慈、利·亨特和评论家威廉·黑兹利特)诗歌的挑战。为了简洁起见,他还将亨特的贵族朋友雪莱和拜伦,以及雪莱的朋友托马斯·洛夫·皮科克归入保守党评论家创造的这个贬义标签下,因为济慈和亨特的诗歌起源于工人阶级,所以他对其进行了贬低。(辉格党甚至年轻贵族的激进政治使他们同样受到保守党文学界的谴责。)这些英国浪漫主义第二代年轻一代的作家(华兹华斯和柯勒律治,以及后来的布莱克,构成了第一代的主要人物)一致钦佩华兹华思在其伟大的十年诗歌中狂热的亲法国革命立场,但开始鄙视他们认为他在后来的诗歌中放弃了平等主义政治理想,尤其是他的哲学长诗《远足》
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
European Legacy-Toward New Paradigms
European Legacy-Toward New Paradigms HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
97
×
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