Relevance of Individual

During our study of Romantic era poetry, the connection between poems and poets was not always evident. But upon further inspection, a collection of significant themes emerges as a unifying element to the course as a whole. Among those themes, one of the things I saw repeatedly worked and reworked was the concept individual relevance: from whence does the individual originate a certain purpose? Several of the poets explored this idea, although all of them explored the concept through uniquely different filters. From William Gilpin in Observations on the River Wye, John Keats in “On Seeing the Elgin Marbles,” to William Wordsworth in “The Thorn” and in The Prelude, all have comments on where the individual finds—and at times where it does not find—its relevance.

The most general exploration of the relevance of individual is William Gilpin’s examination of the picturesque, in which the individual does not find significant meaning; in fact, the general concept of individual is slightly admonished. In the piece, Gilpin mirrors the human individual in elements of Nature, stating that the picturesque should be taken in as something vast and general. A lot of what Gilpin is communicated correlates with Schor article, “Reading in Detail,” where the author claims that “by dividing and dispersing the spectator’s attention…the detail blocks the dynamic rush of the Imagination, fatigues the eye, and in the end induces anxiety rather than the elevating pleasure of the Sublime” (Schor 19). The individual components are not as important as the whole entity they create. This puts Gilpin, as the spectator, in an interesting position. M. pointed out in one of her posts that “people had to appreciate the beauty through an altered form instead of taking it all in as a whole." This in turn can be mirrored on humanity. Gilpin, as the individual, can never find his relevance in Nature because he truly does not belong to it. When comparing Nature to manmade things, Gilpin says that the area is “greatly injured in a picturesque light, by becoming scenes of habitation, and industry” (Gilpin 12). This shows his severe disconnect with things around him and the fact that the individual, human or component in Nature, cannot find significance in the picturesque Nature. I chose the picture above because it shows the clear disconnect between man and Nature. Even though the figure is set in the front, the background is the true focus (indicated by the figure facing it). There is an inherent awesome power of Nature as it extends back into the unknown and all the figure can do is observe. This kind of disconnect feels like Gilpin’s idea of the picturesque and how man, although he is observing and technically set higher than Nature, can neither be greater nor a part of it.

For Keats in “On Seeing the Elgin Marbles,” the individual finds relevance in the face of death. Keats begins the poem with an exploration of the implications of death, and then towards the end, moves to a sort of acceptance. Keats acknowledges that his own “mortality weighs heavily upon [him] like unwilling sleep,” showing his acknowledgement of death’s inevitability as well as his own hesitation (Keats II, lines 1-2). The fact that death is inevitable is something that holds Keats in the mindset that he cannot write poetry because his “spirit is too weak” (Keats II, line 1). Dlacey1127 said in her post that Keats “has lost hope in trying to fight the battles within his heart” and that “he finds luxury in sadness, while dark glories swarm his brain,” a statement that completely embodies Keats in the beginning of the poem. There is something inherently Pyrrhonic about the beginning, how Keats feels the impending presence of death so greatly that it renders him almost useless. But as the poem progresses, Keats shifts and states, “yet ‘tis a gentle luxury to weep/That I have not the cloudy winds to keep,/fresh for the opening of the morning’s eye” (Keats II, lines 6-8). This shift indications that Keats does not have the illusion of death’s far away presence, which takes the pressure off of Keats because he knows what he can and cannot do in the face or mortality. On the cusp of death, Keats is able to determine the limits of his will and life. Death gives meaning to the living and it is only here that the individual is able to truly know its own relevance as well as its potential. This poem is steeped in biographical influences. Keats’ life is famously littered with death, suffering from early losses of his father, mother, and grandparents, all of which affected him greatly. 1817 marked the year that Keats finally began to focus solely on poetry (finally quitting his medical schooling) and it’s no surprise that after so much death in his life, that his focus for one of his earliest works would be the effect of death on the individual (http://englishhistory.net/keats/life.html). 

