DOCSLIB.ORG

The Public Sphere of the Hunt Circle in Early Nineteenth

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE PUBLIC SPHERE OF THE HUNT CIRCLE IN EARLY NINETEENTH- CENTURY POLITICS AND CULTURE A Dissertation by BYOUNG CHUN MIN Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2010 Major Subject: English THE PUBLIC SPHERE OF THE HUNT CIRCLE IN EARLY NINETEENTH- CENTURY POLITICS AND CULTURE A Dissertation by BYOUNG CHUN MIN Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Chair of Committee, Terence Hoagwood Committee Members, Susan Egenolf Mary Ann O’Farrell James M. Rosenheim Head of Department, Jimmie Killingsworth May 2010 Major Subject: English iii ABSTRACT The Public Sphere of the Hunt Circle in Early Nineteenth-Century Politics and Culture. (May 2010) Byoung Chun Min, B.A., Seoul National University; M.A., Seoul National University Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. Terence Hoagwood This dissertation examines the Hunt circle’s public activities and its historical significance in terms of public-sphere theory proposed by Jürgen Harbermas. Recent studies on Romantic literature have attended to how Romantic writers’ literary practices were conditioned upon their contemporary history, as opposed to the traditional notion of Romanticism based on an affirmation of individual creativity. Although these studies meaningfully highlight the historicity inherent in seemingly individualistic Romantic texts, they have frequently failed to assess the way in which this historicity of Romantic texts is connected to Romantic writers’ own will to engage with public issues by placing too much emphasis on how history determines individuals’ activities. In this sense, the notion of public sphere offers a productive theoretical framework by which to read the historicity of Romantic literature without disavowing an individual writer’s role in historical proceedings, since it underscores a historical process in which a communal interaction between individuals constitutes a progress of history. By focusing on this iv significance of public-sphere theory, this dissertation suggests that the Hunt circle, whose members’ communal literary practices were aimed at achieving the public good in the tumultuous post-Napoleonic era, serves as a model of this process-based historical theorization. Chapter I examines the significance of public-sphere theory in assessing how the Hunt circle engaged in its contemporary history. Chapter II elucidates the nature of the public sphere that Leigh Hunt’s and his circle’s activities created and discusses the problems that this public sphere faced in the historical context of the early nineteenth century. Chapter III shows how the Hunt circle exposed a sense of anxiety and instability in the face of the commercialized literary public sphere by examining John Keats’s literary practices. Chapter IV highlights Percy Bysshe Shelley’s public ideal which aimed for a unified and inclusive public sphere beyond class boundaries and traces how this ideal was frustrated in the ensuing historical proceedings. Chapter V deals with the final phase of the Hunt circle and its disintegration by observing the ways in which Mary Shelley memorialized the Hunt circle for the feminized reading public of the Victorian period. By illuminating the nature of the Hunt circle’s activities for the public, this dissertation ultimately aims to reassess how literary intellectuals in the Romantic period struggled to sustain the traditional calling of men of letters in their contemporary public sphere. v DEDICATION For my parents, Chang-Dong Min and Ok-Ja Kim vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. iii DEDICATION .......................................................................................................... v TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... vi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION: LOCATING THE HUNT CIRCLE IN PUBLIC-SPHERE THEORY .............................................................. 1 II LEIGH HUNT AS A MAN OF LETTERS AND THE HUNT CIRCLE AS AN INTELLECTUAL PUBLIC SPHERE: THE FORMATION OF THE HUNT CIRCLE AND ITS HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................. 19 1. Hunt’s Activities through the Examiner and the Formation of the Hunt Circle ..................................................................... 22 2. Debates Surrounding Habermas’s Public-Sphere Theory ........ 33 3. The Notion of the Republic of Letters as the Basis of the Hunt Circle’s Publicity ............................................................. 47 4. Debates Surrounding the Issue of How to Characterize the Hunt Circle’s Publicity ............................................................. 