[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
public and, therefore, could reorient consciousness (particularly memory)
toward a newly configured public realm (p. 25). On Browning s relation-
ship to Shelley and its place in literary lore, see Frederick Pottle, Shelley and
Browning: A Myth and Some Facts (Chicago: Pembroke Press, 1923).
10. Matthew Arnold, The Study of Poetry (1880), in The Complete Prose
Works of Matthew Arnold, ed. R. H. Super, 11 vols (Ann Arbor: University
of Michigan Press, 1977), IX, 161 88.
11. Arnold, Shelley (The Nineteenth Century 1888; Essays in Criticism, Second
Series, 1895) in Complete Prose Works of Matthew Arnold XI, 305 27.
12. For a useful summary of Arnold s ambivalence, see Allott, Attitudes
to Shelley. Park Honan s biography Matthew Arnold: A Life (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1981) gives an account of the psychological role Shelley
played in Arnold s dreamy, emotive early life (p. 414); for Arnold s own
182 Notes
testimony, see his letters to Clough on Shelley (Letters of Matthew Arnold
to Arthur Hugh Clough, ed. H.T. Lowry [Oxford: Oxford UP, 1932], pp. 97,
124, 146).
13. Arthur Henry Hallam s On Some of the Characteristics of Modern
Poetry (1833), which defines Keats and Shelley as poets of sensation,
rather than [Wordsworthian] reflection, marks a key moment in the
evolution of such a view of Romantic aestheticism. See On Some of the
Characteristics of Modern Poetry, and on the Lyrical Poems of Alfred
Tennyson, The Writings of Arthur Hallam, ed. T.H.V. Motter (New York:
MLA, 1943), pp. 182 97.
14. See Kaufman on the contrasting and overlapping legacies assigned to
the Keatsian dissolution of selfhood and concomitant building up of
form, which in turn serves an intellectual sensorium ultimately capable
of dissolving the object-world, on the one hand, and to the Shelleyan
prophetic and disseminative negationalism that pays tribute to realty
by beginning in opposition to it, on the other (p. 383). Compare T.S.
Eliot s insistence that Poetry is not a turning loose of emotion, but
an escape from emotion; it is not the expression of personality, but an
escape from personality. But, of course, only those who have personality
and emotions know what it means to want to escape from these things
( Tradition and the Individual Talent [1919], in Selected Essays [New
York: Harcourt, 1964], pp. 3 11 [p. 10]).
15. Symonds, Shelley, p. 187.
16. Arnold s essay first appeared in The Nineteenth Century, January 1888,
and was then reprinted in Essays in Criticism, Second Series. Clarke also
discusses the sexual politics of the essay, though not its politics of form.
17. Robert Browning, Essay on Shelley (1852) in Collected Works, ed. Roma
King et al. (Athens: Ohio UP; Waco, Texas: Baylor University, 1981) V,
137 51 (p. 139).
18. Ibid.
19. Browning s influential essay on Shelley was originally the Introduction to
a set of supposed Shelley letters which proved to be forgeries. It is easy to
see Browning s essay on Shelley as defensive in relation to conditions of
poetic celebrity: against Shelleyan self-exposure, Browning maps out for
himself an alternative form of poetic fame more insulated from publicity,
identifying himself with the objective poet for whom personality and
work are more obliquely related.
20. Such a charge about Shelley would not be new, of course; for a representa-
tive earlier opinion on Shelley s impulsiveness, see the Quarterly Review s
1861 discussion of Shelley biographies (Unsigned review of Mary Shelley,
ed., The Works of Percy Bysshe Shelley; T. J. Hogg, Life of P. B. Shelley; Lady
Shelley, Shelley Memorials; and T. L. Peacock, Memoir of P. B. Shelley,
Quarterly Review 220 [1861] 289 328). In the reviewer s summary, his
emotions found fruit in action without let or struggle; they were gener-
ally good and noble but when they were vicious, he had neither the
nerve nor the will to control them. He acted, in short, professedly from
impulse, and not from duty (pp. 320 1).
Notes 183
21. Norman is still the most entertaining and wide-ranging account of such
practices. See also Clarke, Swann Shelley s Pod People, and Pascoe,
Hummingbird.
22. Pascoe, Hummingbird, pp. 1 2.
23. To James Thomson, April 21, 1873, in Selected Letters, ed. Roger W. Peattie
(University Park: Penn State UP, 1990), p. 307.
24. Henry James, The Aspern Papers in the Aspern Papers and the Turn of the
Screw, ed. Anthony Curtis (New York: Penguin, 1984), pp. 43 142.
25. Najarian traces the entanglement of Victorian love for Keats with
ideas of masculinity and same-sex desire; see especially his chapter on
Arnold.
26. Clarke, p. 151.
27. Fraistat, Illegitimate Shelley, p. 410.
28. Ibid.
29. Clarke discusses this passage as well, but argues that Captain Kennedy s
masculinity is intended to ward off the feminizing effects of enthusi-
asm for the poet.
30. Arnold also contributed introductions to the selections from Gray and
Keats in Ward s anthology. In 1888 the essay was republished as the open-
ing essay to Essays in Criticism, Second Series.
31. Steven Connor, Haze: On Nebular Modernism, paper presented at
Trinity College, Oxford, May 12, 2006, on line, accessed 12 April 2007,
http://www.stevenconnor.com/haze/, p. 3.
32. David G. Riede, Matthew Arnold and the Betrayal of Language (Charlottesville:
University Press of Virginia, 1988), p. 4.
33. William Hazlitt, review of Posthumous Poems, by Percy Shelley, Edinburgh
Review 11 (July 1824) 494 514, reprinted in Shelley: The Critical Heritage,
ed. James Barcus (Boston: Routledge, 1975), pp. 335 45 (p. 336).
34. Ibid., p. 335.
35. Thomas Jefferson Hogg, The Life of Percy Bysshe Shelley, 4 vols (London:
Moxon, 1858), II, 46. Compare also Hogg s analogy of telling Shelley s
life to exhibiting a phantasmagoria, a magic lantern, a spectrum of pris-
matic colours (II, 46).
36. Edmund Gosse, Modern English Literature: A Short History (1897) (New
York: Frederick A. Stokes, 1906), p. 313.
37. McGann, The Romantic Ideology: A Critical Investigation (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1983), p. 115.
38. Hallam, On Some of the Characteristics of Modern Poetry , p. 186.
39. The lines are spoken by the Spirit of the Hour, to Asia and Panthea, at
the start of Act II, Scene 5. To make it match the selection from Burns, I
assume, Arnold leaves off the final line of the Spirit s speech: They shall
drink the hot speed of desire! It seems to me that for Arnold s purposes
this last line would have been all he really needed to quote.
40. Shelley, Defence of Poetry (c. 1821), in SPP, p. 508.
41. For a strong analysis of the logic of futurity in the Defence, see Deborah
Elise White s discussion of this sentence in her Romantic Returns:
Superstition, Imagination, History (Stanford: Stanford UP, 2000), pp. 121 8.
184 Notes
42. That the poet should be the (instrumentalized) term of accommodation
between sets of effects parallels the logic of the Aeolian lyre passage ear-
lier in the Defence, which similarly defines man in terms of an accom-
modation of effects to one another (SPP, p. 480).
43. Ibid., pp. 503 4.
44. Ibid., p. 504.
45. Hazlitt, Review of Posthumous Poems, p. 336.
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]