DOCSLIB.ORG

Translation Or Transformation? the Relations of Literature and Science

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Translation Or Transformation? the Relations of Literature and Science Translation or Transformation? The Relations of Literature and Science Gillian Beer Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 44, No. 1. (Jan., 1990), pp. 81-99. Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0035-9149%28199001%2944%3A1%3C81%3ATOTTRO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-E Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London is currently published by The Royal Society. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/rsl.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. http://www.jstor.org Wed Jan 30 06:28:38 2008 Notes Rec. R. Soc. Lond. 44,81-99 (1990) TRANSLATION OR TRANSFORMATION? THE RELATIONS OF LITERATURE AND SCIENCE* Girton College, Cambridge, CB3 OJG The theme announced for this lecture, 'the presentation of science through literature' might suggest a one-way traffic, as though literature acted as a mediator for a topic (science) that precedes it and that remains intact after its re-presenta- tion. That is not how I understand the relations between the two. I shall emphasize interchange rather than origins and transformation rather than translation. Scien- tific and literary discourses overlap, but unstably. Victorian writers, scientific and literary, held to the ideal of the 'mother-tongue'; in our own time the variety of professional and personal dialects is emphasised instead. Yet the expectation lingers that it should be possible to translate stably from one to another. This expectation may prove unrealistic. More is to be gained from analysing the transformations that occur when ideas change creative context and encounter fresh readers. The fleeting and discontinu- ous may be as significant in our reading as the secure locking of equivalent meanings. Questions can change their import when posed within different genres. Recognizing scientific reference within works of literature may not be as straight- forward a business as it seems. To put it at its most direct: how do we recognize science once it is in literature? Can such reference to scientific material be drained again of its relations within the literary work and returned to autonomy? Neither literature nor science is an entity and what constitutes literature or science is a matter for agreement in a particular historical period or place. The activities of scientists, and their social and institutional bases, have changed enormously over the past 100years. More, on the face of it, than those of the writer of literature. But the English language now bears a freight of meaning from very diverse national groups across the world. That is an important change. The present internationalism of both science and literature makes for curious crossplays. I shall examine some examples later in this argument. The movement towards mathema- * 'Ibis is the text of the first lecture on literature and science, sponsored by the Royal Society of Literature, the British Academy and the Royal Society, and given at the Royal Society on 20 April 1989. 82 Gillian Beer ticization has enhanced hopes of a stable community of meaning for scientists at work; the spread of English makes for often delusive accords between different communities of meaning. In the first part of the lecture I concentrate on some sought-for correspondences between scientific and literary language; in the second part I examine some recent examples of the transformation of scientific materials in literary works. Such analysis reminds us forthwith of the apparent ease with which, in language, we inhabit multiple, often contradictory, epistemologies at the same time, all the time. AUTHORITATIVELANGUAGES In the mid and late 19th century the humanities were still in the ascendant in school and university studies, whereas now the appeal to authority is usually in the direction of science. In that way our present situation differs also from that described 30 years ago by C.P. Snow in The two cultures (1). The language available alike to 19th century creative writers and scientists had been forged out of past literature, the Bible, philosophy, natural theology, the demotic of the streets or the clubs. Scientists as various as James Clerk Maxwell and Charles Lyell habitually seamed their sentences with literary allusion and incorporated literature into the argumentative structures of their work (as Lyell does Ovid and Clerk Maxwell Tennyson.) The first number of the scientificjournal Nature (4 November 1869) opened with a set of aphorisms culled from Goethe and selected by Huxley. Huxley describes the journal's aim as 'to mirror the progress of that fashioning by Nature of a picture of herself, in the mind of man, which we call the progress of Science' (2). 