80 5. The Difficulties Which the Hunt Circle’s Ideal Publicity Faced in Historical Proceedings ............................................... 96 III THE ANXIETY OF WRITING FOR THE PUBLIC: THE CASE OF JOHN KEATS ................................................................................ 104 1. Keats’s Early Project of Poetry and Its Frustration: Keats’s Poems of 1817 and Endymion and Tory Reviewers’ Responses to Them .................................................................. 109 2. Keats’s Ambivalent Attitude toward the Public: Keats’s Letters ....................................................................................... 131 3. Keats’s Complicated Position on the Issue of What Poetry Can Do for the World: The Fall of Hyperion and Lamia ......... 148 vii CHAPTER Page IV BEYOND AN INTELLECTUAL BOURGEOIS PUBLIC SPHERE: PERCY BYSSHE SHELLEY’S NOTION OF IDEAL PUBLICITY AND ITS HISTORICAL LIMITATION ............................................. 170 1. Embodying an Inclusive and Open Public Sphere in Writings: Shelley’s “Hermit of Marlow” Pamphlets ............................... 175 2. Poets as the Unacknowledged Legislators of the World and the Public Sphere Which They Created: Laon and Cythna, Prometheus Unbound, and A Defence of Poetry ...................... 199 3. The Failure of Shelley’s Ideal Public Sphere: Two Receptions of Shelley’s Writings .................................... 218 V CONCLUSION: THE DISINTEGRATION OF THE HUNT CIRCLE AND MARY SHELLEY’S RETROSPECTIVE WRITINGS ON THE HUNT CIRCLE ............................................... 226 1. Mary Shelley’s Privatization of the Hunt Circle’s Public Activities: The Last Man.......................................................... 230 2. The Inflected Reception of the Hunt Circle’s Publicity in the Victorian Period: Mary Shelley’s Editorial Works.................. 241 WORKS CITED ........................................................................................................ 252 VITA ......................................................................................................................... 265 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION: LOCATING THE HUNT CIRCLE IN PUBLIC- SPHERE THEORY This dissertation examines the historical significance of the Hunt circle (mostly, writers who belong to the so-called second-generation of Romanticism) by focusing on what kind of public sphere the Hunt circle members pursued and embodied through their activities for contemporary politics and culture and how this public sphere came to be disintegrated in the ensuing historical proceedings. As is well known, the notion of “public sphere” is proposed in Jürgen Habermas’s The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, which historically locates a model of his theory of communicative action, and the basis of this notion is related to his lifelong effort to espouse the validity of Enlightenment Reason.1 Habermas, by attending to cultural gatherings of the eighteenth- century bourgeois societies in Britain, defines public sphere as a medium for open discussions in which private subjects gathered to practice their critical reason both through collaboration and competition. The proposition of public sphere as an overriding principle of a socio-cultural formation involves theoretical significance in several ways. This dissertation follows the style of the MLA Handbook. 1 In The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Habermas’s theory of public sphere is founded upon his study of specific cases of eighteenth-century England’s communal associations. For a general account of the principle of communicative action practiced in a society, see Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. I: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, trans. Thomas McCarthy (Boston: Beacon, 1984). 2 First, while this proposition places emphasis on individual actions, it never loses sight of the public dimension of which these individual actions become constitutive parts. Second, since it underscores the relational dynamics of communicative action, it does not preclude individual autonomy (along with individuals’ potential to effectuate social changes) in theorizing how a socio-cultural formation works.2 Most importantly, the role of reason in actualizing social justice, which has been downgraded and even annulled by those who attend to the class-oriented exclusivity and the instrumental reification generated from reason, can be recuperated by the assumption immanent in the notion of public sphere that communicative actions between individuals constitute the workings of 2 Recent
Recommended publications
  • Reviews a Congenial Figure

