Jonathan Brody Kramnick - The Making of The English Canon - 1997
Jonathan Brody Kramnick - The Making of The English Canon - 1997
Jonathan Brody Kramnick - The Making of The English Canon - 1997
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Modern Language Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to PMLA.
http://www.jstor.org
Broq'Kramnick
Jonathan
1087
1088 TheMakingoftheEnglishCanon
II thusstateexplicitly
whatpreciselyin itsimplicitness
forso longcouldassertitsauthority. (36-37)
As criticsbegan to rethinktheconsequencesof
widespreadreadingand thecommodification of Benjamin'snarrative, in thisanalysis,is ultimately
books,an affirmative relationtothecultural market groundedin thesocialrelationsof artistic produc-
becameincreasingly difficult
to sustain.The print tions-the change in producersand consumers
relationsand formsof literacythat,in theearly overtime.The important pointforthecurrent argu-
yearsoftheeighteenth century,bespoketherefine- mentis notso muchtheimplicitly Whiggishstory
mentof nationaltaste were now regardedwith of art'sdemocratization, however, as thecounter-
somedismay.This senseofculturalcrisis,in turn, narrative of theaura's phoenixlikerebirthas the
impelleda transformation ofcriticaltheory.
As the aesthetic.The affirmativecultureofthemarket led
very"commonprints"Addisonsaw as thecon- to a skepticalcritiqueofthecirculation ofcultural
ditionof a politeand rationalnationbecame the goods.Literary culturebecamean objectofcritical
condition ofan unstableconsumer theem-
culture, discussionandso formed a publicsphereofprivate
phasison decorousease gavewayto a revaluing of subjects,butas a result,its sacramental aurawas
difficult obscurity.To thedegreethatlinguistic dif- debasedbycirculation andconsumption. Farfrom
ferencestill distinguished ancientfrommodern disappearing in modernculture, theaurais in fact
Englishliterature, itonlyconfirmed formanymid- its product.Habermas's analysis thus may be
eighteenth-century criticsthevaluabledistanceof rewritten to covertheemergenceof theEnglish
olderwriters frommarketsociety.The consequent canononlyby shifting theperspective to themo-
transformation in thenarrative and methodof li- mentin the 1740s and 1750s when the earlier
teraryhistorywas ratherdrastic:Spenser,Shake- emphasis on polite conversationbequeatheda
speare,and MiltonreplacedDenhamand Waller; compensatory revaluingofthepast.
philologyreplacedmodernization; and thenarra- Whereas Dryden and Addison attemptedto
tiveofimprovement becamea narrative ofdecline. overcomethedifficult vulgarityof thepast,mid-
Yet itwouldbe wrongto say thatthemid-century centurycriticsfoundthelinguisticdistanceand
simplybrokefromthenormsof the Augustans. aestheticdifficulty of Shakespeareand Spenser
Rather, theearliermodelofliterary historical
devel- (and on occasionChauceras well) important ele-
opment-progress towardrefinement-was turned mentsof whatmade these writerscanonical. In
on itshead;thepastcrystallized bytheAugustans Critical Observations on Shakespeare (1748), for
was dialecticallypreservedbytheirsuccessorsas example,JohnUptonwritesthat"withoutlearn-
the radiantsheenof pre-enlightened, vernacular ing"-by whichhe meanswithout"knowledgein
highculture. ancientcustomsandmanners, ingrammar andcon-
Whydidprintrationality bringabouta nostalgia struction"-Shakespeare "cannotbe readwithany
forantiqueformsand language?In a suggestive degreeofunderstanding ortaste"(ix, 137).Thisem-
gloss on WalterBenjamin,Habermasdescribes phasison theoldnessofShakespeare'slanguage-
howthepublicspherebrought thedistanceofitscadenceandrhythms-led Upton
abouta certaincri-
to devotea thirdofthetreatiseto analyzingShake-
sis at itsverymeridian:
speare'smeteranddefending itsoriginalscansion.
Cultureproductsno longerremainedcomponents
Alienating thetextfrom the very languageofcon-
of
theChurch'sand court'spublicityof representation; temporary readers,Uptonrepeatedly suggeststhat
thatis precisely
whatis meantbythelossoftheiraura thehistoryofEnglishis notan ascenttothemodem
of extraordinarinessand by the profaningof their idealofpolitespeech.In fact,he argues,theweight
once sacramentalcharacter.The privatepeople for placedon sociability
produced a distorted
accountof
whom the culturalproductbecame available as a thenationalcanon:
commodityprofaneditinasmuchas theyhadto deter-
mineits meaningon theirown (by way of rational The misfortune seemsto me to be, thatscarce any-
communicationwithone another),verbalizeit,and one pays a regardto whatShakespearedoes write,
Jonathan Kramnick
Brody 1091
but they are always guessing at what he should themoreI considerourstudiesand amusements,
write;norin anyotherlightis look'd on, thanas a thegreater is thewondertheyshouldeverpleaseat
poor mechanic;a fellow,'tis true,of genius,who all" (15). Shakespeareand Miltonare strikingly
says,now and then,verygood things,butwild and embodied,notjust manlybutalso nervous,their
uncultivated;and as one by no meanspropercom- distancefrommodernity reifiedin thestrength and
pany forlords, and ladies, maids of honour,and resiliencyoftheircorporalfibers.ButUptonmay
courtpages,'tillsomepoetor other,whoknowsthe
be understood, as well,tobe suggesting "nervous"
worldbetter,takeshimin hand,and introduces him
in themodernsenseof anxiety:Shakespeareand
in thismoderndresstogood company. (16)
Miltonlookto thepresentand see theireclipseby
effeminate massculture.The pastviewedfromthe
A rational approach to the artifactsof the literary
present proleptically worriesoveritsdemise.
