DOCSLIB.ORG

181-5-1850 Mary Elizabeth Rontree

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
181-5-1850 Mary Elizabeth Rontree Ilittkkit! lll NOT TO BE TAKEN AWAY SATIRE AND PARODY IN THE FICTION OF THOMAS LOVE PEACOCK AND THE EARLY WRITINGS OF WILLIAM MAKEPEACE THACKERAY 181-5-1850 Mary Elizabeth Rontree A thesis submittedto The University of Gloucestershire in accordance with the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Humanities September2004 ST COPY AVAILA L Abstract This thesisexamines the works of Peacockand the early periodical contributions of Thackerayin the light of recent twentieth-centurycritical interpretationsof satire. In particular, attention to Peacock'suse of elementsof the Menippeansub-genre in his satirical fiction offers a reassessmentof his place in the literary tradition. While Thackeray'searly writings demonstratesome characteristicsof Menippeansatire, a review of his work from the broader perspectiveof BakhtiWsexposition of carnival influencesin serio-comicliterature provides a new understandingof the origins and usesof his narratorial devices. A comparisonof the work of the two authors, within the time constraint of the first half of the nineteenthcentury, illustrates how nineteenth-centurypublishing innovations shapedliterary perceptionsof satire. Although the high statusof the genre in the predominantculture of the previous century was challengedby the growth of the readingpublic, satire found new energy and modesof expressionin the popular magazinesof the period. In addition, writers facing the increasingheterogeneity of new reading audiences, forced were to reconsidertheir personalideals of authorshipand literature, while renegotiatingtheir position in the literary marketplace. Organizedin six chapters,the discussionopens with an account of traditional interpretationsof satire, and goes on to examinerecent analysesof the genre. The secondchapter focuses on the relevanceof these new interpretations to the work of Peacockand Thackerayand the extent to which the use of Menippeanforms of satire enabledeach to challengethe establishedopinions of their period. Changesin conceptsof reading and writing and innovations in modes of publication form the substanceof the third chapter and this is followed by an analysisof the work of both writers, using Bakhtin's interpretation of the Menippeansub-genre in the broader context of serio-comicdiscourse and the carnival tradition, Chapter five is a comparativestudy of the attitudes of both writers towards contemporaryliterature and the final section placestheir work in the political context of the period. Both Peacockand Thackeraymade extensive use of elementsof Menippeansatire in their fiction. The content of their work, however, and their modesof writing were highly individual, to someextent shapedby the different marketsthey supplied.Collectively, their writings illustrate two aspectsof the cultural watershedof the early nineteenthcentury, Peacockreflecting traditional notions of authorshipand Thackerayrepresenting a new industry, regulatedby the commercialconsiderations of supply and demand.As satirists,each succeededin adaptingthe genre to satisfyboth his own authorial integrity and the expectations of his readers. DECLARATION I declarethat the work in this thesiswas carried out in accordancewith the regulationsof the University of Goucestershireand is original except where indicatedby specificreference in the text. No part of this thesishas been submitted as part of any other academicaward. The thesishas not beenpresented to any other educationinstitution in the United Kingdom or overseas. Any views expressedin the thesisare those of the author and in no way represent those of the University. m Signed Date: --Irl ;Z' . -ý-L ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am most grateful to the University of Gloucestershirefor making this researchproject possibleand to my supervisors,Professor Simon Dentith and ProfessorPhilip Martin, for their support and encouragement.In particular, I owe an immensedebt of gratitude to Simon,whose energy and enthusiasmare truly inspirational. I would also like to thank my neglectedfamily and friends for their forbearanceand patience. i Introduction. The position of satire in the literary tradition during the first half of the nineteenth century has received little critical attention and remains unclear. Contemporary discussion has focused on the Augustan period as the great age of satire, an era during which writers explored the aesthetic principles and critical precepts of classical authors, consciously accepting these as models for their own work. What they produced was openly imitative of their literary predecessors and rigorously circumscribed by the cultural assimilation of these earlier modes of writing. Critical opinion has, until recently, suffered from similar constraints, with the result that during the early years of the nineteenth century, satire, which ceased to match the demanding criteria of the formal style, attracted little attention, and the genre was assumed to be in