{"title":"詹姆斯-菲茨杰姆斯-斯蒂芬文选:论小说与新闻》,克里斯托弗-里克斯编(评论)","authors":"Jeremy Tambling","doi":"10.1353/dqt.2024.a929051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen: On the Novel and Journalism</em> ed. by Christopher Ricks <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Jeremy Tambling (bio) </li> </ul> <em>Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen: On the Novel and Journalism</em>. Edited by Christopher Ricks, Oxford UP, 2023. Pp. xxxvi + 258. £160. ISBN 978-0-19-288283-7 (hb). <p>Eleven volumes are due to appear of the <em>Selected Writings</em> of James Fitzjames Stephen (1829–94), lawyer, colonial administrator in India and historian of criminal law, brother to Leslie Stephen and uncle to Virginia Woolf. He was the son of a British Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, Wilberforcian, and instrumental in the ending of slavery in the British colonies. Of those volumes already out, edited overall by Christopher Ricks, Jan-Melissa Schramm, and at first, by Frances Whistler, this one, \"On the Novel and Journalism,\" edited by Ricks, comprises much of his writing for the <em>Saturday Review</em>, which, starting in 1855, coincides with the period of <em>Little Dorrit</em> and <em>A Tale of Two Cities</em>, both of which Stephen notices. The volume, excellently edited by Ricks, with grateful cross-referencing of the critical work of Lisa Rodensky, is stimulating reading and essential for reading Dickens, for several reasons.</p> <p>First, Stephen gives an important context for the contemporary reception of Dickens, and of the novel. His hostility (it is hardly too strong to call it that) to the latter recalls an informal nineteenth-century debate where Jane Austen was on the opposite side from Carlyle and Arnold (the latter especially in relation to Charlotte Brontë), and where history, the classics, and poetry were regarded as higher. It may be hard to comprehend for those coming after Bakhtin's arguments about the novel, but the form has had to struggle against drama and poetry, and against \"harder\" forms of \"light\" reading (e.g. history), and especially in view of what irked Stephen: that the novel was inseparable from journalism, a word which, appearing in the 1830s, both defined some of Stephen's own writing, and disturbed him profoundly for its lesser commitment to truth than obtains in law, and for its function as merely affording amusement, like the novel. Any reader of Victorian culture ought to be familiar with Stephen, and his astringency in writing about issues which have only further mutated – as Ricks, who has a nice note on his dependence on Wikipedia, indicates in referring to \"social media\" (170, xix). Part of Stephen's anxiety is that his criticism will be seen to partake of mere journalism.</p> <p>Second, Stephen is very interesting on Dickens, whom he has obviously read intensively, as he has read other novels, including French literature. Thus, there is an excellent treatment of <em>Manon Lescaut</em>, an interesting piece on Balzac, whom he admires, with qualifications (see below) – George Eliot in comparison disliked <em>Père Goriot</em> – and Flaubert, whose <em>Madame Bovary</em>, \"a specimen of 'realism' in fiction,\" he hates (100). This width of reading is itself interesting. There is discussion of Thackeray, whom he likes (as did Eliot), <strong>[End Page 280]</strong> and liking of Austen, and reverence for Scott (the patrician Tory who is the antithesis of Dickens, for Stephen), plus mention of Trollope, but none of Eliot. The writers in his sights are Charles Reade, for <em>It Is Never Too Late to Mend</em> and its treatment of conditions in Birmingham prison, and Dickens, as both literally a journalist and novelist. Stephen draws blood several times with Dickens, but before discussing that, and his unfairness – for example, he is not good in summing up the plot of <em>A Tale of Two Cities</em> (200) in a review which takes a swipe at Dickens's private life and his reasons for beginning <em>All the Year Round</em> and dropping <em>Household Words</em> (199) – I will discuss his general critical position.