For Wordsworth in “The Thorn,” the individual finds its relevance in society, and in this case, what happens when that relevance is disregarded. One of my favorite lectures in the entire course was our lecture over “The Thorn.” Professor Porter really shed light on the political implications of the piece. The way we expounded on the unreliability of the narrator and how the text moves from a supernatural piece, to something “illustrating not only a mother's sorrow at losing her child, but also the often unsympathetic nature of society” (http://www.literature-study-online.com/essays/wordsworth.html). Throughout the poem, the narrator is enigmatic in nature and does not share the same superstition of Martha Ray as the fellow people of the town. As we explored extensively in lecture, when the narrator comes upon Martha Ray in line 202 of stanza XIX, he see her face and runs; he runs away even though he hears her say, “‘O Misery! O Misery!’” as he does, disregarding her and any chance to turn back to help her. I remember Professor Porter discussing the appalling nature of this act, how human compassion is completely disregarded. Whenever people encounter her, they run; Martha Ray never has the opportunity to speak or explain her situation. The narrator even claims that “there’s none that ever knew” of Martha’s story, and even attributes most of her story to various accounts of the townspeople. There is not a clear connection to Martha Ray and all of the natural elements in the beginning, but as the poem progresses, the end brings enlightenment; Martha is so dehumanized by society as a social pariah that she becomes part of the landscape; she, in essence, is the thorn: “And all had joined in one endeavour/To bury this poor thorn for ever” (Wordsworth, line 103). Calliope said in one of her posts that “perhaps [the thorn] was just the remnants of a rose that had been stuck into the ground” and now it is “just a dead shell of what once was." “The Thorn” becomes a critique of society’s inclination to abandon and outcast an individual that does not properly align with the acceptable standards of humanity. Martha Ray was dark and sad after her love abandoned her and she lost her child and because of this darkness, society shunned her. Like the thorn that was formerly a rose, Martha Ray is only a ghost of her individual self. Her individual relevance in society was stunted and eventually withered. I chose the picture above because it wonderfully embodies Martha Ray and the deeper implications of the poem. The figure is a woman, completely masked by her environment, most likely from the influence of outside intervention. She was made this way. She’s barely a human anymore, so much a part of her background that she is almost gone. The relevance of her individual self, which normally would have flourished in society, was instead shunned; because of this, she is merely a ghost of her former self. 

Almost in an extension of Keats’ goal, but in a less macabre way, is Wordsworth’s exploration of how the individual finds its relevance in retrospect. The Prelude is an exploration of the connection between Nature and memory, one that allows for the narrator of the poem to ultimately remember his own self in conjunction to the past. What is extremely relevant is that for Wordsworth, the individual seems to only obtain this connection from Nature (in contrast with Gilpin, who seems to advocate a blatant disconnect between Man and Nature). Wordworth says that “the passions that build up our human soul” are “not with the mean and vulgar works of man,/ But with high objects, with eternal things,/With life and Nature” (Wordsworth and Coleridge 4, lines 134-7). Nature is the originator of our thoughts and the inspiration behind these memories. For the individual in The Prelude, it is the act of recollecting memories that allows significant retrospect; this act of retrospect ultimately leads to factors that shape self-identity. One of my fellow classmates, C Jane, commented how Wordsworth “allows his adult self to realize the importance of these childhood memories” and that “these memories have shaped who he is as an adult.” Similar to this act of memory as self-identity is a concept that John Locke explored in his philosophy. One relevant difference is that John Locke advocates memory as self-identity, but this act of remembering does not change in retrospect. It is clear that, for Wordsworth, “external objects actively impress not merely the senses (as for Lockeans) but also the intellect (and thus that there is a distinction to be made between sense and intellect)” (Joshua 511). For Wordsworth, the act of remembering is not simply how he is able to prove his own existence, but how he shapes and changes his individual nature; it is where the individual finds its relevance. The relationship between Locke and Wordsworth is explored extensively on http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/wordsandlocke.html.
 