    Reviews a Congenial Figure

    unconventional deist Mary Wollstonecraft, Reviews a congenial figure. A woman writer who did so little to forward the agenda of contemporary feminism was, apparently, best consigned to silence. But by ignoring Anne Stott, Hannah More: The First More, the scholars of this period Victorian. Oxford University Press, postponed the discovery that her 2003. Pp. 384. £25.00. reputation as a sanctimonious conservative ISBN 0199245320. is not fully deserved. More’s first biographer, William Though an important figure in her own Roberts, whose Memoirs of the Life and time, Hannah More (1745-1833) was Correspondence of Mrs. Hannah More ignored by the generation of feminist appeared in the year after her death, bears scholars who began, during the 1970s, to much responsibility for the distorted rediscover forgotten or depreciated picture of More, which, as Stott notes, was women writers. The degree to which these until very recently ‘firmly embedded in scholars overlooked More is revealed by the historiography’ concerning her (p. ix). the fact that no full-length biography Roberts felt free to alter More’s appeared between 1952, when M. G. correspondence to fit his view of the way Jones’s sensible but rather perfunctory that the founding mother of the Hannah More was published, and the Evangelical movement ought to have appearance of Anne Stott’s Hannah More: written. Since few of More’s letters were The First Victorian in 2003. Yet More in print in any other form, Roberts’s was not only the most widely-read British portrait of More became the standard woman writer of her era, the author of picture, but in the early twentieth century plays, conduct books, tracts for the poor, a that picture, which corresponded to its best-selling novel and a variety of creator’s ideal of pious femininity, devotional works, but also a historical appeared less flattering.
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, IRVINE Romantic Liberalism

    UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, IRVINE Romantic Liberalism

    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE Romantic Liberalism DISSERTATION submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in English by Brent Lewis Russo Dissertation Committee: Professor Jerome Christensen, Chair Professor Andrea Henderson Associate Professor Irene Tucker 2014 Chapter 1 © 2013 Trustees of Boston University All other materials © 2014 Brent Lewis Russo TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii CURRICULUM VITAE iv ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION v INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1: Charles Lamb’s Beloved Liberalism: Eccentricity in the Familiar Essays 9 CHAPTER 2: Liberalism as Plenitude: The Symbolic Leigh Hunt 33 CHAPTER 3: Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s Illiberalism and the Early Reform Movement 58 CHAPTER 4: William Hazlitt’s Fatalism 84 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Charles Rzepka and the Trustees of Boston University for permission to include Chapter One of my dissertation, which was originally published in Studies in Romanticism (Fall 2013). Financial support was provided by the University of California, Irvine Department of English, School of Humanities, and Graduate Division. iii CURRICULUM VITAE Brent Lewis Russo 2005 B.A. in English Pepperdine University 2007 M.A. in English University of California, Irvine 2014 Ph.D. in English with Graduate Emphasis in Critical Theory University of California, Irvine PUBLICATIONS “Charles Lamb’s Beloved Liberalism: Eccentricity in the Familiar Essays.” Studies in Romanticism. Fall 2013. iv ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Romantic Liberalism By Brent Lewis Russo Doctor of Philosophy in English University of California, Irvine, 2014 Professor Jerome Christensen, Chair This dissertation examines the Romantic beginnings of nineteenth-century British liberalism. It argues that Romantic authors both helped to shape and attempted to resist liberalism while its politics were still inchoate.
  • 1 4 Henry Stead Swinish Classics

    1 4 Henry Stead Swinish Classics

    Pre-print version of chapter 4 in Stead & Hall eds. (2015) Greek and Roman Classics and the British Struggle for Social Reform (Bloomsbury). 4 Henry Stead Swinish classics; or a conservative clash with Cockney culture On 1 November 1790 Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France was published in England. The counter-revolutionary intervention of a Whig politician who had previously championed numerous progressive causes provided an important rallying point for traditionalist thinkers by expressing in plain language their concerns 1 Pre-print version of chapter 4 in Stead & Hall eds. (2015) Greek and Roman Classics and the British Struggle for Social Reform (Bloomsbury). about the social upheaval across the channel. From the viewpoint of pro- revolutionaries, Burke’s Reflections gave shape to the conservative forces they were up against; its publication provoked a ‘pamphlet war’, which included such key radical responses to the Reflections as Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Man (1790) and Tom Paine’s The Rights of Man (1791).1 In Burke’s treatise, he expressed a concern for the fate of French civilisation and its culture, and in so doing coined a term that would haunt his counter-revolutionary campaign. Capping his deliberation about what would happen to French civilisation following the overthrow of its nobility and clergy, which he viewed as the twin guardians of European culture, he wrote, ‘learning will be cast into the mire, and trodden down under the hoofs of a swinish multitude’. This chapter asks what part the Greek and Roman classics played in the cultural war between British reformists and conservatives in the periodical press of the late 1810s and early 1820s.
  • Introduction: 'The Radical Ladder'