'Progress', 'fashioning', 'picture', 'mirroring', 'Nature herself': the securing of enquiry by means of a stable accord with a sacrilized external world is reinforced by the journal's epigraph from Wordsworth: To the solid ground Of nature trusts the Mind that builds for aye. 'Ground' in this scientific context condenses the senses 'earth' and 'argument'. That epigraph, with its accompanying image, continues as the bannerhead of the journal, past Maxwell, past Einstein, for almost 100 years. In 1957 it was shorn of its image but it was retained on each volume title page until 1963, when its anachronism must at last have seemed greater than its annealing powers. To the Victorians, whether preoccupied with science or literature or politics - and however conscious they might be of the fickleness of signification- the concept of the mother-tongue was crucial. In the case of English the 'mother-tongue' was idealized as the English of past literature above all. Scientific writers in the Victorian period were immersed in the general language of the tribe, yet needed to formulate their own stable professional dialects with which to communicate with Translation or Transformation? each other. By that means they would be able to change the level of description so as to engage with new theoretical and technical questions. They would also limit the range of possible interpretation, and, it was their hope, misinterpretation. But they were reluctant to allow writing on scientific issues to remain on the linguistic periphery. They thus claimed congruity with poetry, perceived as the authoritative utterance within current language. Victorian middle and upper class language was formed by what we might call a parental diad: not only the mother-tongue but the father-tongue shaped the dominant educational ideology. Classical languages played a central role in the education system, a system reserved almost entirely for boys until the late 19th century and taught to them by men. The practice of Victorian scientists of citing classical writing in their work serves several functions: some social, some illustra- tive, some argumentative. Such allusion effortlessly claimed gender and class community with a selected band of readers; it implied a benign continuity for scientific enquiries with the imaginative past of human society; it could figure the tension between objectivity and affect. In our own time writers on discourse have emphasised the heterogeneity of dialects within the apparently common tongue, the way in which we never can quite securely translate from one professional or social group to another the intensity, or vacuity, of terms. Terms may be precise and full in one domain, meagre in an~ther~transformedin yet another: 'matter' would be a simple example, or 'select'. Words are also subject to ontological decay: what starts precise and bounded may become neutralized, or soggy. When George Eliot's novel Daniel Deronda first appeared, both R.H. Hutton and George Saintsbury objected in their reviews to the description of the heroine's 'dynamic glance' as being pedantic and over-scien- tific (3). Hardly the objection that such a clichkd phrase would raise now. Words are impressed with the shared assumptions, with the things not said of each group, just as much as they are with their shared assertions. But none of us is a member of one social and linguistic group only. We live, therefore, in a variety of conflicted epistemologies. Scientific workers strive to contain their procedures within a single epistemological frame, but cannot exempt them from further and other construals. We experience every day, and we condense that experience in speaking and listening, as co-workers, shoppers, friends, researchers, women or men, perhaps parents, lovers, certainly political activists or quietists, members willy-nilly of local, national and global communities at a particular moment in historical time. Some terms transfer across all these zones, particularly those terms that have to do with kinship, commerce, measurement, conflict. They shift scale and energy as they go. Much literature of the late 20th century is proudly parodic, presenting puns as the profoundest rather than the lowest form of wit.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The King Edward Vii Professorship of English Literature