Each author has a view on what gives the individual relevance, a view that varies across historical periods and the course as a whole. I found it extremely significant that a lot of poets address this theme, but each focus their theory through a different lens. Whether it was where the individual does, does not, or what happens when the individual is deprived of its relevance, all of the poets I explored above have vastly different viewpoints of the theme. I believe that this exploration of the individual leads ultimately to the invigoration of society as a whole and sets the stage for later development of such things as Detailism and Realism. Overall, the theme of the relevance of the individual is one of the many themes we explored across the course that really intrigued me about this time period in literature. 

Bibliography

Gilpin, William. Observations on the River Wye and Several Parts of South Wales, &c. Relative Chiefly to Picturesque Beauty; Made in the Summer of the Year 1770. By William Gilpin, 3rd ed. London: Printed for R. Blamire, 1792. Print.

Joshua, Essaka. "Wordsworth Amongst The Aristotelians." Journal Of The History Of Ideas 67.3 (2006): 511-522. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 10 Dec. 2012.

Keats, John. The Complete Poems of John Keats. New York: Random House Digital, 1994. Google Books. Web.

Schor, Naomi. Reading in Detail: Aesthetics and the Feminine. New York: Methuen, 1987. Print.

Wordsworth, William, and Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Lyrical Ballads 1798 and 1800. Ed. Dahlia Porter and Michael Gamer. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview, 2008. Print.

Wordsworth, William. The Prelude: 1799, 1805, 1850. Ed. Gill Abrams and Wordsworth. Norton, 1979. Print. 

http://www.literature-study-online.com/essays/wordsworth.html
http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/wordsandlocke.html
http://englishhistory.net/keats/life.html

There is something about Wordsworth that I really enjoy. I don't know if it's his style, or his command over the thematic elements he explores, but I find myself relaxed when I read him. Which I think is quite odd, because his lack of rhyme style and seemingly sporadic shifts through time in The Prelude would indicate something that takes a little more effort to enjoy. Or in essence, a clear rhyme scheme (at least for me, ordinarily) is a definitive structure and it sort of gives me certain guidelines to follow in a poem. Normally, free verse stresses me out. But not with Wordsworth.

This poem coincides nicely with an element of our course that we explored earlier in the semester. In The Prelude, Wordsworth gives credit to Nature for the fruition of mentality of mankind. In the beginning, Wordsworth says that Nature stimulates and focuses thought, as evidenced by the stream that leads to his dreams. This sort of implies that Nature has control over mankind, yet that is not the case in the poem. 

My favorite lines of the poem are lines 122-129. The way Wordsworth describes "mighty forms that do not live like living men" is so powerful. It kind of reminds me of the way Schopenhauer describes the relationship of intelligence and will, how man uses intelligence and rationality to explain certain phenomenon, like a grid that organizes something wild. And all of this occurs because of that cliff. Man divides and affects Nature, but Nature will always recover. Man owes Nature so much, but does not truly belong. Something I'm curious about: what does the cliff represent in the poem? It stops the narrator multiple times and it seems to be the physical barrier between man and the limitless sky. Is it that Nature is okay in certain aspects, like the trees and what gives man inspiration, but somethings are not accepted? Like man's blatant ignorance of some aspects of Nature ruin the other elements?

I agree with a post further down. Wordsworth's recollection of his memories is a perfect example of collecting the self/poet. Retrospect of memory is what ultimately leads to self identity (something that Locke and Hume expound upon in their epistemological accounts).

I don't know why I see so many similarities between philosophy and elements of this class. Sorry!