past consists in acknowledging theirperiodicity.
As criticsbecameincreasingly concernedwith
This periodizing move then bestows a kind of
theslack effeminacy of theculturalmarket, they
high-culturalaura on literarytextsas theyfade into
oftenturnedto theallegednonrelation of Shake-
English antiquity.The rejectionof the modernizing
speare'sidiomto thespeechhabitsof thepublic
narrative,thatis, values older works to the degree
sphere.In a series of articlesin theAdventurer
thattheyare difficult to assimilateintothe commu-
(1753) on Shakespeare'sThe Tempestand King
nityof modernreaders.
Lear, forexample,JosephWartonarguesthathis
As Upton examines how earlier criticism tai-
period'scorruption of literaryvalue and misread-
lored Shakespeare forthe public, he notes the so-
ingofliterary history
arebothproducts ofculture's
cial composition of thatpublic, its confinementto
dissemination duringtheAddisonianperiod.8He
the elite classes: "lords, and ladies, maids of hon- characterizes theprojectoftheAdventurer, in fact,
our, and courtpages." Upton neitherlongs forthe as a rejoinder totheSpectator'scelebration ofprint
restriction of thataudience norcelebratesits demo- commodities andofthereadingpublic:
cratic overcoming.Rather,he argues thatthe cate-
goryof audience itselfhas become a problem.This Addisonremarks thatSocrateswas said to have
is a crucial move forthe mid-century'svarietyof brought philosophydownfromheavento inhabit
historicistor "scholarly"criticism.7The public has amongmen:"AndI,"sayshe,"shallbe ambitious to
forgottenhow to read older texts; the national haveitsaidofme,thatI havebroughtphilosophy out
canon needs to be secured by specialist critics.As ofclosetsandlibraries,
schoolsandcolleges,
todwell
is common in such critiques,the representationof inclubsandassemblies attea-tables,
andincoffee-
cultural degradation is provocatively gendered: houses."Butthispurpose hasinsomemeasure been
"How farthe corruptionof even our public diver- defeatedbyitssuccess;andwehavebeendriven from
oneextreme withsuchprecipitation,
thatwehavenot
sions may contributeto the corruptionof our man-
stoppedin themedium, butgoneon to theother.
ners, may be an inquiry not unworthythe civil hasbeendivested ofthepeculiarities
Learning ofa
magistrate,"Upton avers; "mattersof these con- collegedress,thatshemight mixin publicassem-
cernmentsare now leftto the managementof our blies;butbythismeansshehasbeenconfounded with
women of fashion; and even our poets, whose end ignoranceandlevity. (21:289-90;no.139)
is profitand delight,are exceedinglycautious how
they incur the censure of these fair umpires and The "engagedand easy" manneroftheSpectator
critics" (17). The culture of refinementto which had theunforeseeneffectof degradingthevery
Upton respondshas transformed froma genteelpo- learningandtastewithwhichitintended to please
liteness to a female conspiracy,a public managed thepublic(21: 288). Addisonis rightto suggest
by women and bearingof "death and destructionto thattheprintmarkethas madeculturalgoods ob-
the little taste remaining among us" (1 1). In this jects of conversation,
butthisprocesshas turned
light,Upton continues, "it seems no wonder,that back on itself;"insteadof learninghavingele-
the masculine and nervous Shakespeare, and Mil- vated conversation,conversationhas degraded
ton should so littleplease our effeminatetaste.And learning"(21: 290).
1092 TheMakingoftheEnglishCanon
gallantries"shapes its formalconstitutionas an al- and will never restore it to those honours it has,
legory,and it is throughallegory,Wartonsuggests, once forall, lost" (49). In Hurd's ratherinstrumen-
that modern readers may get a sense of just how tal lament,the waning of Spenser's audience dur-
distant The Faerie Queene is fromcontemporary ing the eighteenthcenturyis the condition forhis
culturalproducts(2: 89). That "allegorical poetry, criticalrevivalas highculture:
throughmany gradations,at last received its ulti-
mate consummationin theFairy Queen" signals an PoorSpenserthen
overall decline in literaryachievementafterSpen- -"in whosegentlespright
ser, as the center of cultural production moved Thepurewell-headofPoesiediddwell"
fromthe court to the market(2: 112). "Afterthe must,foroughtI can see, be leftto theadmiration
of
a few letteredor curiousmen: while the manyare
Fairy Queen," Warton writes,"allegory began to
sworntogether togiveno quarter tothemarvelous.