a state of degeneration and decline. This thesis explores the possibility that satire, at this time, was not only still very much in evidence, but also gaining in energy and momentum, as it survived a period of rapid cultural change. Central to this argument is a contextual evaluation of new market forces operating within the publishing industry. Changes in methods of publication and alterations in the constitution of reading audiences brought up fundamental questions concerning the nature of authorship, causing divisions within the profession itself. This process also exposed hierarchical tensions between the predominant culture of the period and a growing popular culture within the literary marketplace. For the first time, the established notion of the pursuit of literature as a prerogative of the privileged classes came under a serious challenge and experienced authors as well as emerging writers were obliged to adapt to new artistic and commercial demands. 11 At the sametime, satire had encountereda direct challengefrom the Romantic writers, and the form beganto break free from the constraintsof the formal satiristsof the previous century. Less familiar modesof the genre,which had remaineddormant, were stimulatedinto use. Although Menippeansatire has beenidentified in ancient classicalliterature and in someRenaissance seriocomic fiction, the sub-genrehas, until recently, receivedlittle attention. An investigation into the ways in which elementsof the mode surfacedin someforms of nineteenth-centurywriting will broadenthe focus of critical conceptionsof satire, and offer new interpretationsof work that hasbeen previously neglected. The following chaptersexamine, in somedetail, the political context of the period and cultural changesin conceptsof publishingand readership. However, this investigationis primarily intendedto analyse,in the light of recent twentieth-centuryliterary criticism, the methodsby which Peacockand Thackeray accommodatedsatire into their work. Referenceto recent twentieth-century discussionsof Menippeansatire, Frye (1957), Bakhtin (1984), Relihan (1993) and Kaplan (2000), suggestsa context Peacock'ssatirical fiction and Thackeray'searly periodical work and indicatesthat elementsof the mode may have survived during the first half of the nineteenthcentury, as it acquirednew audiencesin an increasinglyheterogeneous literary marketplace. Peacockmade use of the dialogic characteristicsof Menippeansatire as a tool of ideological enquiry, challengingthe establishedopinions of a largely intellectualreadership. Thackerayemployed carnivalesque modes of discoursein his periodical work, as he attackedcontemporary values. Finally, this analysiswill justify the application of recent criticism to nineteenth-centurywriting, and offer a iii re-appraisal of the respective positions of Peacock and Thackeray in the literary tradition. I Chapter One: A Further Progress of Satire Satire, as a literary genre, is resistant to any single definition. Early European attempts at clarification were confused by uncertainties concerning the etymological origins of the word. Elizabethan commentary is largely based on the theory that the form derived from the satyr-gods of Greek drama, who employed harsh invective to rebuke fellow citizens for their follies and vices. Renaissance theory, in particular Casaubon's De SatjTica Graecorum Poesi et Romanorum Satira (1605), refuted the 'satyr' connection and presented a broader, more comprehensive perspective of the genre. However, the acceptance of Casaubon's thesis was hampered by scholarly disputants, who defended one or another of the Roman satirists, each distorting theories of satire to fit the style of his preferred champion. The importance of Casaubon's contribution was taken up and developed by Dryden, whose Discourse on the Origin anc4Progress of Satire (1693), is recognised as the most prominent and influential work on English satire, Griffin writes that: 'Our reigning notion of satire as a moral art and as a carefully constructed and unified contrast between vice and virtue finds its fullest and most influential presentation in Dryden's essay.' I The Discourse owes its lasting prominence to two factors: in the first instance, the status of Dryden's own work as a satirist earned him a secure place in literary history; secondly, he pulled together the disparate factions of seventeenth-century theory, producing a unified paradigm that could be used to restore satire to the cultural eminence of its classical origins. Derived from the work of Horace, Persius and Juvenal, his prescriptive criteria of thematic unity and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Pennsylvania State University the Graduate School College of The
