H. Stuart Jones. Intellect and Character in Victorian England: Mark Pattison and the Invention of the Don. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 285 S. $101.00, cloth, ISBN 978-0-521-87605-6. Reviewed by Heather Ellis Published on H-Albion (January, 2008) H. S. Jones's new monograph sets itself two rector of Lincoln College. The high point of this primary aims, both of which are admirable: frst‐ section is an original and perceptive discussion of ly, to produce an integrated study of Mark Patti‐ the reception of Pattison's Memoirs (published son's life and thought and secondly, to situate posthumously in 1885) and the nature of his cul‐ these themes within the wider context of debates tural afterlife. The second half focuses on key as‐ about the nature of the academic life in a period pects of Pattison's thought which have not been of unprecedented reform for the English universi‐ examined in detail before, including his engage‐ ties. There has arguably never been a satisfactory ment with the mid-Victorian cult of character and intellectual biography of Pattison which has done the emergence of intellectual history as a distinct justice to his undeniable complexity and subtlety scholarly discipline. More familiar themes are as a thinker, particularly on the subject of the in‐ also re-examined such as Pattison's involvement tellectual and his vocation. A much fuller and with the movement for the endowment of re‐ more detailed treatment is needed than was pro‐ search. Here, Jones makes the important point vided by John Sparrow's 1967 study, Mark Patti‐ that Pattison, unlike many of his contemporaries, son and the Idea of a University which is the most understood no fundamental division between the recent and best-known attempt to discuss Patti‐ "research" and "teaching" university. For him, the son's ideas in these terms. essence of scholarly research was a dedication to On this score, Jones certainly does not disap‐ the transmission of existing knowledge rather point. He has divided his study of Pattison into than to the discovery of new. two coherent halves. The frst treats of Pattison's Perhaps the greatest strength of the study is life biographically from his boyhood in Wensley‐ precisely this ability to question (and, when need‐ dale to his years at Oxford, frst as an undergradu‐ ed, refute) long-standing misconceptions about ate when he fell under the spell of John Henry Pattison and his life. Most obvious, perhaps, is the Newman, and then as fellow, tutor, and fnally, popular assumption that he had been the inspira‐ H-Net Reviews tion behind the character of the bitter and ineffec‐ enough as an intellectual biography conceived tual scholar, Edward Casaubon, in George Eliot's along these lines. His ability to tease out the com‐ novel Middlemarch (1871). On the merits and de‐ plexities and nuances of Pattison's thought re‐ merits of this and other possible literary repre‐ garding the fgure of the intellectual and the na‐ sentations of Pattison, Jones writes briefly and ture of the academic life is impressive. persuasively. Such representations have, as he Where the book is less successful, however, is rightly points out, occupied far too much space in where it attempts to generalize beyond the fgure previous studies. Of greater significance is Jones's of Pattison. The title of the book suggests that its demonstration of the longevity of the influence remit will include not only Pattison's thoughts on which John Henry Newman and the Tractarians the academic life, but also how they ftted in to a exercised upon Pattison's thought and self-image. broader cultural process that Jones calls "the in‐ Most commentators have, by contrast, explained vention of the don." Despite claiming on a num‐ Pattison's involvement with the Oxford Movement ber of occasions that Pattison's historical impor‐ in his younger years as a puzzling blip on an oth‐ tance lies in his articulation of a distinctive vision erwise relatively straightforward development to‐ of the academic life which his contemporaries wards a secularist position. Instead, Jones argues recognized and were influenced by, the reader is convincingly that Newman's emphasis on an as‐ left somewhat puzzled at the end of the book as to cetic regimen of rigorous self-discipline came to precisely what this "distinctive" vision consisted form an integral part not only of Pattison's self- of and what its significance actually was. The dif‐ image, but of his conception of the academic life. ficulty in isolating the key features of Pattison's vi‐ Here, Jones follows in the footsteps of David J. De‐ sion is, in itself, no fault of Jones's; it is an in‐ laura and others who have demonstrated the escapable consequence of the complexity of Patti‐ long-lasting impact which contact with the Oxford son's thought (which Jones works so hard to Movement had upon the lives of other prominent show) and of the tendency of both contempo‐ Victorian writers and thinkers such as Matthew raries and later commentators to oversimplify his Arnold and Walter Pater.