The emergence of literary criticism in 18th-century Britain : discourse between attacks and authority

412 Pages·2014·3.723 MB·English

by  Sebastian Domsch

Sebastian Domsch
The Emergence of Literary Criticism in 18th-Century Britain
Buchreihe der ANGLIA/
ANGLIA Book Series
Edited by
Lucia Kornexl, Ursula Lenker, Martin Middeke,
Gabriele Rippl, Hubert Zapf
Advisory Board
Laurel Brinton, Philip Durkin, Olga Fischer, Susan Irvine,
Andrew James Johnston, Christopher A. Jones, Terttu Nevalainen,
Derek Attridge, Elisabeth Bronfen, Ursula K. Heise, Verena Lobsien,
Laura Marcus, J. Hillis Miller, Martin Puchner
Volume 47
Sebastian Domsch
The Emergence of
Literary Criticism in
18th-Century Britain
Discourse between Attacks and Authority
For an overview of all books published in this series, please see
http://www.degruyter.com/view/serial/36292
ISBN 978-3-11-035616-8
e-ISBN 978-3-11-036206-0
ISSN 0340-5435
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress.
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.
© 2014 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Printing: CPI books GmbH, Leck
♾ Printed on acid-free paper
Printed in Germany
www.degruyter.com
Contents
ANoteonTexts VII
A TheAgeofCriticism
1 Introduction 3
2 ContemporaryDiscussionsofCriticismandtheCritic 12
2.1 DefinitionsandEvaluations:TheStateofCriticism 12
2.2 ImaginingCriticism 22
B TheAuthorityofCriticism
1 CriticalAuthority 49
2 AristocraticAuthority 54
2.1 Court-WitsandGentlemanCritics 55
2.2 ChangesintheSystemofPatronage 71
3 TheAuthorityofSeniority:AncientandModernCriticism 94
4 TheAuthorityofPoeticGenius 115
4.1 ThePoetasCritic 117
4.2 PoetsandEditors 136
5 Learning:KnowledgebetweenAuthorityandPedantry 150
5.1 ThePedantasExemplary 151
5.2 PoliteLearningagainstErudition 157
5.3 SpecializedKnowledge 164
6 RulesandtheCritic 177
6.1 PowerStructures 180
6.2 RulesandReason 193
VI Contents
7 TasteandtheCritic 201
7.1 DebatingTaste 203
7.2 TheTasteoftheAudience 213
7.3 TheStandardofTaste 216
8 Name-Authority:TheCriticasInstitution 229
8.1 TheAnachronisticCritic:JohnDennis 233
8.2 TheInstitutionalCritic:SamuelJohnson 254
9 AuthorityandtheMarketplace 269
9.1 Overproduction 275
9.2 “Thisprocessofchymicalcriticism”:
TheCriticasGate-Keeper 285
10 InstitutionalizingAuthority:AcademiesandReviews 301
10.1 CourtsofCriticismI:TheAcademy 301
10.2 CourtsofCriticismII:TheReviews 312
10.3 “TheTheatreofWar”:AttacksontheReviews 341
C Conclusion
DistanceandDemocracy 359
WorksCited 373
Index 405
A Note on Texts
The basis of this study are the texts of and about literary criticism that were
publishedfromtheendofthe17thtotheendofthe18thcentury,aboutathousand
independently published titles, from pamphlets to multi-volume works, not to
speak of the periodical essays, journal articles, and reviews. Fortunately, new
electronic databases like Eighteenth Century Collections Online, Early English
BooksOnline,Eighteenth-CenturyJournalsandBritishPeriodicals,butalsoGoogle
Books, have made the majority of these texts easily available in their historical
editions,manyofwhichhaveneverseenareprintaftertheiroriginalpublication.
