Notes Introduction 1. Angela Leighton, Shelley and the Sublime (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984) p. 18. Also see Rosemary Jackson, Fantasy: the Literature of Subversion (London: Methuen, 1981) p. 24. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 2. See for example, Marie Bonaparte’s classic Freudian study of Edgar Allan Poe, The Life and Works of Edgar Allan Poe: a Psycho-Analytic Interpretation (1933) trans. J. Rodker (London: Imago, 1949). See also Christine Brooke- Rose, The Rhetoric of the Unreal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981) for an early study which uses Lacanian ideas. 3. Terry Castle, The Female Thermometer: Eighteenth-Century Culture and the Invention of the Uncanny (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995). All subse- quent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 4. Vijay Mishra, The Gothic Sublime (New York: State University of New York Press, 1994). All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 5. David B. Morris, ‘Gothic Sublimity’, New Literary History 16, 2 (1985) 299–319, 302. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 6. Clive Bloom, Reading Poe Reading Freud: the Romantic Imagination in Crisis (London: Macmillan, 1988) p. 8. 1 The Gothic and the Sublime 1. Sigmund Freud, ‘The Uncanny’ (1919) in Art and Literature: Jensen’s Gradiva, Leonardo Da Vinci and Other Works, trans. J. Strachey, ed. A. Dickson (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1985) pp. 339–76. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 2. See Jackson, Fantasy: the Literature of Subversion pp. 49–53. Her arguments concerning the relationship between I/not-I are drawn from Tzvetan Todorov’s, The Fantastic: a Structural Approach to a Literary Genre, trans. R. Howard (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1975). 3. Cassius Longinus, Longinus on Sublimity (c.1st–2nd century AD) trans. D.A. Russell (Oxford: Clarendon, 1965) p. 46. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 4. Thomas Weiskel, The Romantic Sublime: Studies in the Structure and Psychology of Transcendence (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986) p. 24. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 5. Edmund Burke, A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful (1759) ed. James T. Boulton (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987). This is the edition which includes Burke’s preamble on Taste which is relevant to our argument and so is the edition referred to. It also includes the 1757 text. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 179 180 Notes 6. Immanuel Kant, ‘The Analytic of the Sublime’ in The Critique of Judgement, Part 1 (1790) trans. James C. Meredith (Oxford: Clarendon, 1986) pp. 90–203. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 2 Frankenstein: Sublimity Reconsidered, Foucault and Kristeva 1. Mary Shelley, Frankenstein: or the Modern Prometheus (1831) (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1985) p. 103. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 2. See Andrew Griffin, ‘Fire and Ice in Frankenstein’ in The Endurance of Frankenstein, eds. G. Levine and V.C. Knoepflmacher (London: California University Press, 1979) pp. 49–73, p. 50. 3. Chris Baldick, In Frankenstein’s Shadow: Myth, Monstrosity, and Nineteenth- Century Writing (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990) p. 45. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 4. Stephen Knapp, Personification and the Sublime (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1985) p. 73. 5. David E. Musselwhite, Partings Welded Together: Politics and Desire in the Nineteenth-Century English Novel (London: Methuen, 1987) p. 69. All subse- quent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 6. Michel Foucault, The Order of Things: an Archaeology of the Human Sciences (1970) (London: Tavistock, 1982). All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 7. See Foucault, The Order of Things p. 304. 8. Musselwhite argues that the creature moves from an understanding that language is classifactory to an understanding that the social function of language can be learned, see Partings Welded Together pp. 55–6. 9. Mary Poovey, The Proper Lady and the Woman Writer: Ideology as Style in the Works of Mary Wollstonecraft, Mary Shelley, and Jane Austen (London: Chicago University Press, 1984) p. 126. 10. Kristeva, Revolution in Poetic Language, trans. Margaret Waller (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984) p. 24. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 11. David Ketterer, Frankenstein’s Creation: the Book, the Monster, and Human Reality (Victoria: Victoria University Press, 1979). All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 12. See also Musselwhite, Partings Welded Together, p. 64. 