I am not the biggest fan of this poem. I appreciate it a little more after the discussion in class on Tuesday--the way Byron used the breaks in the poem is absolutely clever and fascinating. What I have a hard time relating to is the heavy emphasis on historical context. I don't know why, but this poem was one of the first ones that I felt was never intended for me to read or really understand, like some esoteric anachronism that is somewhat beheld because of the emphasis on Byron's name. I don't know if I'm making any sense (I took the GRE today and I completely useless now), but this poem felt dense, but not in the, "OH MY GOSH, there is some hidden meaning in the poem and I just got it and now everything makes sense" sense. More heavy than dense, like the implications of the three roles and their corresponding countries of origin (which I'm interested to hear more about tomorrow), and the obvious, but complicated context that weighs the poem down. Since we're in the section on collecting the poet, I'm really interested to see how "The Giaour" corresponds to Byron's life. 
This poem reminded me a lot about a component in Aristotle's aesthetic argument where he claims that poetry is more philosophical and serious than history because poetry deals with universals while history deals with particulars. In his "Poetics," he also nullifies any poetry to be even labeled as poetry when it deals with history. I felt that sense while reading "The Giaour." It didn't feel like a poem to me. It had the same mood/tone as that one Charlotte Smith poem that we read, the one that was laced with historical references (which I did not enjoy). I think that may be in part to my lack of knowledge in the world of poetry, but that was my initial reaction. Like I said earlier, I'm interested to hear more about it. I can always count on the lectures to completely change my initial dislike for certain poems. 

I absolutely enjoyed reading "Unpacking my Library." One of my favorite lines is "Every passion borders on the chaotic, but the collector's passion borders on the chaos of memories" (pg. 60). 

The way the author talks about collecting as a means of remembering and almost preserving memory reminded me very much of the philosophies of John Locke, who claimed that memory is our only means of personal identity. Collecting is like a form of personal identity. 

I love what the author says about collecting as a type of rebirth and the value of old versus new. I think it's a true testament to the act of collecting that old out-values the new, especially when taking into account the influence of economy on our society. We live in a time when most people want new things and things that have evolved. We rarely see people who crave an old Nokia phone over the iPhone 5; that's just not how humanity works at this time. We live in an ever-changing, fast-paced world where new is always better. But the act of collecting, from the shells that Professor Porter brought on the first day of class, to Bowles' picturesque, to the collection of books that one of my classmates shared below, has yet to change. A collector craves, even needs, things from the past because they truly make the collection. The past defines the present and instead of being a component that adds to the present, the past is its own entity and equally, if not more, valuable. 

I love what the author says about the characteristics of a book collector. I can confidently call myself a book collector and I've done EVERYTHING he said: borrowed books with the intent of not returning them, stolen a book, and not to mention the fact that I have hundreds of books and I've only read about a third of them. Overall, I loved this piece a lot.

Just out of curiosity, when was this written? It feels somewhat modern, but I'm not sure. 

I, like many of the posts below, am not a fan of The Prologue. I do not understand the reasons why Wordsworth would revoke the creative license of his audience. I mean, I understand why he did it; he wanted to clearly (although whether The Prologue is clear is debatable) explain not only his process, but the intention behind his poetry. But the reader no longer has an individual reading. I feel a very close connection with Wordsworth's Prologue to Bowles' idea of the picturesque. He believed that it was something to be taken generally, and that the parts of the whole were not as important as the whole itself. I feel like Wordsworth comes across with this mindset, that his general concept of the poem (political themes, for example) is more important than any other individual reading that the poem could be interpreted in. It makes me feel as if Wordsworth had little to no faith in not only his audience, but in his poetry.
But The Prologue wasn't all bad. I really liked how Wordsworth explained the differences between poetry and prose and why he chose to convey his message through poetry in the first place. But I find it ironic that he eventually resorts to a very prose-like prologue to convey what he felt poetry was better at conveying.

I don't know what to think about "The Rime of the Ancyent Marinere." I think what I found most perplexing was the odd juxtaposition between style and theme. Truly reflective of the title, the piece was very lyrical and sing-songy. It felt like I was reading Shel Silverstein at times, but with much more complicated themes. I think this can be attributed to the ABAB quatrains and the slight variances on repetition of lines. I found it interesting that there were some stanzas that moved away from this format, and many of them were characterized by repeating lines (like in II and III). But unlike Lewis's repetition, which seemed to cause more drama and add thematic tension to the work, I feel like this repetition acts differently. It seems to be adding to the speaker's character, like in section II where he repeats "fog and mist"; it seems like the speaker is trying to convince himself that it happened? Speaking of, why? Regardless, that's what it feels like to me. The tension does not seem to originate from the repeating lines, but from the breaks in style and the stark contrast between style and subject. 

