Philip and Mary Sidney, Aemilia Lanyer, Katherine Philips and Mary, Lady Chudleigh
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Gender and Collaboration in Seventeenth-Century English Poetry: Philip and Mary Sidney, Aemilia Lanyer, Katherine Philips and Mary, Lady Chudleigh by Hannah VanderHart Department of English Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Sarah Beckwith, Co-Supervisor ___________________________ Julianne Werlin, Co-Supervisor ___________________________ Charlotte Sussman ___________________________ David Aers ___________________________ Leonard Tennenhouse Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of English in the Graduate School of Duke University 2019 i v ABSTRACT Gender and Collaboration in Seventeenth-Century English Poetry: Philip and Mary Sidney, Aemilia Lanyer, Katherine Philips and Mary, Lady Chudleigh by Hannah VanderHart Department of English Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Sarah Beckwith, Co-Supervisor ___________________________ Julianne Werlin, Co-Supervisor ___________________________ Charlotte Sussman ___________________________ David Aers ___________________________ Leonard Tennenhouse An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of English in the Graduate School of Duke University 2019 Copyright by Hannah VanderHart 2019 Abstract This dissertation examines the collaborative poetry and poetics of four early modern women writers: Mary Sidney Herbert (1561-1621), Aemilia Lanyer (1569–1645), Katherine Philips (1631-1664) and Mary, Lady Chudleigh (1656 – 1710). It critically recovers women’s poetry and their different modes of literary collaboration at the same time as it explores their unique manuscript and print practices. The critical methods employed are primarily historicist and formal and founded on close reading of revision processes, literary source materials and formal poetics. Additionally, each chapter argues that the contexts of relationship and community are integral to understanding how women writers employed collaborative writing practices as well as the significance of collaboration as an alternative to competition. I conclude that, across the long seventeenth century, the intellectual social agency of women writers grows through their collaborative writing practices, evidenced by publication and print. iv Dedication To all women writers, collaborators, laborers, poets. v Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. vii Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... viii Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1. ‘Love which hath never done’: Gender, Revision and Collaboration in The Sidney Psalter .................................................................................................................................. 4 Chapter 2. ‘Your Excellence can Grace both It and Mee’: Defect, Collaboration and Gift in Aemilia Lanyer’s Dedication Poems .................................................................................... 43 Chapter 3. ‘For man was never made to be alone’: Retreat and Sociability as Political- Poetic Process in Katherine Philip’s Poetry ............................................................................. 82 Chapter 4. Reciprocal Esteem: Political Engagement as Collaboration in Mary Lady Chudleigh’s “The Ladies Defence” ........................................................................................ 125 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 174 Bibliography .............................................................................................................................. 175 Biography ................................................................................................................................... 183 vi List of Figures Figure 1: Simon de Passe, Mary Herbert, Countess of Pembroke. 1618. Line engraving, 179 mm x 111 mm. The National Portrait Gallery, London. .......................................................... 6 vii Acknowledgements Thank you to David Aers, for the gift of J.C.A. Rathmell’s The Psalms of Sir Philip Sidney and The Countess of Pembroke—the book which inspired this project. Thank you to Sarah Beckwith, Julianne Werlin and Charlotte Sussman for their individual wisdom, expertise and encouragement during these last few years; to Len Tennenhouse for his kindness. Special thanks to the friends and family who watched my children, caring for me by caring for them, throughout my coursework at Duke: Jackie Neufeld, Grace Hamman, my mother Lee Hethcox, my sisters Esther and Della, and the teachers at Trinity Avenue Presbyterian Weekday School. All my love and gratitude to Luke VanderHart, my Greatheart, and to our children Beren and Anselm. viii Introduction “Tis zealous love, love which hath never done, / Nor can enough in world of words unfold,” confesses Mary Sidney Herbert in “To the Angell Spirit of the Most Excellent Philip Sidney,” a dedication poem in which Herbert simultaneously presents the Sidney psalms to her brother’s spirit and asks pardon for completing them. I first discovered Herbert’s poetry in J.C.A. Rathmell’s edition of the Sidney psalms. Rathmell divides the psalms between their respective sibling authors, allocating psalms 1-43 to Sidney and psalms 44-150 to Herbert. The first psalm, in Sidney’s half, Rathmell takes from the Woodford manuscript—a manuscript revised, edited and curated by Herbert. The Woodford manuscript’s psalm 1 is actually a collaboration between Sidney and Herbert—ten lines cut and six lines written and added by the Countess of Pembroke. This collaborative process is lost to the casual reader of Sidney’s psalm 1—smoothed over, ironed out; erased. Recovering the collaborative writing of Sidney and Herbert’s psalm—the manuscript history and the poetic revisions made—challenged me to consider other seventeenth-century poetry engaging collaborative writing and reading practices. In hindsight, Herbert’s offering of “zealous love, love which hath never done” figures heavily in the work I chose for this project on collaborative poetry. Each poet whose work appears in my chapters—Mary Sidney Herbert, Aemilia Lanyer, Katherine Philips and Lady, Mary Chudleigh—situates her writing practice in specific 1 relationships and community. Not only do these women write for particular audiences, their poetic forms are often generated through the occasion of their relationships: Aemilia Lanyer’s dedication poems, Katherine Philips’ retreat poems and Mary, Lady Chudleigh’s dialogue poem “The Ladies Defence” arise out of naming and implicating others in the occasion of the work itself. In this way, and perhaps against the generous and captivating scholarship of Ilona Bell on Elizabethan courtship poetry, I see the poetry covered in this project as set against the voice of the lyric poem, centered on the “lyric I.” Rather, the poetry of Herbert, Lanyer, Philips and Chudleigh is explicitly and warmly interested in the other: the intreated, honored, invited and (sometimes) lovingly corrected reader. These are texts taking place in and through relationship and political interdependencies, texts whose generation and form is owed to such relationship and dependency. In their different ways, the poetry of each one of these women asserts collaboration rather than competition—or controversy. My research examines a gendered company of women poets—a focus that inflects the nature of the manuscript and print collaboration taking place. Early modern print culture looked different for women writers—they often needed sacred or devotional reasons to write, or a classical text to translate. A narrative thread throughout my chapters is that Herbert, Lanyer, Philips and Chudleigh’s poetry does not merely resist, challenge or subvert male patriarchy networks, but that their poetries enact an engagement with them that creates literary and social spaces for women readers and 2 writers. Like their male publishing counterparts, these women poets first imaginatively created their readership and their patrons. Herbert addresses the spirit of her brother Philip, the figure of Queen Elizabeth I, and all psalm-singing, English persons. In Lanyer and Philips, such readers and patrons are ideally figured as women of good birth and courtly, political connections. Lady Chudleigh writes for women of serious intelligence (and a dissenting minister). The very forms of these poems—their audience and occasion—demonstrate how collaborative writing is a mode of community making and maintaining. From Herbert’s revision and composition made in “zealous love” to Lanyer’s language of the gift, from Philips’ poetry of friendship and retreat to Lady Chudleigh’s dialectic mode of “reciprocal esteem,” the work of these four women poets acknowledges social bonds and community and, in fact, sees these practices as essential to the writing of poetry itself. 3 Chapter 1. ‘Love which hath never done’: Gender, Revision and Collaboration