THE LAUREATES’ LENS: EXPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT OF LITERARY HISTORY AND LITERARY CRITICISM FROM BENEATH THE DUNCE CAP Lindsay Emory Moore Dissertation Prepared for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY University of North Texas December 2015 APPROVED: Gabriel Cervantes, Major Professor Dahlia Porter, Committee Member Deborah Armintor, Committee Member Robert Upchurch, Chair of the Department of English Costas Tsatsoulis, Dean of the Toulouse Graduate School Moore, Lindsay Emory. The Laureates’ Lens: Exposing the Development of Literary History and Literary Criticism from Beneath the Dunce Cap. Doctor of Philosophy (English), December 2015, 225 pp., references, 199 titles. In this project, I examine the impact of early literary criticism, early literary history, and the history of knowledge on the perception of the laureateship as it was formulated at specific moments in the eighteenth century. Instead of accepting the assessments of Pope and Johnson, I reconstruct the contemporary impact of laureate writings and the writing that fashioned the view of the laureates we have inherited. I use an array of primary documents (from letters and journal entries to poems and non-fiction prose) to analyze the way the laureateship as a literary identity was constructed in several key moments: the debate over hack literature in the pamphlet wars surrounding Elkanah Settle’s The Empress of Morocco (1673), the defense of Colley Cibber and his subsequent attempt to use his expertise of theater in An Apology for the Life of Colley Cibber (1740), the consolidation of hack literature and state-sponsored poetry with the crowning of Colley Cibber as the King of the Dunces in Pope’s The Dunciad in Four Books (1742), the fashioning of Thomas Gray and William Mason as laureate rejecters in Mason’s Memoirs of the Life and Writings of William Whitehead (1788), Southey’s progressive work to abolish laureate task writing in his laureate odes 1813-1821, and, finally, in Wordsworth’s refusal to produce any laureate task writing during his tenure, 1843-1850. In each case, I explain how the construction of this office was central to the consolidation of literary history and to forging authorial identity in the same period. This differs from the conventional treatment of the laureates because I expose the history of the versions of literary history that have to date structured how scholars understand the laureate, and by doing so, reveal how the laureateship was used to create, legitimate and disseminate the model of literary history we still use today. Copyright Notice Lindsay Emory Moore 2015 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Writing is a collaborative process for me, and I have greatly benefitted from the feedback and knowledge of several friends, colleagues, and professors throughout my time in graduate school. Gabriel Cervantes graciously agreed to direct my dissertation in his first semester at UNT and has brought enthusiasm and exacting criticism to my project. Dahlia Porter, in whose Romanticism course the seed for this project was first planted in my mind, has provided encouragement, vital feedback, and mentorship. Deb Armintor has been an ever-present source of encouragement throughout the project. I am grateful also for the mentorships throughout my time in graduate school of Ryan Boettger, Amanda Kellogg, and Alex Pettit, who have all graciously spent their time providing feedback on projects and given hours of helpful encouragement and advice. Joseph Oppong has provided time and space for uninterrupted writing time in Dissertation Boot Camps and inspired me to “go go go go go!” Heather Robinson has been my partner during the dissertation process: reading drafts and commiserating while providing encouragement, helpful feedback, and, most of all, friendship. Brian Tatum and Cole Jeffrey have helped me better define my ideas and re-construct sentences while supporting me with pizza, friendship, and encouragement. Most of all though, I am grateful for my family, who has supported me in every step of this process. My parents taught me the value of hard work and told me that I could do anything I wanted to do. My husband Kevin has been a loving and supportive partner, listening to hours of talk about graduate school and poets laureate without any complaint. Finally, I dedicate this project to my son, Jackson. I hope that when you find what you love, you remember this time in our lives and know that you can do anything you want to do if you are ready to work like mad to achieve it. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iii INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 Previous Studies of the Poets Laureate ....................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER 1 THE CITY POET AND THE POET LAUREATE: THE LINEAGE OF HACK LITERATURE IN THE RESTORATION AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURY ........................... 21 Elkanah Settle and The Empress of Morocco............................................................................ 24 Female (Dis)Empowerment in The Empress of Morocco ......................................................... 29 Common Women and Literary Value in the Epilogue and the Notes and Observations.......... 29 The Larger Literary Lineage of the Notes and Observations .................................................... 51 Consolidating Literary Lineage in The Dunciad ....................................................................... 63 CHAPTER 2 THE THEATER LAUREATE: A RECONSIDERATION OF COLLEY CIBBER ....................................................................................................................................................... 73 Cibber Criticism: From the Eighteenth Century to Present ...................................................... 79 Cibber’s Apology: Performance and National Reform ............................................................. 85 “We of the Vulgar”: Middle-class Ethos in Cibber’s Apology ................................................. 95 “Shew what Talents are requisite to make Actors valuable…to assist the Judgment of future Spectators”: A Manual for Critiquing Acting ......................................................................... 101 The Theater Laureate’s Legacy ............................................................................................... 108 CHAPTER 3 LAUREATE REJECTERS: THE CONSTRUCTION OF ANTI-LAUREATE LEGACIES IN WILLIAM MASON’S BIOGRAPHIES ........................................................... 114 Gray’s Rejection of the British Monarchy: Odes by Mr. Gray (1757) ................................... 117 The Re-Fashioning of a Pindaric Poet: A New Edition (1768) ............................................... 126 Establishing the Legacy of Thomas Gray ............................................................................... 133 A Legacy Under Fire: Samuel Johnson’s “Gray” ................................................................... 140 Legacies Revised: Poems by William Whitehead, Esq. Late Poet Laureat […] To Which are Prefixed Memoirs of his Life and Writings by W. Mason, M.A. ............................................. 145 Memoirs of the Life and Writings of William Whitehead and the Laureate Rejecters ............ 150 CHAPTER 4: MODERN LAUREATES: SOUTHEY, WORDSWORTH, AND THE LAUREATE BI-ANNUAL ODES ............................................................................................. 158 iv Poets Laureate in Context: Previous Studies on the Laureateships of Southey and Wordsworth ................................................................................................................................................. 160 Laureate Task Writing and Evolving Views of Patronage in the Long Eighteenth Century .. 165 Southey’s Symbolic Change: Rebelling Against the Ultimate Patron .................................... 180 Wordsworth’s Laureateship: A Public Demonstration of Ideology ........................................ 188 Works Cited ................................................................................................................................ 197 v INTRODUCTION Three hundred and thirty-one years after the appointment of John Dryden to the office of poet laureate in Britain, the office proved it still possessed political currency. When Prime Minister of Britain Tony Blair refused to appoint popular favorite Carol Ann Duffy as Poet Laureate in 1999, he claimed that “middle Britain” would not approve of Duffy’s homosexuality (Higgins). Though Blair initially wanted to use the newly vacated office to promote what he termed “cool Britannia,”—someone who was not a part of the traditional establishment—he eventually chose Andrew Motion for the office, a much less controversial figure (Higgins). Ironically, Blair’s choice of Motion later became controversial when Motion commented on the detrimental effect the laureateship had on his ability to write good poetry and declared that he would not include any of his Laureate poetry in his collections (“Laureate Bemoans Thankless Job”). Motion then resigned as Laureate in 2009, becoming the only Poet Laureate of Britain to remove himself from office. When Duffy was appointed poet laureate after the resignation of Motion in 2009, her appointment was thought to be symbolic of progressive attitudes towards women and the LGBT community: Duffy was