Notes Introduction 1. Malcolm Bradbury and James McFarlane (eds), Modernism: A Guide to European Literature 1890–1930 (London: Penguin, 1976), p. 29. 2. Fredric Jameson, ‘Postmodernism and Consumer Society’, in The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture,ed.HalFoster (Port Townsend: Bay Press, 1983), p. 114. 3. For an example of this much-used phrase, see David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change (Oxford: Blackwell, 1990), which defines mod- ernism as ‘a troubled and fluctuating aesthetic response to conditions of modernity produced by a particular process of modernization’ (p. 99). 4. See Roger Griffin, Modernism and Fascism: The Sense of a Begin- ning under Mussolini and Hitler (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2007), esp. ‘Introduction’. 5. Immanuel Kant, The Critique of Judgement, trans. James Creed Meredith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1952), p. 65. 6. Walter Pater, ‘On Style’, in Essays on Literature and Art,ed. Jennifer Uglow (London: Dent, 1973), p. 77. 7. Stéphane Mallarmé, ‘Le Tombeau d’Edgar Poe’, in Poésies (Paris: Flammarion, 1989), p. 99. 8. T.S. Eliot, ‘Four Quartets’, in Collected Poems 1909–1962 (London: Faber & Faber, 1963), p. 218. 9. Paul Valéry, ‘Poetry and Abstract Thought’, in The Art of Poetry, trans. Denise Folliot (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1958), pp. 52–81, here p. 81. 10. Robert Musil, The Confusions of Young Törless, trans. Shaun Whiteside (London: Penguin, 2001), p. 1. 11. William Carlos Williams, Autobiography (New York: New Direc- tions, 1967), p. 380. 12. See, for instance, Bodo Müller, ‘Der Verlust der Sprache. Zur linguistischen Krise in der Literatur’, Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift 16 (1966), 225–43. 245 246 Notes to Introduction 13. Letter to Louise Colet, 16 January 1852. The Selected Letters of Gustave Flaubert, trans. Francis Steegmuller (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1954), p. 131. 14. Theodor W. Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, trans. Robert Hullot- Kentor (London: Continuum, 2004), p. 229. 15. Thomas Mann, Death in Venice, trans. David Luke (London: Vintage, 1998), p. 207. 16. Angela Leighton, On Form (Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 2. 17. Ibid. 18. Susan Sontag, ‘On Style’, in A Susan Sontag Reader (London: Penguin, 1983), pp. 137–55, here p. 141 (originally published in Against Interpretation, New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1966). 19. Ibid., pp. 142–3. 20. Peter Gay, Style in History (New York: Basic Books, 1974), p. 3. 21. Sontag, ‘On Style’, p. 154. 22. Ibid., p. 153. 23. Thomas Mann, Reflections of a Nonpolitical Man, trans. Walter D. Morris (New York: Frederick Ungar, 1983), p. 55. 24. Geoffrey Hill, ‘Tacit Pledges’, in Collected Critical Writings,ed. Kenneth Haynes (Oxford University Press, 2008), p. 407. 25. ‘Style signifie donc la manière dont quelqu’un s’exprime, quoi qu’il exprime.’ Paul Valéry, Vues (Paris: La Table Ronde, 1948), p. 311. 26. ‘Perfomative’ is to be understood in J.L. Austin’s famous sense: ‘to utter the [performative] sentence is not to describe my doing of what I should be said in so uttering to be doing or to state that I am doing it: it is to do it’. J.L. Austin, HowtoDoThings with Words (Oxford University Press, 1971), p. 6. 27. Roland Barthes, Writing Degree Zero, trans. Annette Lavers and Colin Smith (London: Jonathan Cape, 1967), p. 9. 