    THE KING EDWARD VII PROFESSORSHIP OF ENGLISH LITERATURE FACULTY OF ENGLISH 1 The Professorship Background The King Edward VII Professorship has fallen vacant as a result of the retirement of Professor David Trotter, who succeeded Gillian Beer and previous holders, Marilyn Butler and Frank Kermode. The Faculty has three other established Professorships in the Faculty: the Professorship of English (currently held by Professor Stephen Connor), the Professorship of English 2000 (currently held by Professor John Kerrigan) and the Professorship of Medieval and Renaissance Literature (currently held by Professor Nicolette Zeeman). The Professorship is a Crown appointment made on the recommendation of an Advisory Committee convened by the University. Selection Criteria Candidates will be considered for the Professorship on the basis of the following selection criteria, which they should address in their application. An outstanding research record of international stature in English Literature. The vision, leadership experience and enthusiasm to build on current strengths in maintaining and developing a leading research presence, and an established record in attracting research grant support to further this development. The ability to further the academic planning and strategic development of English Literature in the University and, where appropriate, to facilitate its development within the UK. The ability to manage and interact effectively with staff and students at all levels. An enthusiastic commitment to the recruitment, training and
    [Show full text]
  • Science and Literature: Reflections on Interdisciplinarity and Modes of Knowledge Sowon S Park University of Oxford, Faculty of English, UK [email protected]
    Science and Literature: Reflections on Interdisciplinarity and Modes of Knowledge Sowon S Park University of Oxford, Faculty of English, UK [email protected] The joint field of ‘science and literature’ has been gaining increasing prominence in the last two decades, charting new grounds beyond the divided landscape of the ‘two cultures’. Of our increasingly border-crossing research culture, no field provides a better example than cognitive literary criticism. Though still relatively young, this area has already produced a body of work that is extremely wide-ranging in both scale and explanatory scope, illustrating through its very organization the possibilities of multidisciplinary enquiry. This paper will examine interdisciplinarity with reference to evolutionary literary criticism, a sub-field within cognitive literary criticism; a scrutiny of the political and ideological implications that follow from basing an account of literature on adaptive value will be given followed by a discussion of the historical lineaments of the science/literature debate. Keywords: science / culture / literature / cognitive literary criticism / evolutionary criticism / interdisciplinarity UDK 82.0:001.3 I The joint field of ‘science and literature’ has been gaining increasing prominence in the last two decades or so, charting new ground beyond the divided landscape of the ‘two cultures’. The MLN signaled this spirit of constructive interdisciplinary exchange in their special issue entitled Literature and the History of the Sciences (2003), which announced
    [Show full text]
  • Front Matter
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-76711-8 - Romantic Tragedies: The Dark Employments of Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Shelley Reeve Parker Frontmatter More information ROMANTIC TRAGEDIES Troubled politically and personally, Wordsworth and Coleridge turned in 1797 to the London stage. Their respective tragedies, The Borderers and Osorio, were set in medieval Britain and early modern Spain to avoid the Lord Chamberlain’s censorship. Drury Lane rejected both, but fifteen years later, Coleridge’s revision, Remorse, had spectacular success there, inspiring Shelley’s 1819 Roman tra- gedy, The Cenci, aimed for Covent Garden. Reeve Parker makes a striking case for the power of these intertwined works, written against British hostility to French republican liberties and Regency repression of home-grown agitation. Covertly, Remorse and The Cenci also turn against Wordsworth. Stressing the significance of subtly repeated imagery, as well as resonances with Virgil, Shakespeare, Racine, Jean-Franc¸ois Ducis, and Schiller, Parker’s close readings – boldly imaginative and decidedly untoward – argue that at the heart of these tragedies lie powerful dramatic uncertainties driven by unstable passions, what he calls (adapting Coleridge’s phrase for sorcery) “dark employments.” reeve parker is Professor of English Emeritus at Cornell University, and is also a life member of Clare Hall, University of Cambridge. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-76711-8 - Romantic Tragedies: The Dark Employments
    [Show full text]
  • MSA Programme with ROOMS ALLOCATED, July 18
