Domestic Georgic from Rabelais to Milton by Katherine Kadue A
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Domestic Georgic from Rabelais to Milton by Katherine Kadue A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Comparative Literature in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Timothy Hampton, Co-chair Professor Joanna Picciotto, Co-chair Professor Victoria Kahn Professor Anne-Lise François Professor Jeffrey Knapp Spring 2017 Abstract Domestic Georgic from Rabelais to Milton by Katherine Kadue Doctor of Philosophy in Comparative Literature University of California, Berkeley Professor Timothy Hampton, Co-chair, and Professor Joanna Picciotto, Co-chair This dissertation uncovers the unexpected affinity of major early modern literary figures for the minor, incremental operations of preservation, maintenance, and what could be broadly construed as housekeeping. Reading male-authored literary works alongside domestic manuals and recipe manuscripts, many of which were written by or for women, I show how canonical early modern texts shared the primary concern of home and garden maintenance: the necessity of constant, almost invisible labor in order to keep the things of the world—perishable material, fragile bodies, precarious real and virtual communities—intact. When scholars ignore authors’ persistent comparisons of their own work to small-scale acts of domestic preservation, they pass over a still- viable possibility that I bring into focus: the conception of literary labor not as a desperate striving for originality, fame, and a starring role in a narrative of progress, but as a form of maintenance work that aims at preserving individual and collective life. This maintenance work falls under the category of, though it is rarely recognized as, georgic: the (agri)cultural topos whose early modern resurgence is usually associated with the heroically laborious advancement of learning, the forwarding of foundational national mythologies, and groundbreaking formal innovation. Authors working both within and aslant of the georgic tradition, I show, denaturalize the conflation of cultivation and progress by situating their work in domestic spaces and practices where preservation, not progress, is the provisional goal. For Erasmus and François Rabelais, humanist education is less about the forward march of knowledge than the maintenance of texts, bodies, and communities; for Joachim Du Bellay, tending to the French garden of letters yields only invisible or uncertain results. For authors writing in the midst or wake of civil war—Michel de Montaigne, Andrew Marvell, and John Milton—domestic georgic intellectual labor becomes a mode of precarious individual and collective survival, rather than of certain improvement. The first half of this dissertation recasts the heroes of humanism as housewives at heart. Reading Erasmus’s commentary on his own scholarly labors alongside one of the most influential accounts of labor in the twentieth century, that of Hannah Arendt, I suggest that the humanist condition— the drive to preserve the classical tradition through active means—is, in practice, housewifery. My chapters on Rabelais and Du Bellay locate deep concerns about the fragility of culture and community at the heart of the French authors most associated with celebratory textual excess and robust linguistic fertility programs. In the second half, I shift from the shaky beginnings of national cohesion to the context of civil war, where collective precarity was even more apparent, and where the maintenance work that animates Virgil’s Georgics—a poem also written with civil war in the 1 background—became even more urgent. I argue that Montaigne, Marvell, and Milton respond to political degeneration by redefining progress and reproduction as minor, cyclical, metabolic repair, whether of the self, the family, or the Christian community. I trace the domestic georgic mode through sixteenth-century France and seventeenth-century England through close stylistic analysis. Through an attention to small-scale textual patterns like parenthetical interruption, self-correction, and repetition, as well as to thematic concerns with small- scale acts of domestic preservation, I recover overlooked attitudes about “unproductive” labor and non-linear progress in the works of the early modern authors often credited with industriously ushering in modernity. By revealing male authors’ deep identifications with menial labors that were and are often relegated to “women’s work,” my project exposes a genealogy from the glorified texts of Renaissance humanism to the insufficiently valued intellectual labor of today. In academia and online, performed by manuscript digitizers and “content providers,” this labor, if visible at all, is often disparaged as mechanical, expendable, or a “labor of love” that should be its own reward. Yet this unseen, unappreciated work makes possible the communities and institutions we claim to value. 