Matthew Lewis Presentation

Matthew Gregory Lewis, "Tales of Wonder"

Biographical Information and Information Leading to Composition of "Tales of Wonder" [Citation for the below information: (Peck)]:

•Born July 9, 1775 to Frances Maria Sewell and Matthew Lewis (both of whom came from well-known, respected, and relatively wealthy families).

•Eldest of 4 children--Matthew, Maria, Barrington (named after one of Matthew Lewis Sr.'s upper-level directors), Sophia Elizabeth.

•Obtained his curiosity of entertainment from his mother, who had literary inclinations (early in his career, she acted as his literary agent and she eventually published poems herself).

•The relationship between Matthew’s mother and father was quite complicated, with Matthew caught in the middle. When Matthew was six, his mother left her husband, taking the music master, Samuel Harrison as her lover. Supposedly while separated, Matthew’s mother obtained a lover and frequently moved in order to avoid her husband. Her husband discovered her secret and on the day she birthed another man’s child, he showed up at her home. He later petitioned for divorce because of her adultery (which she did not contest), but the bill of divorce was rejected and they were married until death.

•As a result, Matthew’s mother was forced to retreat from society and fled to France. Matthew, being the eldest, played mediator between his parents and kept in contact with both (he believed his father to be in the right, but held his mother dear). He even told people that his mother was his aunt to avoid talking about the awkward situation and hopefully never awaken the scandal. 

•He spent his summer vacation of 1791 in Paris, where he is said to have first been inspired in what would later become The Monk, his most famous work.

•While in Paris, he would send his mother songs for plays that she was writing and plays that he translated into English that she could sell to Drury Lane (he frequently gave his mother money whenever he could). 

•Matthew’s father wished for his son to take up a diplomatic career (much like his own), so Matthew spent the summer of 1792 in Germany. There in Weimar, he met Johann Wolfgang van Goethe, and his desire to have something of his on stage grew.

•When Lewis graduated, he was fully intent on writing, but passively accepted his father’s plan for him to have a career in diplomacy. In 1794, his father got him a job in the British embassy to Holland.

•Lewis did not like The Hague (capital city of South Holland in the Netherlands) or its Dutch citizens and because he was so bored, he produced The Monk there in ten weeks.

•Lewis obtained a seat in Parliament in 1796 because of his father.

•From age 14-21, he lived the acceptable life of the son of a well-to-do government official. But during that time, one of the things that remained constant was his drive to become an author.

•He said he would spend his time “scribbling Novels and Plays” that thus had the power “to deluge the town with such an inundation of Ghosts and Magicians, as would satisfy the thirst of the most insatiable swallower of wonders."

•In 1802, Lewis withdrew from parliamentary career.

•Matthew and his father had a falling out 1803 when Lewis Sr. became involved with a woman, Mrs. Ricketts, who forced her way into the family circle, gained influence over him and caused him to treat his son poorly. Apparently, she claimed that the only reason they weren't married was because they were waiting for Matthew's mother to die. She also forced Lewis Sr. to write Matthew out of his will and instead leave the family fortune to her. They superficially made up in 1805.

•Matthew’s father grew ill and died in 1812. It was discovered then that Matthew's father, while disappointed in Matthew's failed diplomatic career, never intended to disown his son and instead left almost all of the family fortune to Matthew. 

•Poems was his last publication.

•In 1815, he went to visit estates in the West Indies.

•In the summer of 1816, he visited Percy and Mary Shelley at Geneva, Switzerland.

•In 1817, he took a second trip to Jamaica, which brought on the yellow fever that resulted in his death on the voyage back to England. He was buried at sea. 

•There was no indication that Matthew Lewis ever had a serious love life. There are reports that he was heterosexual and had a relationship with a woman, but there are also reports that he was homosexual. 