    Introduction: 'The Radical Ladder'

    Notes Introduction: ‘The Radical Ladder’ 1. The Loyalist; or, Anti- Radical; Consisting of Three Departments: Satyrical, Miscellaneous, and Historical (W. Wright, 1820), iv. 2. Here, it might also mean (if the artist is being subversive), ‘I Have Suffered’, which Caroline and the radicals certainly had; or, it might stand for ‘In hoc signo vinces’ – ‘with this as your standard you shall have vic- tory’, hinting at the odd relationship between this Queen and republican radicals. 3. See Thompson, The Making, 691–6. 4. See Robert Reid, The Peterloo Massacre (Heinemann, 1989), 117–19. 5. Frederick Jameson, The Political Unconscious: Narrative as Symbolically Social Act (London: Routledge, 2002), ix. 6. Jameson, The Political Unconscious, 1. 7. Clifford Siskin, The Work of Writing: Literature and Social Change in Britain, 1700–1830, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999), 2. 8. Frank Kermode, The Romantic Image (London: Fontana Press, 1971), 18–19. 9. Anne Janowitz, ‘“A voice from across the Sea”,: Communitarianism at the Limits of Romanticism’, At the Limits of Romanticism: Essays in Cultural, Feminist and Materialist Criticism, ed. Mary A. Favret and Nicola J. Watson (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1994), 85. 10. Nigel Leask and Phillip Connell (eds.), Romanticism and Popular Culture in Britain and Ireland, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 7. 11. Gary Dyer, British Satire and the Politics of Style, 1789–1832 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 141. 12. Donald Read, Peterloo: the ‘Massacre’ and its Background (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1958), 16. Interestingly, in a letter to The Times newspaper on 26 September 2008 Read wrote: ‘The crowd was certainly gathered to demand democratic reform, but it was in a fes- tive mood.
  • History and Vision in Byron, the Shelleys, and Keats Timothy Ruppert

    History and Vision in Byron, the Shelleys, and Keats Timothy Ruppert

    Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Electronic Theses and Dissertations Spring 2008 "Is Not the Past All Shadow?": History and Vision in Byron, the Shelleys, and Keats Timothy Ruppert Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/etd Recommended Citation Ruppert, T. (2008). "Is Not the Past All Shadow?": History and Vision in Byron, the Shelleys, and Keats (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/1132 This Immediate Access is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. For more information, please contact [email protected]. “IS NOT THE PAST ALL SHADOW?”: HISTORY AND VISION IN BYRON, THE SHELLEYS, AND KEATS A Dissertation Submitted to the McAnulty College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts Duquesne University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Timothy Ruppert March 2008 Copyright by Timothy Ruppert 2008 “IS NOT THE PAST ALL SHADOW?”: HISTORY AND VISION IN BYRON, THE SHELLEYS, AND KEATS By Timothy Ruppert Approved March 25, 2008 _____________________________ _____________________________ Daniel P. Watkins, Ph.D. Jean E. Hunter , Ph.D. Professor of English Professor of History (Dissertation Director) (Committee Member) _____________________________ _____________________________ Albert C. Labriola, Ph.D. Magali Cornier Michael, Ph.D. Professor of English Professor of English (Committee Member) (Chair, Department of English) _____________________________ Albert C. Labriola, Ph.D. Dean, McAnulty College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts Professor of English iii ABSTRACT “IS NOT THE PAST ALL SHADOW?”: HISTORY AND VISION IN BYRON, THE SHELLEYS, AND KEATS By Timothy Ruppert March 2008 Dissertation Supervised by Professor Daniel P.
  • Jane Stabler, “Religious Liberty in the 'Liberal,' 1822-23”