</p> <p>Stephen will always be important for his status as a legal mind and his contribution to the discussion of law and its relation to literature. He demands evidence – a topic of interest to Wilkie Collins (unmentioned) in <em>The Woman in White</em> and <em>The Moonstone</em>, and to Alexander Welsh's critical writing – and wants the novel to be informed by that. He has little time for the \"sensation\" novel or crime fiction, or...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":41747,"journal":{"name":"DICKENS QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen: On the Novel and Journalism ed. by Christopher Ricks (review)\",\"authors\":\"Jeremy Tambling\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/dqt.2024.a929051\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen: On the Novel and Journalism</em> ed. by Christopher Ricks <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Jeremy Tambling (bio) </li> </ul> <em>Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen: On the Novel and Journalism</em>. Edited by Christopher Ricks, Oxford UP, 2023. Pp. xxxvi + 258. £160. ISBN 978-0-19-288283-7 (hb). <p>Eleven volumes are due to appear of the <em>Selected Writings</em> of James Fitzjames Stephen (1829–94), lawyer, colonial administrator in India and historian of criminal law, brother to Leslie Stephen and uncle to Virginia Woolf. He was the son of a British Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, Wilberforcian, and instrumental in the ending of slavery in the British colonies. Of those volumes already out, edited overall by Christopher Ricks, Jan-Melissa Schramm, and at first, by Frances Whistler, this one, \\\"On the Novel and Journalism,\\\" edited by Ricks, comprises much of his writing for the <em>Saturday Review</em>, which, starting in 1855, coincides with the period of <em>Little Dorrit</em> and <em>A Tale of Two Cities</em>, both of which Stephen notices. The volume, excellently edited by Ricks, with grateful cross-referencing of the critical work of Lisa Rodensky, is stimulating reading and essential for reading Dickens, for several reasons.</p> <p>First, Stephen gives an important context for the contemporary reception of Dickens, and of the novel. His hostility (it is hardly too strong to call it that) to the latter recalls an informal nineteenth-century debate where Jane Austen was on the opposite side from Carlyle and Arnold (the latter especially in relation to Charlotte Brontë), and where history, the classics, and poetry were regarded as higher. It may be hard to comprehend for those coming after Bakhtin's arguments about the novel, but the form has had to struggle against drama and poetry, and against \\\"harder\\\" forms of \\\"light\\\" reading (e.g. history), and especially in view of what irked Stephen: that the novel was inseparable from journalism, a word which, appearing in the 1830s, both defined some of Stephen's own writing, and disturbed him profoundly for its lesser commitment to truth than obtains in law, and for its function as merely affording amusement, like the novel. Any reader of Victorian culture ought to be familiar with Stephen, and his astringency in writing about issues which have only further mutated – as Ricks, who has a nice note on his dependence on Wikipedia, indicates in referring to \\\"social media\\\" (170, xix). Part of Stephen's anxiety is that his criticism will be seen to partake of mere journalism.