Composition:

The Monk (included because it contributes to "Tales of Wonder")

•The gothic was characterized by shock, debauchery, and black magic. Most of Lewis’ work is categorized as being in the “horror gothic” genre. ("Gothic Fiction")

•Education: Marylebone Seminary (where the students were largely of the nobility and gentry and the curriculum included Latin, Greek, French, writing, arithmetic, drawing, dancing, and fencing); Westminster School (at age 8, where he distinguished himself as an actor and showed his love of theatre); Christ Church-Oxford (at the age of 15, earned his B.A. in the Spring of 1794 and eventually his M.A.). This education is the exact same as his father's, who wanted Lewis to follow in his diplomatic footsteps (an aspiration that Lewis always followed, but never really engaged in, always having the desire to write). It is said that the violence he experienced at school between the boys of Westminster serves as inspiration for the violent nature of his Gothic work. (Peck) and (MacDonald)

•Lewis was influenced by Ann Radcliffe’s “The Mysteries of Udolpho” and Horace Walpole’s “The Castle of Otranto” (Peck)

•Inspiration for the gothic nature of his work came from places he had lived. Growing up, he lived in Stanstead Hall; an Old Nurse would frequently tell him stories about a room in the house, which was supposed to be haunted. Lewis's sister Sophia wrote to Walter Scott after her brother's death saying that Matthew would go “past that gloomy chamber, [and] on the way to his dormitory, he would cast a glance of terror over his shoulder, expecting to see the huge and strangely-carved folding doors fly open, and disclose some of those fearful shapes that afterwards resolved themselves into the ghastly machinery of his works. To such juvenile feelings he ascribed some of the most stricking scenes in The Castle Spectre” (Peck). Matthew Lewis explained to Byron many years later that his quarters at Weimar were haunted. Matthew Lewis was apparently "awakened every morning by the rustling of papers in a closet adjoining his room but never found anyone there. The servant of the house explained that this phenomenon was occasioned by the ghost of the former owner, a mother who every day at the house of her death had continue to search frantically the closet filled with foreign newspapers for new of her only son, who had been lost at sea” (Peck). 

•George Ticknor: “A very decent looking man compared with the form my imagination had given to the author of The Monk and The Castle Spectre" (Peck). 

•The Monk immediately achieved celebrity status for Lewis, however, about a year after its appearance, an injunction to restrain its sale was obtained. This led to a second edition in which Lewis cited himself as the author and removed what he believed was objectionable ("Monk Lewis")

•The Monk was so influential in his career that it earned Lewis the nickname of “Monk” Lewis (Peck).

•Included four supernaturalist elements that exerted great influence on the Gothic tradition of horror: the demonic temptress (or succubus); the Bleeding Nun; the Wandering Jew; and the diabolous ex machina (Thomson).

•Success of The Monk opened up the theatre to him and he wrote The Castle Spectre, his most famous and popular play (Peck). 

•Like Walter Scott, Matthew Lewis collected and translated poems. In 1798, Lewis met William Erskine in London, who showed him some of Walter Scott’s (then unknown) translated poems; Lewis expressed interest in Scott and asked him to contribute to his Tales of Wonder project. Walter Scott agreed because of the fame surrounding Lewis's name that came from The Monk's success (Peck).

•Lewis introduced Scott to London society, arranged that his own publisher print some of Scott’s work, and used his influence in theatre to have Scott’s House of Aspen produced (Peck).

•Tales of Wonder was first referred to as “Tales of Terror,” but then title changed closer to publication (Peck).

•The poems that were included in Tales of Wonder were collected as early as 1793, but the work was constantly delayed. This was due to several things, including Lewis’s desire for perfect translations of the four elemental spirit poems [Walter Scott said about "The Erl-King" to a friend: “I assure you, there is no small impudence in attempting a version of that ballad, as it has been translated by Lewis” (Peck).] and his brother's death on January 13, 1800 (Peck). 

•During this time, Scott was only patient with Lewis out of respect, but printed An Apology for Tales of Wonder in 1799, 9 ballads which later appeared in Tales of Wonder. Only 12 copies of this publication were sold and labeled as specimens of printing.

•Accumulation of poems from Lewis, Sir Walter Scott, and Robert Southey.