    Jane Stabler, “Religious Liberty in the 'Liberal,' 1822-23”

    Jane Stabler, Religious Liberty in the Lib... http://www.branchcollective.org/?ps_articles=jane-stabler-religious-liberty-in-the-liberal Jane Stabler, “Religious Liberty in the ‘Liberal,’ 1822-23” Figure 1: Thomas Philipps, Portrait of Lord Byron (1824) To think about the Liberal as an important event is to enter contentious territory. William Hazlitt (who was a contributor) described the journal as “obnoxious” in its day (Complete Works 12. 379), and in the following century, it was usually regarded as a failure or, at least, a disappointment—something that never really came together before it fell apart. In 1910, Barnette Miller described it as “a vague, up-in-the-air scheme, wholly lacking in coordination and common sense” (113). Metaphors of death and still-birth pervade the twentieth-century criticism: according to C. L. Cline “The Liberal died with the fourth number” (247); Leslie P. Pickering summarises the project thus: “in as meteoric a manner as it lived, so did the journal die, bearing with it to its untimely grave the ruined hopes of its progenitors, until now its name conveys but little to the minds of the many” (7-8). The seminal study by William H. Marshall declared, “the real question does not concern the causes of the failure of The Liberal but the reason that any of the participants thought that it could succeed” (212). In Richard Holmes’s biography of Shelley, the journal “folded quietly . after only four issues, the final collapse of Shelley’s original Pisan plan” (731); in Fiona MacCarthy’s biography of Byron, the Liberal was a “critical and financial disaster” and, after Byron’s final contribution, it simply “folded” (456).
  • Shelley's Editing Process in the Preface to <I>Epipsychidion</I>

    Shelley's Editing Process in the Preface to <I>Epipsychidion</I>

    The Keats-Shelley Review ISSN: 0952-4142 (Print) 2042-1362 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/yksr20 Shelley's Editing Process in the Preface to Epipsychidion Michael Laplace-Sinatra To cite this article: Michael Laplace-Sinatra (1997) Shelley's Editing Process in the Preface to Epipsychidion , The Keats-Shelley Review, 11:1, 167-181 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/ksr.1997.11.1.167 Published online: 18 Jul 2013. Submit your article to this journal View related articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=yksr20 Download by: [Bibliothèques de l'Université de Montréal] Date: 07 February 2016, At: 08:47 SHELLEY'S EDITING PROCESS IN THE PREFACE TO EPIPSYCHIDION by Michael Laplace-Sinatra Prefaces are often disregarded by readers who, more often than not, start without taking time to peruse them first. Sir Walter Scott knew this perfectly well, and he wrote about it, very wittily, in 'A PostScript Which Should Have Been a Preface', the last chapter of his novel Waverley written in 1814: 'most novel readers, as my own conscience reminds me, are apt to be guilty of the sin of omission respecting the same matter of prefaces' .1 Scott refers to novel readers but poetry readers are also 'guilty of the sin of omission', maybe even more so in so far as they may wish, understandably enough, to read only poetry and not a prose introduction. Many critics include prefaces in their analysis, but most of the time only as a means of interpreting the work they precede.
  • Six Studies in Nineteenth^Century English Literature and Thought