2 In memory of my grandmother, Marjorie Moore Kadue, and in appreciation of her economy. i Table of Contents Acknowledgements iii Introduction The Humanist’s Closet Opened 1 I. Garden Variety Humanism 2 II. Humanist Housework 6 III. The Labors of Erasmus 16 Chapter 1 Fixing Rabelais 23 I. Dead Stones: Cultivating Petrification 23 II. Pickled Gaiety: Preserving Alteration 29 III. The Dregs: Laying Up Waste 37 IV. Frozen Food: Reproducing Metabolism 42 Chapter 2 Belaboring Du Bellay 47 I. Oral Exercises: Domesticating Hercules 50 II. Microeconomic Poetics: Exchange without Change 57 III. Yard Maintenance: Hedging on and for the Future 66 Chapter 3 Montaigne in Agitation 73 I. Irritating Humors: Montaigne in Trouble 76 II. Vain Things: Montaigne at Home 81 III. Living Stones: Montaigne in His Kidneys 84 Chapter 4 Marvell in the Meantime 94 I. Nuns Preserving Badly: The Pre-meantime 100 II. Securely Playing, or, Quick Work 103 III. Preservation Restored: The Magna Mater in Training 105 IV. The Green World: Grafting On 108 Chapter 5 Tempering Milton 113 I. Subliming for Survival: Kitchen Georgic in Areopagitica 116 II. Suspending Sublimation: Reformation Georgic in Paradise Lost 121 III. Reproducing the Incarnation: Metabolic Georgic in Paradise Regain’d 131 Works Cited 139 ii Acknowledgements I am grateful to have had a dissertation committee that has both sustained and altered my thinking so deeply. Timothy Hampton first brought me into the early modern world where I have now been pickling for some years. His course on Pléiade poetry my first semester of graduate school was the petri dish where this dissertation’s central questions began to culture. I thank him for seeing in my work the potential and the pitfalls that have been invisible to me, for a parenthetical remark about Rabelais’s parentheses that became profoundly important to my thinking, and for always reading me à bien. Joanna Picciotto has given me an inimitable example of an experimentalist ethos and the intellectual laborer’s vocation that I nonetheless hope to imitate. Her generosity, her humor, and her urgency make working with her a paradise, and her commitment to the infinite conversation of intellectual life has made me feel privileged to be in that conversation with her, along with all its other living and dead participants. I hope we never stop talking. I am thankful that Victoria Kahn took up the task of reminding me to come up for air from my close readings and consider larger stakes, both of this dissertation and of my intellectual commitments in general. She helped me find precision and direction not only with her incisive comments on my drafts but also with her suggestions for conceptualizing a project that has at times felt too much like a housewife’s diverse fleeces; I owe the georgic framing of the dissertation to her. It was in the silent interstices of a seminar with Anne-Lise François that I began to think about what unrealized potential could and couldn’t do. I often discover her ideas within my own, just sitting there like open secrets, their assimilation forgotten and remembered only by anamnesis. The conversations I imagine between her and Joanna about pastoral, progress, and improvement have seasoned this dissertation’s brine; those conversations are ongoing. Jeffrey Knapp has provided thoughtful feedback and asked difficult questions that have forced me to refine conceptual frameworks that were petrified in all the wrong ways. He has challenged me to live up to the ideals of tempering to which I subscribe. I was lucky to have intensely supportive teachers before Berkeley, especially Barry McCrea, whose curiosity and kindness have made me a better thinker and a better teacher. Teaching at Berkeley and through the Prison University Project at San Quentin State Prison, I have felt more supported than my students will know by the communities we made and maintained in the classrooms of writing and language courses. My students, and the incremental labor we did together, helped me experience collective thinking in ways both minor and meaningful, even or especially when we were working in less than ideal conditions. I have received material support from Berkeley with a dissertation fellowship from the Townsend Humanities Center, where I benefitted from sharing my work on Rabelais. I also benefitted from feedback on an early iteration of my Milton chapter in a seminar on the topic of nature sponsored by the Townsend in 2012. The Mellon Foundation’s summer institutes in paleography with Marc Smith and Heather Wolfe allowed me to develop a more intimate