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of the Liberal Arts THE SATIRIC NOVEL FROM FIELDING TO HOGG A Dissertation in English by Julian Fung © 2015 Julian Fung Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2015 ii The dissertation of Julian Fung was reviewed and approved* by the following: Robert D. Hume Evan Pugh Professor of English Dissertation Adviser Chair of Committee John T. Harwood Associate Professor of English and Information Sciences and Technology Philip Jenkins Edwin Erle Sparks Professor Emeritus of the Humanities Nicholas A. Joukovsky Professor of English Debra Hawhee Professor of English and Communication Arts and Sciences Director of Graduate Studies *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School. iii ABSTRACT This dissertation is an overview of the British novel c. 1740–1830 from the perspective of a scholar interested in narrative satire. Many of the major novels in this period were considered by contemporary readers to be satires or at least to contain strong satiric elements, yet few scholars have attempted to explain how these novels use satire. Critics of individual novelists have, to varying degrees, treated their subjects as satirists—Smollett is frequently read as a satirist, as is Peacock. But these studies often do not give a sense of the sheer variety and diversity of this period’s novelistic satire. Though many works were thought to be satiric, they use satire in vastly different ways for various purposes. How much of a relationship exists between the satire of Smollett, Burney, and Bage, for instance? These novelists all write works containing satire, but they diverge in both tone and aim.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Peacock's Maid Marian: a Humorist's Treatment of Traditional Materials
    Eastern Illinois University The Keep Plan B Papers Student Theses & Publications 1-1-1967 Thomas Peacock's Maid Marian: A Humorist's Treatment of Traditional Materials Ronald D. Snead Follow this and additional works at: https://thekeep.eiu.edu/plan_b Recommended Citation Snead, Ronald D., "Thomas Peacock's Maid Marian: A Humorist's Treatment of Traditional Materials" (1967). Plan B Papers. 542. https://thekeep.eiu.edu/plan_b/542 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Theses & Publications at The Keep. It has been accepted for inclusion in Plan B Papers by an authorized administrator of The Keep. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Thomas fea~ock's Maid Marian: A Humorist 's Treatment of raditional Materials (TITLE) BY Ronala L. Snesd PLAN B PAPER SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF SCIENCE IN EDUCATION AND PREPARED IN COURSE English 5e5 IN THE GRADUATE SCHOOL, EASTERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY, CHARLESTON, ILLINOIS 1966-67 YEAR I HEREBY RECOMMEND THIS PLAN B PAPER BE ACCEPTED AS FULFILLING THIS PART OF THE DEGREE, M.S. IN ED . '" °()$.( . , ( 'f DATE te7 DATE DEPARTMENT HEAD Thomas Love Peacock is a little knovm but delightful nineteenth century English author . His seven works·- Headlong Hall (1815), Melincourt (1817), Hightmare Abbey (1818), Ma id Marian ( 1822), The Misfortun.es of Elphin (1829), Crochet Castle (1831), and Gryll Grange (1860 ) -- 1 Ian Jack calls satiric tales. Traditionally, these works have been referred to as novels end would qualify under Thrall and Hibbard 1 s handbook definition of a novel as any extended piece of prose fiction.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Southey Poems Pdf
    Robert southey poems pdf Continue For the chairman of the Australian Ballet, see Robert Southee (businessman). This article needs additional quotes to verify. Please help improve this article by adding quotes to reliable sources. Non-sources of materials can be challenged and removed. Find sources: Robert Southee - news newspaper book scientist JSTOR (August 2018) (Learn, how and when to remove this template message) Robert SoutheyPortrait, c. 1795Born (1774-08-12)12 August 1774Bristole, EnglandDied21 March 1843 (1843-03-21) (age 68)London, EnglandOccupationPoet, historian, historian, historian, historian, historian, historian, historian, biographer, essayistLiter movementRoantisisspehit Fricker (1795-1838; her death)Carolina Ann Bowles (1839-1843; his death) Robert Southee (1839-1843; his death) Robert Southee (1839-1843; his death) Robert Southee (1839-1843; his death) Robert Southee (1839-1843; his death) Robert Southee (1839-1843; his death) Robert Southee (1839-1843; his death) Robert Southee (183 /ˈsaʊði/ or /ˈsʌði/; August 12, 1774 -March 21, 1843) was an English romantic poet and poet laureate from 1813 until his death. Like other lake poets, William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Southee began as a radical but became steadily more conservative as he gained respect for Britain and its institutions. Other romantics, notably Byron, accused him of siding with the institution for money and status. He is remembered as the author of the poem After Blenheim and the original version of Goldilocks and the Three Bears. Life Robert Southey, Sir Francis Chantrey, 1832, National Portrait Gallery, London Robert Southee was born in Wine Street, Bristol, Robert Southey and Margaret Hill. He was educated at Westminster School in London (where he was expelled for writing an article in The Flagellant, attributing the invention to the devil), and at Balliol College, Oxford.