    Six Studies in Nineteenth^Century English Literature and Thought

    SIX STUDIES IN NINETEENTH^CENTURY ENGLISH LITERATURE AND THOUGHT edited by Harold Orel and George J. Worth UNIVERSITY OE KANSAS PUBLICATIONS LAWRENCE, 1962 UNIVERSITY, OF KANSAS PUBLICATIONS ? HUMANISTIC STUDIES, NO. 35 SIX STUDIES IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY ENGLISH LITERATURE AND THOUGHT SIX STUDIES IN NINETEENTH^CENTURY ENGLISH LITERATURE AND THOUGHT edited by Harold Orel and George J. Worth Contributors: W. P. ALBRECHT HAROLD OREL WALTER E. SANDELIUS GEORGE J. WORTH PETER CAWS W. D. PADEN UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS PUBLICATIONS LAWRENCE, 1962 © Copyright 1962 by the University of Kansas Press L.C.C.C. Number 62-63635 PRINTED IN THE U.S.A. PREFACE This collection of essays by various members of the faculty of the University of Kansas is, we hope, of interest to students of the nineteenth century. There is something new, and perhaps something im• portant, in each of these discussions. We hope, above all, that they convey a sense of the abundant excitement which we find in this period. H. O. G. W. Contents Hazlitt on Wordsworth; or, The Poetry of Paradox 1 W. P. ALBRECHT Browning's Use of Historical Sources in Strafford 23 HAROLD OREL Liberalism and the Political Philosophy of Thomas Hill Green 39 WALTER E. SANDELIUS The Intruder-Motif in George Eliot's Fiction 55 GEORGE J. WORTH Evidence and Testimony: Philip Henry Gosse and the Omphalos Theory 69 PETER CAWS Swinburne, the Spectator in 1862, and Walter Bagehot 91 W. D. PADEN Index 117 Hazlitt on Wordsworth; or, The Poetry of Paradox by W. P. ALBRECHT The "poetry of paradox," says Hazlitt, "had its origin in the French revolution, or rather in those sentiments and opinions which produced that revolution.
  • Byron and Leigh Hunt: “The Wit in the Dungeon”1

    Byron and Leigh Hunt: “The Wit in the Dungeon”1

    Leigh Hunt 1 1 BYRON AND LEIGH HUNT: “THE WIT IN THE DUNGEON” [Italicised passages are from Leigh Hunt, Lord Byron and some of his Contemporaries (“L.B.” here and in the notes) 2 vols, 1828.] 1) England It’s in the nature of dungeons to make their occupants seem more interesting than they appear when they’re freed. I remember two victimised theatre-performers whom the Soviets prevented from emigrating for years and years, and who were blown up by their western supporters into stifled geniuses. They were freed – put on their first show … and were promptly forgotten. I saw nothing in Lord Byron at that time, but a young man who, like myself, had written a bad volume of poems – Hunt on his first sighting of Byron, swimming, in 1812. L.B. p.2. What drew Byron’s initial attention to James Henry Leigh Hunt was Hunt’s imprisonment for libelling the Prince Regent in The Examiner, the Sunday paper he and his very different brother John edited, and in part wrote. The Prince, wrote Hunt (among much else), … was a violator of his word, a libertine over head and ears in debt and disgrace, a despiser of domestic ties, the companion of gamblers and demireps, a man who has just closed half a century without one single claim on the gratitude of his country or the respect of posterity!2 This was published on March 22nd 1812, less than a month after Byron’s Lords speech on the Luddites, which was given on February 27th, and a month before his Roman Catholic Claims speech, which was given on April 22nd.
  • Bibliography

    Bibliography

    Bibliography Allott , Miriam (ed.) ( 1982 ), Essays on Shelley (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press). Angeli , Helen Rossetti ( 1911 ), Shelley and His Friends in Italy (London: Methuen). Arditi , Neil (2001 ), ‘T. S. Eliot and The Triumph of Life ’, Keats-Shelley Journal 50, pp. 124–43. Arnold , Matthew ( 1960 –77), The Complete Prose Works , ed. R. H. Super, 11 vols (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press). Bainbridge , Simon ( 1995 ), Napoleon and English Romanticism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Baker , Carlos ( 1948 ), Shelley’s Major Poetry: The Fabric of a Vision (Princeton: Princeton University Press). Bandiera , Laura ( 2008 ), ‘Shelley’s Afterlife in Italy: From 1922 to the Present’, in Schmid and Rossington ( 2008 ), pp. 74–96. Barker-Benfield , Bruce ( 1991), ‘Hogg-Shelley Papers of 1810–12’, Bodleian Library Record 14, pp. 14–29. Barker-Benfield , Bruce ( 1992 ), Shelley’s Guitar: An Exhibition of Manuscripts, First Editions and Relics to Mark the Bicentenary of the Birth of Percy Bysshe Shelley, 1792– 1992 (Oxford: Bodleian Library). Beatty, Bernard ( 1992 ), ‘Repetition’s Music: The Triumph of Life ’, in Everest ( 1992 a), pp. 99–114. Beavan , Arthur H . ( 1899 ), James and Horace Smith: A Family Narrative (London: Hurst and Blackett). Behrendt , Stephen C . ( 1989 ), Shelley and His Audiences (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press). Bennett , Betty T ., and Curran, Stuart (eds) ( 1996 ), Shelley: Poet and Legislator of the World (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press). Bennett , Betty T ., and Curran , Stuart (eds) ( 2000), Mary Shelley in Her Times (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press). Bieri, James (1990 ), ‘Shelley’s Older Brother’, Keats-Shelley Journal 39, pp. 29–33. Bindman , David , Hebron , Stephen , and O’Neill , Michael ( 2007 ), Dante Rediscovered: From Blake to Rodin (Grasmere: Wordsworth Trust).
  • Hopwoodlecture-1953 Stephen Spender.Pdf

