“But Ah”

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Spenser Studies Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1086/717210
Colleen Rosenfeld’s response to Rachel Eisendrath’
{"title":"“But Ah”","authors":"Colleen Rosenfeld’s response to Rachel Eisendrath’","doi":"10.1086/717210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I n English Literature of the Sixteenth Century Excluding Drama (1954), C. S. Lewis makes a surprising claim about the final line of Philip Sidney’s Sonnet 71: “But ah, desire still cries, ‘Give me some food.’” Lewis writes that Sidney’s skill as a poet is evidenced not by the artistry of the line that he wrote, but by the artistry of any number of lines that he did not write. “In almost any other poet,” Lewis claims, “the first thirteen lines would have the air of being a mere ‘build up’ for the sake of the last. But Sidney’s sonnet might have ended quite differently and still been equally, though diversely, admirable.” Those first thirteen lines, Lewis insists, have a value that is neither actualized nor diminished by the pivot of “But ah.” Lewis invites us to imagine that Sonnet 71 might have ended differently. What else might desire have said? Or who else might have spoken in the final lines that could have been but were not written, lines that would have “still been equally, though diversely, admirable”? The poem offers little evidence with which to elaborate this imaginative exercise. The preceding lines of the poem appear to shut the whole thing down. Syntactically unnecessary to the sentence which comes before, the “But” that opens Sidney’s final line comes out of nowhere—as if, if not for the conventional form of the sonnet, Astrophil might have kept a lid on the “cries” of “desire.” But even as Lewis insists on the integrity of those first thirteen lines, the persistent “cries” of “desire” resurface still in Lewis’s prose. The sentence with which Lewis declares the independent value of those first thirteen lines, as well as the interchangeability of the final line with any number of other, unwritten final lines, begins with “But” and attributes to the poem’s aesthetic value the same temporality that characterizes the “cries” of","PeriodicalId":39606,"journal":{"name":"Spenser Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spenser Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/717210","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I n English Literature of the Sixteenth Century Excluding Drama (1954), C. S. Lewis makes a surprising claim about the final line of Philip Sidney’s Sonnet 71: “But ah, desire still cries, ‘Give me some food.’” Lewis writes that Sidney’s skill as a poet is evidenced not by the artistry of the line that he wrote, but by the artistry of any number of lines that he did not write. “In almost any other poet,” Lewis claims, “the first thirteen lines would have the air of being a mere ‘build up’ for the sake of the last. But Sidney’s sonnet might have ended quite differently and still been equally, though diversely, admirable.” Those first thirteen lines, Lewis insists, have a value that is neither actualized nor diminished by the pivot of “But ah.” Lewis invites us to imagine that Sonnet 71 might have ended differently. What else might desire have said? Or who else might have spoken in the final lines that could have been but were not written, lines that would have “still been equally, though diversely, admirable”? The poem offers little evidence with which to elaborate this imaginative exercise. The preceding lines of the poem appear to shut the whole thing down. Syntactically unnecessary to the sentence which comes before, the “But” that opens Sidney’s final line comes out of nowhere—as if, if not for the conventional form of the sonnet, Astrophil might have kept a lid on the “cries” of “desire.” But even as Lewis insists on the integrity of those first thirteen lines, the persistent “cries” of “desire” resurface still in Lewis’s prose. The sentence with which Lewis declares the independent value of those first thirteen lines, as well as the interchangeability of the final line with any number of other, unwritten final lines, begins with “But” and attributes to the poem’s aesthetic value the same temporality that characterizes the “cries” of
“但啊。”
在《16世纪英国文学(不包括戏剧)》(1954)中,c·s·刘易斯对菲利普·西德尼十四行诗第71首的最后一句做出了令人惊讶的断言:“但是啊,欲望仍然在呼喊,‘给我一些食物。’”刘易斯写道,西德尼作为诗人的技巧并不是由他所写的诗句的艺术性来证明的,而是由他没有写的任何诗句的艺术性来证明的。“在几乎任何其他诗人的作品中,”刘易斯说,“前十三行诗都有一种为了最后一行而‘添补’的感觉。”但西德尼的十四行诗可能会以完全不同的方式结束,尽管不同,但仍然同样令人钦佩。”刘易斯坚持认为,前13句话的价值既不会因为“但是啊”而被实现,也不会因为“但是啊”而被削弱。刘易斯让我们想象十四行诗第71首可能会有不同的结局。他还会说些什么呢?或者,还有谁会在最后几句本来可以写下来,但没有写下来的话语中说,那些“尽管不同,但仍然同样令人钦佩”的话?这首诗几乎没有提供证据来详细说明这种富有想象力的练习。这首诗的前几行似乎结束了整件事。从句法上讲,西德尼最后一句开头的“但是”对前面的句子来说是不必要的,这句“但是”不知从哪里冒出来的——仿佛,如果不是因为十四行诗的传统形式,阿斯特菲尔可能会掩盖住“欲望”的“呼喊”。但是,即使刘易斯坚持前十三行文字的完整性,“欲望”的持续“呐喊”仍然在刘易斯的散文中重现。刘易斯用这句话宣布了前十三行诗的独立价值,以及最后一行与其他任何未写的最后几行诗的可互换性,这句话以“但是”开头,并赋予这首诗的美学价值与“呐喊”的短暂性相同
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
Spenser Studies
Spenser Studies Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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