28. Adorno also identifies ‘technique’, which he defines – in terms that evoke the Kantian ‘purposiveness without purpose’ – as ‘that whereby artworks are organized as purposeful in a way that is denied to empirical existence’ (Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, p. 283). 29. Ibid., pp. 184–7. 30. Ibid., p. 187. 31. Ibid., p. 189. 32. Ibid., p. 269. 33. Ibid., p. 270. Notes to Introduction 247 34. See, for instance: ‘The rank of an artwork is defined essen- tially by whether it exposes itself to, or withdraws from, the irreconcilable.’ Ibid., p. 249. 35. Ibid., p. 270. 36. Ibid., p. 271. 37. Ibid. 38. In a 1973 essay in the Times Literary Supplement, George Steiner writes of how Adorno is ‘persuasive on the characteristic nar- cissism in modern art, the reflexive use of the form of the work of art as the theme of the work. Following Benjamin, [Adorno] has sound suggestions regarding the modification of the concept of style through technological modes of reproduc- tion.’ See George Steiner, ‘Adorno: Love and Cognition’, Times Literary Supplement, 9 March 1973, pp. 253–5. 39. Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, p. 284. 40. Ibid., p. 328. 41. Ibid., p. 196. 42. Jean-Yves Tadié, La Critique littéraire au XXe siècle (Paris: Belfond, 1987), p. 10. 43. Ibid., p. 10. 44. Terry Eagleton, Literary Theory: An Introduction (Oxford: Blackwell, 1983), p. 3. 45. Tadié, La Critique littéraire au XXe siècle, p. 29. 46. Ibid., p. 30. 47. Roman Jakobson, ‘Retrospect’, in Selected Writings I (Berlin/ New York/Amsterdam: Mouton, 1962), pp. 631–2, quoted in introduction to Language in Literature (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987), pp. 3–4. 48. Jakobson, ‘Futurism’, in Language in Literature, pp. 28–33, here p. 30. 49. Charles Baudelaire, ‘The Painter of Modern Life’, in Selected Writings on Art and Artists (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972), p. 403. 50. Rilke described one of his poems, ‘The Ball’, in these terms. See Elisabeth Schmidt-Pauli, Rainer Maria Rilke. Ein Gedenkbuch (Basel: Schwabe, 1940), p. 20. 51. Jakobson, ‘Futurism’, p. 32. 52. Erich Auerbach’s influential study of realist forms of writ- ing, Mimesis (1946), gives an historical overview of the development of these differing registers of style: as Jean- Yves Tadié writes, ‘the history of European literature is [for Auerbach] none other than that of a metamorphosis: 248 Notes to Introduction that of stylistic levels (niveaux stylistiques)’, Tadié, La Cri- tique littéraire au XXe siècle, p. 59. See also Hans-Ulrich Gumbrecht, ‘Schwindende Stabilität der Wirklichkeit. Eine Geschichte des Stilbegriffs’, in Stil. Geschichten und Funktionen eines kulturwissenschaftlichen Diskurselements, ed. Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht and K. Ludwig Pfeiffer (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1986), pp. 726–88, here pp. 774–6. 53. See Gumbrecht, ‘Schwindende Stabilität der Wirklichkeit’, esp. p. 753. 54. Letter to Louise Colet, 15 July 1853. Selected Letters, p. 155. 55. Quoted by Matei Calinescu, Five Faces of Modernity (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1987), pp. 72–3. 56. T.E. Hulme, ‘Notes on Language and Style’, in Selected Writ- ings, ed. Patrick McGuinness (Manchester: Carcanet, 1998), pp. 39–40. 57. Quoted in the ‘Prefatory Note’ to William Empson, Seven Types of Ambiguity (London: Penguin, 1995), p. xiii. 58. F.R. Leavis, The Common Pursuit (London: Chatto & Windus, 1952), p. 31. 