</p> <p>Second, Stephen is very interesting on Dickens, whom he has obviously read intensively, as he has read other novels, including French literature. Thus, there is an excellent treatment of <em>Manon Lescaut</em>, an interesting piece on Balzac, whom he admires, with qualifications (see below) – George Eliot in comparison disliked <em>Père Goriot</em> – and Flaubert, whose <em>Madame Bovary</em>, \\\"a specimen of 'realism' in fiction,\\\" he hates (100). This width of reading is itself interesting. There is discussion of Thackeray, whom he likes (as did Eliot), <strong>[End Page 280]</strong> and liking of Austen, and reverence for Scott (the patrician Tory who is the antithesis of Dickens, for Stephen), plus mention of Trollope, but none of Eliot. The writers in his sights are Charles Reade, for <em>It Is Never Too Late to Mend</em> and its treatment of conditions in Birmingham prison, and Dickens, as both literally a journalist and novelist. Stephen draws blood several times with Dickens, but before discussing that, and his unfairness – for example, he is not good in summing up the plot of <em>A Tale of Two Cities</em> (200) in a review which takes a swipe at Dickens's private life and his reasons for beginning <em>All the Year Round</em> and dropping <em>Household Words</em> (199) – I will discuss his general critical position.</p> <p>Stephen will always be important for his status as a legal mind and his contribution to the discussion of law and its relation to literature. He demands evidence – a topic of interest to Wilkie Collins (unmentioned) in <em>The Woman in White</em> and <em>The Moonstone</em>, and to Alexander Welsh's critical writing – and wants the novel to be informed by that. He has little time for the \\\"sensation\\\" novel or crime fiction, or...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":41747,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DICKENS QUARTERLY\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DICKENS QUARTERLY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/dqt.2024.a929051\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE, BRITISH ISLES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DICKENS QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/dqt.2024.a929051","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, BRITISH ISLES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要:评论者 詹姆斯-菲茨杰姆斯-斯蒂芬文选:论小说与新闻》,克里斯托弗-里克斯编,牛津大学出版社,2023 年。克里斯托弗-里克斯编,牛津大学出版社,2023 年。第 xxxvi + 258 页。£160.ISBN 978-0-19-288283-7 (hb)。詹姆斯-菲茨杰姆斯-斯蒂芬(1829-94 年)是印度律师、殖民地行政长官和刑法历史学家,莱斯利-斯蒂芬的兄弟,弗吉尼亚-伍尔夫的叔叔。他是英国殖民地事务次官威尔伯福奇的儿子,在英国殖民地结束奴隶制的过程中发挥了重要作用。在已经出版的由克里斯托弗-里克斯、扬-梅丽莎-施拉姆和弗朗西斯-惠斯勒主编的各卷中,这本由里克斯主编的《论小说与新闻业》收录了他为《星期六评论》撰写的大部分文章,从1855年开始,正好是斯蒂芬所关注的《小杜丽》和《双城记》的写作时期。这本书由里克斯出色地编辑,并与丽莎-罗登斯基的评论著作相互参照,读来令人振奋,是阅读狄更斯的必读书,原因有以下几点。首先,斯蒂芬为当代人对狄更斯和这部小说的接受提供了重要背景。他对狄更斯小说的敌意(这样称呼也不为过)让人想起十九世纪的一场非正式辩论,在这场辩论中,简-奥斯汀与卡莱尔和阿诺德(尤其是后者与夏洛特-勃朗特的关系)站在对立面,而历史、古典文学和诗歌则被视为更高的领域。巴赫金关于小说的论点之后的人可能很难理解,但小说这种形式不得不与戏剧和诗歌,以及 "更难 "的 "轻松 "阅读形式(如历史)作斗争。这个词出现在十九世纪三十年代,既定义了斯蒂芬自己的一些写作,也让他深感不安,因为它对真理的承诺不如法律,而且它的功能与小说一样,只是提供娱乐。任何研究维多利亚时期文化的读者都应该熟悉斯蒂芬,熟悉他在写作中对一些问题的敏锐反应,而这些问题现在已经发生了进一步的变化--正如里克斯在提到 "社交媒体"(170,xix)时所指出的,他对维基百科的依赖性有一个很好的说明。斯蒂芬的部分焦虑在于,他的批评会被视为纯粹的新闻报道。其次,斯蒂芬对狄更斯的研究非常有趣,他显然精读过狄更斯的作品,因为他也读过其他小说,包括法国文学作品。因此,他对《曼侬-莱斯考特》(Manon Lescaut)有精彩的论述,对巴尔扎克(Balzac)也有有趣的论述,他欣赏巴尔扎克,但有条件限制(见下文)--相比之下,乔治-艾略特(George Eliot)不喜欢《戈里奥特伯爵》--还有福楼拜(Flaubert),他讨厌福楼拜的《包法利夫人》(Madame Bovary),"这是小说中'现实主义'的标本"(100)。这种阅读宽度本身就很有趣。有关于萨克雷的讨论,他喜欢萨克雷(艾略特也喜欢萨克雷),[第280页完]也喜欢奥斯汀,崇敬斯科特(斯蒂芬眼中与狄更斯截然相反的贵族保守党人),还提到了特罗洛普,但没有提到艾略特。他关注的作家有查尔斯-里德(Charles Reade)和狄更斯(Dickens),前者是因为《亡羊补牢为时未晚》(It Is Never Too Late to Mend)一书及其对伯明翰监狱状况的描述,后者既是记者又是小说家。斯蒂芬曾多次与狄更斯交恶,但在讨论这一点以及他的不公正之处(例如,他在一篇评论中对狄更斯的私生活以及他开始写《一年四季》并放弃《家常话》(199)的原因进行了抨击)之前,我想先讨论一下他的总体批评立场。斯蒂芬因其法律思想家的地位以及他对法律及其与文学关系的讨论所做的贡献而永远重要。他要求证据--这是威尔基-柯林斯(在《白衣女子》和《月光石》中未提及)以及亚历山大-威尔士的批评写作感兴趣的话题--并希望小说能从中得到启发。他对 "煽情 "小说、犯罪小说或......
Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen: On the Novel and Journalism ed. by Christopher Ricks (review)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:
Reviewed by:
Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen: On the Novel and Journalism ed. by Christopher Ricks
Jeremy Tambling (bio)
Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen: On the Novel and Journalism. Edited by Christopher Ricks, Oxford UP, 2023. Pp. xxxvi + 258. £160. ISBN 978-0-19-288283-7 (hb).
Eleven volumes are due to appear of the Selected Writings of James Fitzjames Stephen (1829–94), lawyer, colonial administrator in India and historian of criminal law, brother to Leslie Stephen and uncle to Virginia Woolf. He was the son of a British Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, Wilberforcian, and instrumental in the ending of slavery in the British colonies. Of those volumes already out, edited overall by Christopher Ricks, Jan-Melissa Schramm, and at first, by Frances Whistler, this one, "On the Novel and Journalism," edited by Ricks, comprises much of his writing for the Saturday Review, which, starting in 1855, coincides with the period of Little Dorrit and A Tale of Two Cities, both of which Stephen notices. The volume, excellently edited by Ricks, with grateful cross-referencing of the critical work of Lisa Rodensky, is stimulating reading and essential for reading Dickens, for several reasons.
First, Stephen gives an important context for the contemporary reception of Dickens, and of the novel. His hostility (it is hardly too strong to call it that) to the latter recalls an informal nineteenth-century debate where Jane Austen was on the opposite side from Carlyle and Arnold (the latter especially in relation to Charlotte Brontë), and where history, the classics, and poetry were regarded as higher. It may be hard to comprehend for those coming after Bakhtin's arguments about the novel, but the form has had to struggle against drama and poetry, and against "harder" forms of "light" reading (e.g. history), and especially in view of what irked Stephen: that the novel was inseparable from journalism, a word which, appearing in the 1830s, both defined some of Stephen's own writing, and disturbed him profoundly for its lesser commitment to truth than obtains in law, and for its function as merely affording amusement, like the novel. Any reader of Victorian culture ought to be familiar with Stephen, and his astringency in writing about issues which have only further mutated – as Ricks, who has a nice note on his dependence on Wikipedia, indicates in referring to "social media" (170, xix). Part of Stephen's anxiety is that his criticism will be seen to partake of mere journalism.
Second, Stephen is very interesting on Dickens, whom he has obviously read intensively, as he has read other novels, including French literature. Thus, there is an excellent treatment of Manon Lescaut, an interesting piece on Balzac, whom he admires, with qualifications (see below) – George Eliot in comparison disliked Père Goriot – and Flaubert, whose Madame Bovary, "a specimen of 'realism' in fiction," he hates (100). This width of reading is itself interesting. There is discussion of Thackeray, whom he likes (as did Eliot), [End Page 280] and liking of Austen, and reverence for Scott (the patrician Tory who is the antithesis of Dickens, for Stephen), plus mention of Trollope, but none of Eliot. The writers in his sights are Charles Reade, for It Is Never Too Late to Mend and its treatment of conditions in Birmingham prison, and Dickens, as both literally a journalist and novelist. Stephen draws blood several times with Dickens, but before discussing that, and his unfairness – for example, he is not good in summing up the plot of A Tale of Two Cities (200) in a review which takes a swipe at Dickens's private life and his reasons for beginning All the Year Round and dropping Household Words (199) – I will discuss his general critical position.
Stephen will always be important for his status as a legal mind and his contribution to the discussion of law and its relation to literature. He demands evidence – a topic of interest to Wilkie Collins (unmentioned) in The Woman in White and The Moonstone, and to Alexander Welsh's critical writing – and wants the novel to be informed by that. He has little time for the "sensation" novel or crime fiction, or...