decline," and with it went the Gothic romance as
(150)
well (2: 110).
odyalso subsumestheantithetical
positionofmid- as thefailureto be abstract:"His stylewas in his
In thesecondpaper,Minim
historicism.
century owntimeallowedto be vicious,so darkenedwith
old wordsand peculiaritiesof phrase,and so re-
wishesforsomestandard
often oftaste,
forsometri- motefromcommonusage,thatJonsonboldlypro-
towhich
bunal, mayappealfrom
merit caprice,
preju- nounceshim 'to have writtenno language"' (4:
dice,andmalignity....Whenhe is placedinthechair 285). In another Rambler,Johnson calls Spenser's
ofcriticism,
hedeclaresloudlyforthenoblesimplic- linguisticeccentricity a "mingleddialectwhichno
inopposition
ityofourancestors, tothepetty refine- humanbeingevercouldhavespoken"(3: 202-03;
ments,andornamentalluxuriance.Sometimes heis
no. 37). Thepointineithercase is thatthelanguage
sunkindespair,
andperceivesfalsedelicacygaining
ground,andsometimes brightenshiscountenance failstobe usedcontinuously enoughforittobe rec-
witha gleamofhope,andpredicts therevivalofthe ognizableto readers.The assertionis notsimply
truesublime.... (2: 190-91) thatSpenseriandictionhas no use; itis rather that
theuse is toonarrow, fixedtotheparticular moment
ThatMinimcan movefromtherefinement ofnum- ofproduction, ofsingular mingling. "A studiedbar-
bersto the"sublime"refusalof"pettyrefinements barism," Spenser'sidiomcanonlybe reproduced by
and ornamentalluxuriance"demonstrates less a hisepigones,neverreconsumed byhisreaders(3:
similaritybetweenthesetwopositionsthantheir 203; emphasisadded).Andso Spenserianism is just
emergence as clearopposites:refinement andGoth- nostalgia,a relationto thepastshornof anyvital
icism.The professionaltrickof Johnson'sexas- connectionto thepresent:"thestyleof Spenser
peratedaccountingof criticism'sfavoriteterms mightby longlabourbe justlycopied; butlifeis
-refinement andrecession,politeness andthesub- surelygivenus forhigherpurposesthanto gather
lime-is to makeitappearas ifhe weresomehow whatourancestors havewiselythrown away,andto
outsidetheinstitutionhe mocks. learnwhatis of no value butbecause it has been
Johnson'sdouble critiquedid not leave him forgotten" (4: 286; no. 121).
withoutan accountof publiccultureand literary The finalreferenceto value in thispassage is
history.In fact,he rejectedGothicismand refine- telling.The nameforculture's exchangevaluehere
mentbecauseof theirinabilityto providesuchan is memory, the accretionof particularuses into
account.As is well known,Johnson'sremarkson a generalmediumof recollection.In contrastto
literary
workswereoftenshapedbyan overarching SpenserandtheSpenserians,twinfiguresof nos-
agon betweenthegeneraland theparticular, the talgia,Johnson beginsto establisha versionofthe
grandandthesmall,theexemplary andthesingu- pastsecuredbyconsumption. Accumulated actsof
lar,thespeciesandtheindividual.13 As a theory of readingfabricate (or remember) a canonicalentity
canonicity, thepreference forgeneralformsturns namedShakespeare.Forthisreason,perhaps,the
on theirtranscendence oftemporally orgeographi- prefaceis notableforthevolatilestridency of its
callycurbedtastes,a transcendence boundup with openingpages. Above all otherEnglishauthors,
a revisedunderstanding of culturalconsumption. Johnsonbegins,Shakespearedeservestheacco-
Thistheory underlay manyofJohnson's seemingly ladesofantiquity:
idiosyncraticjudgmentsin theyearsleadingup to
his editionof Shakespeare.Severaltimesin the Thatpraisesarewithout reasonlavishedon the
Ramblerseries,forinstance, Johnson takesskepti- dead,andthatthehonours dueonlytoexcellence are
cal notice of the Spenser revival as a curious paidtoantiquity,
is a complaint likelytobe always
continuedbythose,who,beingabletoaddnothing to
instanceof literarynostalgia."The imitationof
hopeforeminence
truth, from theheresiesofpara-
Spenser,"heobservesinRambler121,"bytheinflu- dox;orthose,who,beingforced bydisappointment
ence of some menof learningand genius,seems uponconsolatory
expedients, arewillingtohopefrom
likelyto gainupontheage" (4: 285). Whatis dis- whatthepresent
posterity agerefuses andflatter
them-
turbingaboutthisinfluence, Johnson continues, is selvesthat
theregardwhich is yetdeniedbyenvy, will
thatSpenser'slanguagerepresents nothing so much beatlastbestowedbytime.
1098 TheMakingoftheEnglishCanon