    Hopwoodlecture-1953 Stephen Spender.Pdf

    THE YOUNG WRITER, PRESENT, PAST, AND FUTURE BY STEPHEN SPENDER Reprinted from MICHIGAN ALUMNUS QuARTERLY REVIEW August 8, 1953, Vol. LIX, No. 21 The Writer's Calling Endures, Though the Response A1ay Vary THE YOUNG WRITER, PRESENT, PAST. AND FUTURE By STEPHEN SPENDER N THIS, the occasion of giving the tasting the first fruits-I may as well tell annual Hopwood Awards, a few you that, economically speaking, being a O of you must be thinking about the writer is very like being a gambler. The first step in your career signified by receiv­ story or article that earns you $10 might ing an award. In a rather varied life, one equally well earn you $1,000. Sometimes of the things I have never done is to win you are paid a few pennies for a review, a literary prize. My first duty is to congrat­ sometimes enough to keep you for a month. ulate you on an achievement that fills me And what is true of the economics of the with admiration. Rut I must add a word of thing is also true of reputation. Many warning, which you can attribute to sour writers living today who have great repu­ grapes if you wish. You only have to look tations were hardly known during the long at lists of Nobel Prizes, Pulitzer Prizes, years when they were doing their best work. and the rest to realize how changeable-if Anyone who has lived as a writer for ?ot. £allible-is the judgment of literary twenty years or more knows too that one's Junes.
  • To Note That I Vividly Remember My First Byron Conference 37 Ye

    To Note That I Vividly Remember My First Byron Conference 37 Ye

    1 BYRON AND HAZLITT: A NEW LOOK AT THE LIBERAL by Charles E. Robinson (University of Delaware) I wish to thank Christine Kenyon-Jones and Roddy Beaton for inviting me to deliver this plenary lecture--and, as an aside, to note that I vividly remember my first Byron Conference 37 years ago, in 1976, in Messlonghi, Greece--where I met some of the distinguished scholars of the International Byron Society, a 27-year-old John Knebworth, and the work-horses of the society: Ian Scott-Kilvert and especially the beloved Michael Rees--and, of course, Elma Dangerfield. I have also run two of these international conferences in the United States (in 1979; and again, with Jack Wasserman, in 2001); and I also remember speaking on “Byron and the 4th of July” on the 4th of July 2000 at the Carlton Club in London, when and where I had the distinction of being harrumphed many times by Michael Foot, who takes me to my subject of Byron and Hazlitt, for Michael was both a Byron and a Hazlitt scholar. A quotation from Michael’s important book, The Politics of Paradise, aptly reflects the subject of this conference: for Hazlitt, he observed, “the paths of politics and literature crossed and re-crossed in an endless interweaving: each could lead to fulfilment in the other, and each without sustenance from the other could prove bitter and abortive.”1 The same for Byron as for Hazlitt: politics and literature--poetry and politics-- we are reminded of Shelley’s famous remark that “Poets are the unacknowledged 1 Michael Foot, The Politics of Paradise: A Vindication of Byron (London: Collins, 1988), pp.