    [Show full text]
  • THOMAS LOVE PEACOCK by Tony Reeve
    THOMAS LOVE PEACOCK By Tony Reeve Thomas Love Peacock became a resident of Marlow in the summer of 1815 and had a house there until July 1819, a period of four years. During this time, he is best known as a friend and neighbour of the poet, Percy Bysshe Shelley and his wife, Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein, when they also lived in Marlow. Yet, in many ways, it is difficult to understand why they should have been friends. For example, Peacock was seven years older than Shelley, being born on 18 October 1785 at Weymouth in Dorset, the son of a London glass merchant. His father died in 1794 when Peacock was only 8 years of age, but in preparation for his death, his father purchased three annuities, which failed Thomas Love Peacock many years early. As a result, Peacock had to leave school at eleven years of age and take a job as a lowly clerk in the City of London. He had no secondary education at all, but was clearly of outstanding intelligence and managed to educate himself. He taught himself Latin, ancient Greek, French and Italian and became an expert on philosophy and the classic writers. Peacock had no expectations of an inheritance; he could not borrow money. When he got into debt, he worried about his bills and did his best to pay tradesmen. He was not a big man, but was slim and narrow-shouldered. He dressed very neatly and conventionally like a clerk, with a hat over a shock of dark hair.
    [Show full text]
  • Crotchet Castle Thomas Love Peacock , Edited by Freya Johnston , Matthew Bevis Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-03072-5 — Crotchet Castle Thomas Love Peacock , Edited by Freya Johnston , Matthew Bevis Frontmatter More Information the cambridge edition of the novels of THOMAS LOVE PEACOCK crotchet castle © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-03072-5 — Crotchet Castle Thomas Love Peacock , Edited by Freya Johnston , Matthew Bevis Frontmatter More Information © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-03072-5 — Crotchet Castle Thomas Love Peacock , Edited by Freya Johnston , Matthew Bevis Frontmatter More Information the cambridge edition of the novels of THOMAS LOVE PEACOCK general editor: Freya Johnston, University of Oxford senior editorial advisor: Nicholas A. Joukovsky, Pennsylvania State University volumes in this series 1. Headlong Hall 2. Melincourt 3. Nightmare Abbey 4. Maid Marian 5. The Misfortunes of Elphin 6. Crotchet Castle 7. Gryll Grange © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-03072-5 — Crotchet Castle Thomas Love Peacock , Edited by Freya Johnston , Matthew Bevis Frontmatter More Information © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-03072-5 — Crotchet Castle Thomas Love Peacock , Edited by Freya Johnston , Matthew Bevis Frontmatter More Information thomas love peacock CROTCHET CASTLE Edited by Freya Johnston and Matthew Bevis © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-03072-5 — Crotchet Castle Thomas Love Peacock , Edited by Freya Johnston , Matthew Bevis Frontmatter More Information University Printing House, Cambridge CB2 8BS, United Kingdom Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.
    [Show full text]
  • 28Th International Congress on Medieval Studies
    Dear Colleague: It is my pleasure to invite you to the Twenty-Eighth International Congress on Medieval Studies in Kalamazoo which will convene from May 6-9, 1993 on the campus of Western Michigan University under the sponsorship of WMU's Medieval Institute. I call your attention to two highlights of this year's Congress: the German-American Colloquium on German Medieval History sponsored by the Medieval Academy of America and the German Historical Institute in Washington, and the Symposium on the Theory and Practice of Translation in the Middle Ages organized by Professor Jeanette Beer of Purdue University. We are delighted to welcome the early music ensemble Sequentia back to Kalamazoo and look forward to their performance of Vox Feminae: Music from Medieval Women's Cloisters on Thursday evening. On Friday evening, Eberhard Kummer from Vienna, also on a return visit, will perform songs by the Middle High German songwriter Neidhard, and on Saturday night AAI Productions from New York will present several one-act plays from the 7 Sins / 7 Virtues, a project conceived and directed by Melanie Sutherland. These provocative plays explore the traditional seven deadly sins and the seven cardinal virtues through modem interpretations by AAI's resident playwrights. In addition an exhibit sponsored by the Friends of the Road to Santiago entitled "Celebrating the Holy Year: Santiago, a Saint of Two Worlds/Spanish Sketches--Marking the Millenium" will be on display in the Fetzer Center for the duration of the Congress. Please pay close attention to the following pages which contain important information regarding registration, housing, meals, transportation, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Gryll Grange