13. Kristeva, Freud and Love: Treatment and its Discontents in The Kristeva Reader, ed. Toril Moi (Oxford: Blackwell, 1987) pp. 238–71, p. 259. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 3 History and the Sublime 1. Walter Jackson Bate, The Burden of the Past and the English Poet (London: Chatto & Windus, 1971). All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. Notes 181 2. David Hume, ‘Of the Rise and the Progress of the Arts and Sciences’ in Of the Standard of Taste and Other Essays, ed. John W. Lenz (Indiana: Bobbs- Merrill, 1965) pp. 70–94, p. 70. 3. Velleius Paterculus, The History of Rome (c.AD 4) trans. and intro. Frederich W. Shipley (London: Heinemann, 1890) p. ix. 4. Mary Shelley, ‘Valerius: the Reanimated Roman’ in Mary Shelley: Collected Tales and Stories, ed. Charles E. Robinson (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976) pp. 332–44. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 5. Marcus Antoninus Aurelius, The Meditations of the Emperor Marcus Antoninus (c.AD 170) trans. A.S.L. Farquharson (Oxford: Clarendon, 1944) pp. 292–3. 6. Mary Shelley, ‘The Mortal Immortal: a Tale’ in Mary Shelley: Collected Tales and Stories, ed. Charles E. Robinson (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976) pp. 219–30, p. 220. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 7. See Friedrich Schiller, ‘On the Sublime’, in On the Sublime & Naive and Sentimental Poetry (1793–95), trans. J.A. Elias (New York: Ungar, 1975) pp. 191–212. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 8. This might appear to confuse the chronology but my argument is that Mary Shelley is reassessing an aspect of Romanticism which Kant’s philosophy makes possible. 4 Sublime Utterance: Gothic Voyages, Going Public with the Private 1. As we saw in Chapter 1, Burke also attacks the idea of solitude in The Philosophical Enquiry, p. 43. 2. Peter Brooks, ‘“Godlike Science/Unhallowed Arts”: Language, Nature and Monstrosity’ in The Endurance of Frankenstein, eds. G. Levine and V.C. Knoepflmacher (London: California University Press, 1979) pp. 205–20, p. 210. 3. Raymond Williams, ‘The Metropolis and the Emergence of Modernism’ in Unreal City: Urban Experience in Modern European Literature and Art, ed. E. Tims and D. Kelley (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1985) pp. 13–24, p. 22. 4. Carl Woodring, ‘The Mariner’s Return’ in Studies in Romanticism, vol. II, No. 3 (1972) 375–380, 377. 5. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, ‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’ in The Complete Poetical Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1912), Vol. 1, ed. E.H. Coleridge (Oxford: Clarendon, 1975) pp. 186–208. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 6. J.G. Lockhart, Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine, VI (October 1819), cited in Coleridge–The Ancient Mariner and Other Poems, eds A.R. Jones and W. Tydeman (London: Macmillan, 1973) pp. 76–80, p. 77. 7. Richard Haven, Patterns of Consciousness: an Essay on Coleridge (Massachusetts: Massachusetts University Press, 1969) p. 18. 182 Notes 8. Jean-Pierre Mileur, Vision and Revision: Coleridge’s Art of Immanence (London: California University Press, 1982) p. 68. 9. Katherine M. Wheeler, The Creative Mind in Coleridge’s Poetry (London: Heinemann, 1981) p. 46. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 10. Jerome J. McGann, The Beauty of Inflections: Literary Investigations in Historical Method and Theory (Oxford: Clarendon, 1988) p. 151. 11. Edward E. Bostetter, ‘The Nightmare World of “The Ancient Mariner”’ in Coleridge–The Ancient Mariner and Other Poems, eds. A.R. Jones and W. Tydeman (London: Macmillan, 1973) pp. 184–99, p. 184. 12. David Aers, Jonathan Cook and David Punter, Romanticism and Ideology: Studies in English Writing (London: Routledge, 1981) p. 95. 13. Mary Shelley, letter to Maria Gisborne 22 January 1819, in The Letters of Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, Vol. 1, ed. Betty T. Bennett (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980) pp. 85–6. 14. Karl Kroeber, Romantic Fantasy and Science Fiction (London: Yale University Press, 1988) p. 7. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 15. Sigmund Freud, Jokes and their Relation to the Unconscious (1905) trans. J. Strachey and A. Richards (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1991). All subse- quent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 16. Edgar Allan Poe, The Narrative of A. Gordon Pym in The Complete Tales and Poems of Edgar Allan Poe (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1982) pp. 748–883. All subsequent references are to this edition, and are given in the text. 5 The Urban Sublime: Kant and Poe 1. For a specific account of the relationship between Poe and Freudian analysis see Clive Bloom’s Reading Poe, Reading Freud: the Romantic Imagination in Crisis (London: Macmillan, 1988).