Asthisstudyistryingtorecreatethewaythattheperiodperformedanddebated
criticism, it seemed sensible to stay as close to contemporary sources
as possible. Quotes are therefore, where possible, taken from the editions that
contemporarieswouldhaveused,eveninthosecaseswheremoderneditionsare
available. Though, for example, there are excellent critical editions of the col-
lectedworksofAlexanderPope,thesecannothelpbutunifywhatthe18thcentury
experienced as a very large number of different texts in different editions, the
publication context of most of which is intricately tied to the significance that
contemporariesattachedtothem.FromthefirsteditionoftheEssayonCriticism
in1711,throughthemazeofdifferent(anddifferentlypublished)editionsofthe
Dunciad,totheanxiouslydebatedcollectededitionbyWilliamWarburtonin1751
andthe1797WorkseditedbyJosephWarton,thesebooksshapedtherespective
images of Pope the poet and Pope the critical authority for individual readers.
Followingthesamespirit,quotesfrom18th-centurysourceshavebeenleftunal-
tered in spelling, capitalization, and punctuation. For the sake of readability,
aberrant spellings both of words and proper names (such as the contemporary
useof“Shakespear”or“critick”)arenotindividuallynotifiedby[sic].1Toavoid
confusion,twospecialcasesofcapitalizationhavebeenintroducedinthemain
text.Whenevertheterm“Nature”isusedinthe18th-centurysenseasphilosophi-
caloraestheticconcept,itiscapitalizedtodifferentiateitbetterfromotheruses
of the term. Similarly, the capitalized form “Review” is used to denote a review
journalasopposedtoindividualreviewarticles.
1 Sometimes,asinthecaseofShakespeare,variationsinspellingcanevenbeproductivelyread
toillustrateresiduesofconceptualuncertaintyaboutatermorname.

1 Introduction
ItwasverylatebeforecriticismcameintoEngland.(Gildon1721:61)
Among numerous other labels not quite fashionable anymore (like the “Age of
Pope”orof“Johnson”),the18thcenturyhasalsobeencalledthe“AgeofCriticism.”
Thislabelusuallyrefersmainlytoamodeofthinking,butitisalsoapplicabletothe
genre or textual strategy that best expresses this mode of thinking. The will to
question received opinion and to form independent judgments was pervasive
throughouttheperiodandofprimeimportanceforit.JamesEngellhasarguedin
hisimportantstudy,FormingtheCriticalMind,“thatcriticism,exercisedonsucha
massivescale,rankswiththenovelasthemostsignificant‘new’modeofwritingto
enrich English literature between the Restoration of Charles II and the death of
GeorgeIII.”(Engell1989:2)AccordingtoEngell,criticism“becomesamajorbranch
of literature and critics produce much of literary merit” (1989: 3). And indeed,
literarycriticismexistedinEnglandwellbeforetheRestoration,anditcontinuesto
growandchangeinthe19thcenturyandallthewayintothe21st,butitwasbetween
theendofthe17thandtheendofthe18thcenturythatcriticismforthefirsttime
developedgenericformsandinstitutionalcontextsthatarestillrecognizableto-
day, and in which the critic emancipated himself1 into an independent profes-
sional.Simultaneously,literacylevelsrosealongwiththeimportanceofthemiddle
class(cf.Munck2000:46–52andFeather1988:94ff.),thebookmarketexpanded
drastically,2thenumberofjournalsandnewspapersexploded(cf.Bond1957:4ff.
1 Themaleformhereandonlateroccasionsreflectsthetime’sowngenderbias.The18thcentury
overwhelminglyconceptualizedcriticismasamaleactivityandthecriticasaman.AsTerryCastle
writesinherexcellentsurveyofthesubject,“itwascommonlyheldthatliteraryjudgmentwas –or
shouldbe –aprivilegereservedformen”,Castle1997:434.Inthefirsthalfofthecentury,there
wereexceedinglyfewpublishedfemalecriticalvoices,andeveninthesecondhalf,workslikeClara
Reeve’sProgressofRomanceorElizabethMontagu’sEssayontheWritingsandGeniusofShake-
spearearerathertheexception.Asthisstudyattemptstoanalysecontemporaryassessmentsof
criticism,itcannotbutmirrortheirunderrepresentation.Muchislefttobedesiredinmodern
scholarshipaboutfemalecritics.LauraL. Rungehaswrittenthemostthoroughinvestigationto
dateoftheperiod’sfemalecriticsandthegenderingof18thcenturycriticaldiscourse,claimingat
theoutsetthat“genderisaconstitutiveelementofeighteenth-centuryliterarycriticism”,Runge
1997:3.Butthemainpointthatenableshertoseecriticalandgendereddiscourseasconnectedis
thatbothinvolveinherentpowerrelations,cf.Runge1997:6.Thus,itispowerthatisatthecoreof
criticaldiscourse,andgenderedlanguageanotherwaytoexpresspower.Hopefully,thisanalysis
canthereforealsoprovideaproductivestartingpointforfurthersystematicinvestigationsintothe
powerstructuresofcriticismasexpressedandenforcedintermsofgender.
