The Social Contract and the Romantic Canon: the Individual and Society
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Social Contract and the Romantic Canon: The Individual and Society in the Works of Wordsworth, Godwin and Mary Shelley Zoe Rivlin-Beenstock August 2010 Department of English McGill University, Montreal A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree doctor of philosophy ©Zoe Rivlin-Beenstock, 2010 Table of Contents Acknowledgements i Abstract ii Résumé iv Introduction Man as an Island: The Social Contract and Romantic Criticism 1 The Critical Tradition 5 Empiricism, German Idealism and the Case of Coleridge 13 Chapter 1 Individualism as Sociability: The Social Contract, Its Critics and Its Rhetoric, 1651-1792 27 From Natural Freedom to Social Coercion: Rousseau and Society 31 Enforcing Cohesion: The Social Contradiction 42 Literature and the Individual Voice 49 Sovereign Individuality: Hobbes's Leviathan and On the Citizen 54 Self-Governing Individuals 64 Habit and Sociability: Hume and Mandeville 69 Society beyond Sovereignty: Smith and Ferguson 76 Chapter 2 Man, Nature, and Society: The Prelude as Wordsworth's Social Contract Politics and Individualism 84 Individual Form 92 The Prelude and Rousseauvian Pastoral 102 General Wills, Individual Ills 109 Cultivating the Communal Garden 117 The Dead Weight of Communitarianism 124 Chapter 3, "All Play Their own Tune": Individuality and Sociability in Political Justice and Fleetwood 130 The Personal is Political: Political Justice and Rousseauvian Conflict 143 Poetical Justice 153 Allegories of Sociability: Fleetwood and Rousseau 157 No Room of Her Own: Misogyny as a Test Case for Misanthropy 173 Chapter 4, Gender and the Social Contract: Mary Shelley's Frankenstein , Wollstonecraft and Rousseau 181 I. Wollstonecraft on Rousseau, Enlightenment Progress 185 II. Wollstonecraft on Rousseau, Gender 188 Shelley on the Wrongs of Rousseau 194 Shelley on Wollstonecraft: Maternal Absence and Literary Presence 197 I. Excluded Creatures and Political Metaphor, the Male Creature 205 II. Excluded Creatures and Political Metaphor, the Female Creature 208 III. Excluded Creatures and Political Metaphor, Social Contract Allegory 212 Languages of Paradox 215 Conclusion The Social Contract and Beyond 221 Works Cited Acknowledgements Over the years of work on this dissertation, I was the fortunate recipient of the Fonds québéquois de la recherche sur la société et la culture doctoral fellowship, the Sabbath Fund for Canadian Studies Research Grant, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and McGill University Graduate Fellowships. I am thankful to these organizations for making this work possible. First, I wish to express my immense gratitude to my supervisor Monique Morgan for her unwavering belief in this project, for nurturing it from its beginnings in an independent study on German idealism and empiricism, and over its dynamic changes of form and fortune. Thank you for the rigorous comments and for the generous support. I also wish to thank Maggie Kilgour for her helpful feedback on this project in its early stage as a compulsory research project, and Tom Mole for his advice and support in approaching the job market. Arash Abizedeh helped with bibliographical references for the discussion of Rousseau. I am grateful to Cynthia Chase for her illuminating review of the Wordsworth chapter, and to Catherine Gallagher for a stimulating lecture and ensuing dialogue on the topic of counterfactuality, which contributed to the chapter on Godwin. I wish to thank Amy Garnai and Maya Barzilai for their thoughtful feedback and fruitful discussion of my research. Cécile Binder helped translate the abstract. I benefited from numerous further dialogues in the lively academic environments of McGill, and in Montreal and Tel Aviv. As always, I am grateful to my parents Ruchi and Michael Beenstock for their devotion and table talk. Rosie Canaan and Batya Shoshani reminded me not to give up. My thanks to Lucy Boothroyd for her enduring support and help submitting this i i dissertation. A special thanks is due to Ofer Rivlin for his partnership, support and passion for perfectionism over these years of work and beyond. My love and gratitude to Max Rivlin (2004) and Sasha Rivlin (2007) for challenging me to develop beyond what I could have imagined. ii ii Abstract Seventeenth- and eighteenth-century social contract philosophy altered the relationship between the individual and society. In this period, society shifted from the previous model of the body politic, to a new concept whereby a diverse group of individuals unite to protect their private rights by forming a social contract. Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau all struggle to develop a model of society which places the individual first. Empiricist critics of this tradition such as Hume and Smith were also influenced by the social contract's revolutionary individualism, but more skeptical of its model of community. The social contract perspective and its problems directly influenced the French Revolution, and – by extension – British Romantic literature. But the social contract has received little attention in a critical tradition dominated by an interest in German idealism, and by a firm belief in Romanticism's avoidance of socio-historical context. This study of the social contract tradition's influence on canonical Romantic-era texts seeks to refocus Romanticism's political self-awareness. My dissertation adds to a recent interest in empiricist contexts, expanding existent discussion to focus on the social contract in several exemplary Romantic-era works. William Wordsworth's Prelude is arguably the archetypal Romantic poem, and also the target of recent new historicist criticism. I trace its dynamic dialogue with Rousseau over its long editorial history. Wordsworth encounters similar difficulties to Rousseau's alienated modern subjects, who experience society as hostile to individual desires. I then examine William Godwin's ambivalent dialogue with social contract philosophy, comparing Enquiry Concerning Political Justice to Fleetwood , which is critical of individualistic social theories. In Frankenstein , Mary Shelley critiques the iii iii social contract myth of originary independence, drawing directly on Rousseau and also on Mary Wollstonecraft's references to him. These Romantic texts, written a generation after The Social Contract and in the wake of the French Revolution, engage in a new concern with forming a society of isolated individuals. Two hundred years later, this problem remains at the foreground of political theory, partially explaining the contemporary fascination with Romantic icons, such as Wordsworthian nature, the Romantic-Godwinian solitary and Frankenstein's creature. iv iv Résumé La philosophie du contrat social des XVII e et XVIII e siècles a modifié la relation entre l’individu et la société. Pendant cette période, la société est passée du précédent modèle du corps politique à un nouveau concept au moyen duquel un groupe d’individus différents s’unissent pour protéger leurs droits en établissant un contrat social. Hobbes, Locke et Rousseau ont lutté pour développer un modèle de société qui met l’individu à la première place. Des critiques empiristes de cette tradition comme Hume et Smith furent aussi influencés par l’individualisme révolutionnaire du contrat social, tout en étant plus sceptiques quant à son modèle de communauté. La perspective du contrat social a eu une influence directe sur la Révolution française, et – par extension – sur la littérature romantique anglaise. Mais le contrat social n’a pas retenu l’attention d’une tradition critique dominée par son intérêt pour l’idéalisme germanique, et par une ferme croyance dans le fait que le romantisme annulait tout contexte socio-historique. Cette étude de l’influence de la tradition du contrat social sur des textes canoniques du romantisme vise à recentrer la conscience politique du romantisme. Mon travail de recherche s’ajoute à un récent intérêt pour les contextes empiriques, il élargit les débats tout en les concentrant sur le contrat social dans plusieurs ouvrages exemplaires du romantisme. Le Prélude, de William Wordsworth, sans doute l’archétype du poème romantique, est aussi la cible de la récente nouvelle critique historiciste. Je retrace son dialogue dynamique avec les théories de Rousseau sur sa longue histoire éditoriale. Wordsworth rencontre des difficultés similaires à celle des sujets modernes aliénés de v v Rousseau, qui ressentent la société comme hostile aux désirs individuels. J’examine ensuite le dialogue ambivalent de William Godwin avec la philosophie du contrat social, comparant Enquiry Concerning Political Justice à Fleetwood , qui met en question les théories sociales individualistes. Dans Frankenstein , Mary Shelley critique le mythe de l’indépendance originelle dans le contrat social, s’inspirant directement de Rousseau ainsi que des références qu’y fait Mary Wollstonecraft. Ces textes romantiques, écrits une génération après Du contrat social et à la suite de la Révolution française, s’intéressent à la formation d’une société composée d’individus isolés. Deux cents ans plus tard, ce problème reste au premier plan de la théorie politique, expliquant en partie la fascination contemporaine pour les icônes romantiques, comme la nature de Wordsworth, le solitaire du romantique Godwin et la créature de Frankenstein. vi vi Introduction Man as an Island: The Social Contract and Romantic Criticism "I … was reduced to a meer state of nature[.]" (Defoe, Robinson Crusoe 94) In Émile , Rousseau prescribes a strict literary