    Thursday 8.00 – 5.00 MSA Executive Board Meeting 213 AND 214 FULTON 12.30 – 2.30 Pre-Conference Workshops W1 - DIGITAL APPROACHES TO VERSIONING AND VISUALISING MODERNISM G23 JUBILEE Stephen Ross (University of Victoria) J. Matthew Huculak (University of Victoria) W2 - MODERNISM FOR THE MASSES G22 JUBILEE Helen Sword (University of Auckland) W3 - WYNDHAM LEWIS: TOWARDS A COLLECTED, COMPLETE EDITION (PRIVATE MEETING) 103 FULTON Paul Edwards (University of East Anglia) W4 - WHAT DO JOURNALS WANT? (1.00 START) 104 FULTON Susan Stanford Friedman, University of Wisconsin-Madison (editor, Contemporary Women’s Writing) Ann Ardis, University of Delaware (editor of Modernism/Modernity) Peter Boxall, University of Sussex (editor, Textual Practice) Deborah Longworth, University of Birmingham (editor and founder, Modernist Cultures) Douglas Mao, Johns Hopkins University (former senior editor, English Literary History) W5 - WHAT DO PRESSES WANT (FROM A FIRST BOOK)? (1.00 START) G155 JUBILEE Rebecca L. Walkowitz, Rutgers University (co-editor and co-founder, Literature Now book series, Columbia University Press) Jacqueline Baker, Oxford University Press (U.K.), Commissioning Editor for Literature Rebecca Beasley, The Queens College, Oxford University (co-editor, Edinburgh Studies in Modernist Culture, Edinburgh University Press) Kevin J. H. Dettmar, Pomona College (co-editor and co-founder, Modernist Literature and Culture book series, Oxford University Press [US]) David James, Queen Mary, University of London (co-editor and co-founder, Literature Now
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Studies in the Nineteenth Century
    Recent Studies in the Nineteenth Century Jon Mee SEL Studies in English Literature 1500-1900, Volume 53, Number 4, Autumn 2013, pp. 913-940 (Article) Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press DOI: 10.1353/sel.2013.0040 For additional information about this article http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/sel/summary/v053/53.4.mee.html Access provided by Harvard University (18 Jul 2014 00:24 GMT) JonSEL 53,Mee 4 (Autumn 2013): 913–960 913913 ISSN 0039-3657 © 2013 Rice University Recent Studies in the Nineteenth Century JON MEE This essay does not offer anything that could purport to be an overview of recent studies in the nineteenth century. Readers who wish to deduce trends may count for themselves whatever theme or issue they wish to quantify from the list of “works received” that follows. Of course, there will anyway always be a degree of randomness to the books sent to the review editors of any jour- nal, but I am going to indulge my own professional prejudice toward what is called—unsatisfactorily, and perhaps increasingly unsatisfactorily—“the Romantic period,” or worse, “Romanticism.” As readers might expect from someone who has just taken up a chair in eighteenth-century studies, my nineteenth century may have quite a few decades of the eighteenth in it, and not so many of the later decades of the Victorian. Even so, I begin by discuss- ing a book devoted, if not entirely, to the Victorian period, and so default on my own default in order to bring out what seem, to me at least, some key issues for current research in the nine- teenth century.
    [Show full text]
  • Gillian Beer's Landmark Book Demonstrates How Darwin
    Cambridge University Press 0521783925 - Darwin’s Plots: Evolutionary Narrative in Darwin, George Eliot and Nineteenth-Century Fiction, Second Edition Gillian Beer Frontmatter More information Gillian Beer’s landmark book demonstrates how Darwin overturned fundamental cultural assumptions by revising the stories he inher- ited, how George Eliot, Thomas Hardy and other writers pursued and resisted the contradictory implications of his narratives, and how the stories he produced about natural selection and the strug- gle for life now underpin our culture. This second edition of Darwin’s Plots incorporates an extensive new preface by the author and a foreword by the distinguished American scholar George Levine. ‘The only problem with this book is deciding what to praise first. It draws on a breadth of knowledge in many fields, its literary readings are alert and original, it has a profound grasp of idea and form. It must be read by the scientist, the student of Victorian thought and art and the educated person in the street . The book is so exciting as a work of literary criticism – among much else – that it must provoke and disturb old interpretations and judgements.’ Barbara Hardy, New Statesman. ‘. Gillian Beer’s superb study ...a work of criticism that takes its modest place among the other “cloudy triumphs” of English genius.’ Michael Neve, Sunday Times. ‘Offers fresh insights into familiar themes in the history of science by dealing with them in quite a new way.’ John Durant, The Times Literary Supplement. Gillian Beer is King Edward VII Professor of English Literature at the University of Cambridge and President of Clare Hall, Cam- bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reader As Author