59. F.R. Leavis, New Bearings in English Poetry (London: Pelican, 1972), p. 48. 60. Ibid., p. 24. 61. Ibid. 62. Ibid., p. 144. 63. Ibid., p. 119. 64. Ibid., p. 120. 65. Ibid., p. 121. 66. Bridges quotes this in his preface to the 1918 edition of Hopkins’ poems (see Poems of Gerard Manley Hopkins [London: Humphrey Milford, 1918], p. 12). Also quoted by Leavis, New Bearings in English Poetry, pp. 120–1. 67. Leavis, New Bearings in English Poetry, p. 121. 68. Ibid., p. 122. 69. Ibid., p. 129. 70. Ibid. 71. Stendhal, ‘Racine et Shakespeare’, quoted in John Middleton Murry, The Problem of Style (Oxford University Press, 1922), p. 3. 72. Murry claims that Swinburne, for instance, suffers from the ‘hallucination’ of hollow style without true feeling. See Murry, The Problem of Style,p.22. 73. Ibid., pp. 10–11. Notes to Introduction 249 74. Ibid., p. 17. 75. Ibid., p. 136. 76. Both quoted in Herbert Read, English Prose Style (London: Bell, 1963), p. xvi. 77. Both quoted in ibid., p. xvi. 78. See e.g. K. Ludwig Pfeiffer, ‘Produktive Labilität. Funktionen des Stilbegriffs’, in Stil. Geschichten und Funktionen eines kul- turwissenschaftlichen Diskurselements, pp. 685–725, esp. p. 709. Pfeiffer notes the obvious parallel with the rise of ‘werkimma- nente Interpretation’ after the Second World War. 79. Alois Riegl, Problems of Style, trans. Evelyn Kain (Princeton University Press, 1993). 80. Wilhelm Worringer, Abstraction and Empathy: A Contribution to the Psychology of Style (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963), p. 9. 81. Ibid. 82. Ibid., p. vii. 83. Ibid., p. 34. 84. Heinrich Wölfflin, Kunstgeschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Das Prob- lem der Stilentwicklung in der neueren Kunst (1915), translated as Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Later Art, trans. M.D. Hottinger (New York: Dover, 1950), p. 14. Wölfflin also refers to ‘categories of beholding’, p. 227. 85. Ibid., p. 10. 86. René Wellek, ‘Stylistics, Poetics and Criticism’, in Literary Style: A Symposium (Oxford University Press, 1971), pp. 65–76, here p. 70. Gumbrecht echoes this: ‘In the 1920s, the humanities – particularly in Germany – were characterized by an almost “imperial” expansion of the paradigm of style.’ Gumbrecht, ‘Schwindende Stabilität der Wirklichkeit’, p. 772. 87. Die Insel, vol. I, ed. Otto Julius Bierbaum, Alfred Walter Heymel and Rudolf Alexander Schröder (Berlin: Schuster & Loeffler, 1899), p. 2. 88. Heinrich Vogeler, Erinnerungen (Berlin: Rütter and Loening, 1952), p. 74. 89. Jan Andres, ‘Gegenbilder. Stefan Georges poetische Kulturkritik in den “Zeitgedichten” des Siebenten Rings’, George-Jahrbuch 6 (2006–7), pp. 31–54, here p. 41. 90. Stefan George, ‘Das Wort’, in Werke, vol. I (Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 2000), pp. 466–7. 250 Notes to Introduction 91. For an illuminating account of George’s legacy, see Ulrich Raulff, Kreis ohne Meister. Stefan Georges Nachleben (Munich: Beck, 2009). 92. Tadié, La Critique littéraire au XXe siècle, p. 47. 93. See Rainer Maria Rilke / Norbert von Hellingrath. Briefe und Doku- mente, ed. Klaus E. Bohnenkamp (Göttingen: Wallstein, 2008). 94. See Theodor W. Adorno, ‘Parataxis. Zur späten Lyrik Hölderlins’, in Noten zur Literatur. Gesammelte Schriften II (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1974), pp. 447–91. Hölderlin had trans- lated Pindar and Sophocles into a new kind of German, one which attempted to retain the movements of the Greek in the syntax of the German.