2 ForatableontheaverageannualoutputofnewandreprintedworksinEnglish,sortedby
decade,cf.Munck2000:92.Cf.alsoCollins1927:13andFeather1988:93–105.
4 Introduction
andItalia2005:7ff.),andthelegalbattleforcopyrighttogetherwiththegrowing
economicviabilityandgeneralacceptanceofliteraryprofessionalismhelpedform
a modern conception of intellectual property and authorship.3 In the context of
thesefundamentalchanges,authors,critics,booksellers,andreadersstruggledfor
intellectualandculturaldominanceoverbooksandtextsinawaythatishistori-
callyunique.Andasdominanceovertextsisusuallyassertedthroughtherightand
abilitytoevaluateandtointerpret,thisstrugglebecomesmostvisibleinthefieldof
literarycriticism.
Also,sincecriticism,assoonasitiscommunicated,isnotfunctionalwithout
authority, the question of what will here be called critical authority is always
presentincriticaldiscourseaswellasindiscourseoncriticism.Thetermcritical
authorityshouldinthiscontextbeunderstoodtoworklikeavirtualcurrencyinthe
literary world’seconomy of opinion. It isthe capital, or rather the credit, of the
critic,thewillingnessofarecipienttogivecreditorvaluetoacritic’sevaluative
statements.Ofcourse,authorityalwaysmeansauthorityoversomething,sothe
termfundamentallydescribesapowerrelation.Toanalyzeorevenquestioncritical
authoritymeansaskingforacritic’slegitimizationtojudgeofanother’stext.Who
acceptsthecritic’sjudgmentsastrueandwhy?Whatisthesourceandfoundation
ofhisauthority?Whoinvestshimwithit?Whomightwanttodenyittohim?
This study undertakes, through a systematic and historical analysis of the
conceptofcriticalauthority,towriteahistoryofliterarycriticismfromtheendof
the17thtotheendofthe18th centurythatnotonlytakesthediscursiveconstruc-
tion of its (self)representation into account, but also the social and economic
conditions of its practice. As the analysis will show, this history, rather than
formingonelinearchronologicalline,consistsofseveralparallelandintersecting
historiesordiscoursesbasedonthevariousstrategiesthathavebeenemployed
in the course of the period to create, legitimize, or question critical authority.
Suchstrategies,astheyweredeveloped,debated,andrejectedbycontemporary
authorsandcritics,willthereforebethemainfocusofinterest.Intheirsystematic
andtentativelychronologicalorder,thesestrategieswillrevealdevelopmentsin
theformationofcriticismthatproblematizeandgobeyondpreviousattemptsat
writingahistoryof18th-centurycriticism.
As Philip Smallwood has observed, “histories of criticism are in their own
way creative works. They have a foot in the storytelling tradition, in tragedy,
3 Ontheinfluenceofcopyrightonconceptsofauthorship,cf.Woodmansee1984;Ross1992;and
Rose 1993: 1: “[T]he notion of the author is a relatively recent formation, and, as a cultural
formation,itisinseparablefromthecommodificationofliterature.Thedistinguishingcharacter-
isticofthemodernauthor,Ipropose,isproprietorship;theauthorisconceivedastheoriginator
andthereforetheownerofaspecialkindofcommodity,thework.”