    The Reader as Author GILLIAN BEER Contributor: Dame Gillian Beer is King Edward VII Professor Emeritus at the University of Cambridge and a former President of Clare Hall. She is a Fellow of the British Academy and of the Royal Society of Literature as well as an invited member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and of the American Philosophical Society. A number of universities have given her honorary doctorates including Oxford, the Sorbonne, Harvard and St. Andrews. Her books include Darwin's Plots (third edition, CUP, 2009), Open Fields: Science in Cultural Encounter (Oxford University Press, 1996), Virginia Woolf: the Common Ground (Edinburgh University Press, 1996) and Jabberwocky and Other Nonsense: the collected and annotated poems of Lewis Carroll (Penguin Classics, 2012). She is General Editor of Cambridge Studies in Nineteenth Century Literature and Culture. In Milton’s great seventeenth-century epic poem Paradise Lost both God and Satan are described as ‘author’. As the story of creation is re-told God is called ‘author and end of all things’ while elsewhere Satan is ‘the author of all ill’. The difference is marked: Satan can start things but not control their outcome; God is the aim as well as the origin. His authorship describes an arc from initiation to willed conclusion. Human authors are much more like Satan than God: they can start things but not control consequences. Once the book is published it goes out of their control, into the anonymous realm of the reader. Publishing, making public, both inscribes the name of the author in the work (if he or she wishes) and yields it up.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Woolf and the Sciences of Prehistory: a Study of Five Major Novels – Korrakod Paetsasadee – June 2019 Acknowledgements
    Virginia Woolf and the Sciences of Prehistory: A Study of Five Major Novels Korrakod Paetsasadee This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June 2019 Department of English Literature and Creative Writing 1 Word Template by Friedman Morgan& 2014 For my parents i Word Template by Friedman Morgan& 2014 ii Word Template by Friedman Morgan& 2014 Declaration This thesis has not been submitted in support of an application for another degree at this or any other university. It is the result of my own work and includes nothing that is the outcome of work done in collaboration except where specifically indicated. Many of the ideas in this thesis were the product of discussion with my supervisor Mr. Tony Pinkney. iii Word Template by Friedman Morgan& 2014 Abstract This thesis examines Woolf’s major novels and other writings in relation to the discourses of science in her period. As a modernist writer, she has been considered as anti-science and an advocate of formalist aesthetics. A later literary-critical generation constructed her as a feminist writer, at once robust and subtle in her polemics and experimental techniques. But Woolf also consistently expressed her interest in a variety of sciences including natural history and biology, palaeontology, physics, psychoanalysis, technology, astronomy, archaeology and anthropology. By examining her diverse scientific interests, particularly as they cluster around the notion of prehistory, this thesis examines in detail five of her major novels. Her first novel The Voyage Out sets forth, in the light of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, on the mission of creating a new self and a language suitable for women’s use to express their subtle experiences and elusive attitudes to society.
    [Show full text]
  • Modernist Fables and the Vitality of Style
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2015 Virtuoso Beasts: Modernist Fables and the Vitality of Style Cliff Mak University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the American Literature Commons, Literature in English, British Isles Commons, Literature in English, North America Commons, and the Modern Literature Commons Recommended Citation Mak, Cliff, "Virtuoso Beasts: Modernist Fables and the Vitality of Style" (2015). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1093. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1093 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1093 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Virtuoso Beasts: Modernist Fables and the Vitality of Style Abstract This dissertation examines the pivotal function of animals in modernist writing, particularly where modernist style confronts inherited moral codes. Classic accounts of modernism emphasize â??impersonalityâ?? as the prime method for artists seeking cultural and ethical authority in the period after 1880. This project digs into what I argue is ultimately the more palatable capacity of literary beasts to animate a similar poetics of authority. Where doctrines of impersonality often resorted to figures of the inorganic in order to simultaneously disavow and indulge the expression of authorial intention, modernists such as Gerard Manley Hopkins, Virginia Woolf, James Joyce, Rudyard Kipling, and Marianne Moore instead avowed their didactic ambitions by appealing not to traditional expressive and explicit methods nor, on the other hand, to the complete evacuation of personality, but to the vitality and instinct of animals. More than any platinum filament (T.S. Eliotâ??s famous catalyst), animals offered modernists a vocabulary for the bodily and behavioral mechanisms by which individuals become ethical and historical subjects.
    [Show full text]