    GRYLL GRANGE BY THOMAS LOVE PEACOCK ILLUSTRATED BY F. H. TOWNSEND WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY GEORGE SAINTSBURY Mention MACMILLAN AND CO., LTD. NEW YORK : MACMILLAN & CO. 1896 A II rights resemed INTRODUCTION GR YLL GRANGE, the last and mellowest fruit from Pea­ cock's tree, was, like most mellow fruit, not matured hastily. In saying this I do not refer to the long period-exactly a generation in the conventional sense-which intervened between Crotchet Castle of 1831 and this of 1861. For we know as a matter of fact, from the preface to the 1856 edi­ tion of Meli'ncourt, that Peacock was planning Gryll Grange at a time considerably nearer to, but still some years from, its actual publication. There might perhaps have been room forfear lest .such a proceeding, on the part of a man of seventy-five who was living in retirement, should result in an ill-digested mass of detail, tempered or rather distempered by the grumbling of old age, and exhibiting the marks of failing powers. No anticipation could have been more happily falsified. The advance in good temper of Gryll Grange, even upon Crotchet Castle itself, is denied by no one. The book, though long for its author, is not in the least overloaded; and no signs of failure have ever been detected in it except by those who upbraid the still further severance between the line of Peacock's thought and the line of what is vulgarly accounted 'progress,' and who almost oi,enly impute decay to powers no longer used on their side but against them.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Love Peacock's First Novel, Headlong Hall
    ORE Open Research Exeter TITLE Unstoppable force meets immovable object: Peacock’s Headlong Hall and the autonomy of infrastructure AUTHORS Ewers, C JOURNAL Nineteenth-Century Contexts DEPOSITED IN ORE 09 March 2020 This version available at http://hdl.handle.net/10871/120197 COPYRIGHT AND REUSE Open Research Exeter makes this work available in accordance with publisher policies. A NOTE ON VERSIONS The version presented here may differ from the published version. If citing, you are advised to consult the published version for pagination, volume/issue and date of publication Abstract: Thomas Love Peacock’s first novel, Headlong Hall (1815), investigates the effect of infrastructure at a moment when the concept was first being crystallized. Peacock asks what it means when the “headlong” momentum of large technological systems starts to invade more traditional and immovable structures, such as the manorial hall of Squire Headlong. Peacock’s novels are often regarded as inconclusive; Headlong Hall starts with a debate between the passengers on the Irish mail about progress, and ends with the statu-quo-ite Mr Jenkison stating he cannot tell if humanity is advancing or regressing. This doubtful progress is mirrored by Peacock’s description of the improvements wrought by the mail-coach, with the road to Ireland, in the process of being improved by Thomas Telford, also the subject of a contemporary debate about where the nation was heading. Peacock’s novel is, however, unambiguous in the way it describes what Brian Larkin has called the “politics and poetics” of infrastructure, and the way it has a symbolism and an effect that goes far beyond the purely technical.
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Love Peacock Crotchet Castle
    THOMAS LOVE PEACOCK CROTCHET CASTLE 2008 – All rights reserved Non commercial use permitted CROTCHET CASTLE by Thomas Love Peacock INTRODUCTION Thomas Love Peacock was born at Weymouth in 1785. His first poem, "The Genius of the Thames," was in its second edition when he became one of the friends of Shelley. That was in 1812, when Shelley's age was twenty, Peacock's twenty-seven. The acquaintance strengthened, until Peacock became the friend in whose judgment Shelley put especial trust. There were many points of agreement. Peacock, at that time, shared, in a more practical way, Shelley's desire for root and branch reform; both wore poets, although not equally gifted, and both loved Plato and the Greek tragedians. In "Crotchet Castle" Peacock has expressed his own delight in Greek literature through the talk of the Reverend Dr. Folliott. But Shelley's friendship for Peacock included a trust in him that was maintained by points of unlikeness. Peacock was shrewd and witty. He delighted in extravagance of a satire which usually said more than it meant, but always rested upon a foundation of good sense. Then also there was a touch of the poet to give grace to the utterances of a clear-headed man of the world. It was Peacock who gave its name to Shelley's poem of "Alastor, or the Spirit of Solitude," published in 1816. The "Spirit of Solitude" being treated as a spirit of evil, Peacock suggested calling it "Alastor," since the Greek [Greek text] means an evil genius. Peacock's novels are unlike those of other men: they are the genuine expressions of an original and independent mind.