[1] position in order to make sense of it. Clearly, Jones has thought carefully about the This problem, is, however, compounded by most appropriate method to employ when engag‐ the nature of the biographical method which ing in the history of ideas, a theme ever present, it Jones endorses. Focused on the life and thought of would seem, to Pattison's own mind. Following just one individual, the process of analytical de‐ Stefan Collini, Jones maintains that subjective def‐ construction in which Jones engages so that our initions of the intellectual and the academic life view of Pattison may be complicated is arguably do not lend themselves readily to historical and taken too far. We are left without the possibility of sociological analysis, and that they are most effec‐ recovering a coherent impression of his position tively investigated biographically at the level of in contemporary debates on which any assess‐ the individual mind.[2] This is, once more, a point ment of his historical significance must rest. "He with which Pattison would undoubtedly have con‐ did not", we are told, "believe that universities curred, being himself a fne author of intellectual were for 'research' as opposed to 'teaching.' In Ox‐ biographies, most famously of the Renaissance ford he was not for the University against the col‐ scholar Isaac Casaubon. Few, certainly, would dis‐ leges, nor even for the professors against the tu‐ agree that the most important advantage of the bi‐ tors. Neither was he for academic specialism ographical method in the writing of intellectual against literary generalism" (p. 259). When Patti‐ history is its ability to analyze subjective identi‐ son's "distinctive" vision of the academic life is f‐ ties and ideas, and I cannot praise Jones's book 2 H-Net Reviews nally defined--"a general intellectual culture plexity as a thinker has been demonstrated. Prob‐ whose practitioner would not merely work away lems arise only when the book seeks to go beyond at his own little specialism, but would be able to this remit and assess Pattison's influence in con‐ grasp his own place in the history of thought"--the temporary debates and his broader cultural and reader is left unable to locate it, or assess its influ‐ historical importance. There would appear to be ence, in the scholarly debates of the time (p. 259). only one scholarly inaccuracy significant enough This may well be, as Jones suggests, a result of Pat‐ to be noted. On p. 207, Jones ascribes a quotation tison's need for complexity, which prevented him in Pattison's diary to Matthew Arnold in order to adopting straightforward positions in contempo‐ demonstrate the latter's disinterest in scientific rary discussions; whatever the reason, the fact re‐ education; the particular comment was in fact mains that the historical significance that Jones made by his father, the headmaster Thomas claims for Pattison and his ideas has not been ad‐ Arnold.[4] equately demonstrated. Notes The title of the book also implies that its con‐ [1]. David J. Delaura, Hebrew and Hellene in clusions will shed light on wider cultural debates Victorian England: Newman, Arnold, and Pater in Victorian England, in particular, that surround‐ (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1969). ing the relationship between intellect and charac‐ [2]. Stefan Collini, Absent Minds: Intellectuals ter. As the title of the fourth chapter would seem in Britain (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), to indicate, this will involve a substantial engage‐ 47. ment with the mid-Victorian cult of manliness and recent scholarly treatments of the subject. [3]. See, for example, James Eli Adams, This is not, however, what we fnd. "Manliness" is, Dandies and Desert Saints: Styles of Victorian for the most part, treated as a relatively straight‐ Masculinity (London: Cornell University Press, forward ideal with a coherent and unchanging set 1995). For the view that Newman promoted an of virtues attached to it. Thus the alignment of ideal of manliness emphasizing the "contempla‐ "manliness" with "character" is accepted uncriti‐ tive virtues," see Heather Ellis, "Newman and cally, as is the assumption that "manliness" always Arnold: Classics, Christianity and Manliness in promoted physical labor and was opposed to the Tractarian Oxford" in Oxford Classics: Teaching softer and more contemplative virtues. There is and Learning 1800-2000, ed. Christopher Stray no obvious engagement with the work of histori‐ (London: Duckworth, 2007), 46-63. ans of masculinity who have increasingly criti‐ [4]. For the ascription of the comment to cized this monolithic view of manliness and ar‐ Thomas Arnold see A. P.