    [Show full text]
  • Deteriorationism in the Works of Thomas Love Peacock and Kamo No Chomei Sub Title Author Armour, Andrew J.L
    Title The lure of sylvan solitude : deteriorationism in the works of Thomas Love Peacock and Kamo no Chomei Sub Title Author Armour, Andrew J.L. Publisher 慶應義塾大学藝文学会 Publication year 1997 Jtitle 藝文研究 (The geibun-kenkyu : journal of arts and letters). Vol.73, (1997. 12) ,p.177- 192 Abstract Notes 安藤伸介, 岩崎春雄両教授退任記念論文集 Genre Journal Article URL https://koara.lib.keio.ac.jp/xoonips/modules/xoonips/detail.php?koara_id=AN00072643-0073000 1-0177 慶應義塾大学学術情報リポジトリ(KOARA)に掲載されているコンテンツの著作権は、それぞれの著作者、学会または出版社/発行者に帰属し、その権利は著作権法によって 保護されています。引用にあたっては、著作権法を遵守してご利用ください。 The copyrights of content available on the KeiO Associated Repository of Academic resources (KOARA) belong to the respective authors, academic societies, or publishers/issuers, and these rights are protected by the Japanese Copyright Act. When quoting the content, please follow the Japanese copyright act. Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) The Lure of Sylvan Solitude : Deteriorationism in the Works of Thomas Love Peacock and Kamo no Chomei Andrew J. L. Armour For the millenarian doomsayer, disaster looms in every possible field of human activity. And those who lend an ear to such dire prophecies turn to a philosophy of descent, decay, and despair. In many cases, the sincerity of these beliefs may be open to question, but an undeniable benefit of their albeit temporary popularity is that they offer us a glimpse of the medieval mindset, a mental climate in which deterioration is seen as the natural course of life. One of the more striking symbols of this inevitable deterioration is perhaps the Tower of Babel. Before its construction, there was but one language. But, as a divine punishment for this early experiment in elevated architecture, Man was forced to speak in many tongues, the one no longer able to communicate with his neighbour.
    [Show full text]
  • Finnish Politician. Brought up by an Aunt, He Won An
    He wrote two operas, a symphony, two concertos and much piano music, including the notorious Minuet in G (1887). He settled in California in 1913. His international reputation and his efforts for his country P in raising relief funds and in nationalist propaganda during World War I were major factors in influencing Paasikivi, Juho Kusti (originally Johan Gustaf President Woodrow *Wilson to propose the creation Hellsen) (1870–1956). Finnish politician. Brought of an independent Polish state as an Allied war up by an aunt, he won an LLD at Helsinki University, aim. Marshal *Piłsudski appointed Paderewski as becoming an inspector of finances, then a banker. Prime Minister and Foreign Minister (1919) and he Finland declared its independence from Russia represented Poland at the Paris Peace Conference and (1917) and Paasikivi served as Prime Minister 1918, signed the Treaty of Versailles (1919). In December resigning when his proposal for a constitutional he retired and returned to his music but in 1939, monarchy failed. He returned to banking and flirted after Poland had been overrun in World War II, with the semi-Fascist Lapua movement. He was he reappeared briefly in political life as chairman of Ambassador to Sweden 1936–39 and to the USSR the Polish national council in exile. 1939–41. World War II forced him to move from Páez, Juan Antonio (1790–1873). Venezuelan conservatism to realism. *Mannerheim appointed liberator. He fought against the Spanish with varying him Prime Minister 1944–46, and he won two success until he joined (1818) *Bolívar and shared terms as President 1946–56.
    [Show full text]
  • Satireinthenovelsofth Omaslovepeacockbyronl
    SATIRE IN THE NOVELS OF THOMAS LOVE PEACOCK fey BYRON LAIRD FERGUSON A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements far the degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Department ,J ' Qf ENGLISH THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA AUGUST, 1950 Satire in the Novels of Thomas,Love Peacock ABSTRACT Two main problems are investigated: Peacock's technique, his aims and method, as a satirical novelist; and his personal opinions, which, often obscured.by irony, can be determined only by reference to biography, and to his letters, memoirs, and serious essays. He aimed to satirize "public conduct and public opinion" and not private life. His characters, in the •'humours" tradition, are abstractions,of topical ideas, fads, and theories; others are caricatures of contemporary philosophers, politicians, and men of letters. All expose the folly of their opinion while indulging in after-dinner wine, song, and con• troversy. Peacock believed that 'pretentiousness and folly pervaded upper middle-class English society. As a satirist, he is a jester, not a reformer. His attack, diffuse and generally superficial, is governed by laughter rather than bitterness. His irony is discernible in his treatment of character and setting, in his scornful attitude towards his reader, and in his divided position as a humorist who some• times poses as a serious critic. He is a stylist, a creator of witty and pedantic dialogue who is content merely to air disparate and extreme ideas, to pursue folly without attempt• ing to slay it. Peacock's personal opinions and prejudices are determined, thus to interpret his satire, in these broad areas: society, politics, religion, education and science, and men of letters.
    [Show full text]