Publication:

•Very first edition printed at the end of 1800, early 1801 by J. Bell (Peck)

•Printed in two volumes (Peck). 

• Royal octavo (where each page is 1/8 the size of the original piece of paper) on heavy paper, 10" by 6¼" (Peck). 

•Price: 1 guinea (Peck). 

•Of 60 pieces, 2/3 had already been printed before (Peck). 

•The Macbeth quote in the beginning was quite common for Gothic-oriented words. It was considered “citing the Bard” as an "attempt by authors to provide a legitimizing presence for one of the period’s most popular but controversial forms of literary expression” (Lewis).

•Variety of metrical feet, stanza forms, and rhyme schemes (Peck).

•Included a range of subject matter, some representing Gothic matter in its most violent (Osric the lion), some attempting to ridicule Gothic verse, such as "Cinder King," and "Maid of the Moor" (Peck). 

•Second London edition in 1801, which reduced the number of ballads from 60 to 32 (Peck). 

•Edition of 1836 only had 23, while an edition in 1925 only had 8 (Peck). 

Reception:

•The public was disappointed by Tales of Wonder. Lewis attributed this to false hopes raised by the delay, the fact that the popularity of ballads was already decreasing, his own misguided sense of humor (by including poems that mocked the Gothic style), and that by including many well-known poems, the work was expanded to two expensive volumes (Peck). 

•Lewis received much negative attention from critics, although he was successful commercially. ("Matthew Lewis (writer)") 

•Lewis received much criticism for having "for the author" on the title page of the first edition of Tales of Wonder. This statement usually means that all of the money earned by the book goes to the author, not the publisher. Many people called the work “Tales of Plunder” for this reason. It was changed to "for the publisher" in the second edition (Peck). 

•Much of the negative criticism revolved around his dual position as a parliamentary member and author. Some criticism was on the grounds of a lack of originality. ("Matthew Lewis (writer)")

•Coleridge’s review, “Yes! The author of the Monk signs himself a LEGISLATOR! We stare and tremble.” ("The Monk")

•Parreaux, “every reviewer or critic of the book, no matter how hostile he was, felt compelled to at least pay lip-service to Lewis’s genius.” ("The Monk")

•Byron, in The English Bards and Scotch Reviewers, "Wonder-working Lewis, Monk or Bard, who fain wouldst make Parnassus a churchyard; Even Satan's self with thee might dread to dwell, And in thy skull discern a deeper hell." Four years after this review, Lewis and Byron met and according to Mary Shelley, Lewis asked Byron why he called him “Apollo’s sexton” to which Byron found it “difficult to reply to this categorical species of reproof.” After this encounter, they frequently spent time together. Byron valued Lewis’ friendship and profited from his literary advise. (Peck). 

•Scott: “few persons have exhibited more mastery of rhyme, or greater command over the melody of verse” (Peck).

•More Wonders was an attack on Tales of Wonder that appeared in pamphlet form in 1801, under the pseudonym “Mauritius Moonshine” and was reviewed by the Monthly Mirror 9. Thomas Dermody later claimed authorship in a letter to a friend. The letter and review date the parody before February 1801, making it the earliest satiric response to Tales of Wonder. ("More Wonders")

•Tales of Terror is a collection of poems that parodies the Tales of Wonder. It was anonymously published and though some thought that Lewis was involved (because of the original title of Tales of Wonder), but this was proved to be untrue. This parody appeared in June of 1801. (Peck).

Bibliography:

"Gothic Fiction." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2012. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothic_fiction>.

Lewis, M. G. Tales of Wonder. Ed. Douglass H. Thomson. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview, 2010. Print.

MacDonald, D. L. Monk Lewis: A Critical Biography. Toronto: University of Toronto, 2000. Print.

"Matthew Lewis (writer)." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 2012. Web. 6 Oct. 2012. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Lewis_(writer)>.

"The Monk." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 2012. Web. 6 Oct. 2012. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monk>.

"Monk Lewis." Monk Lewis. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Oct. 2012. <http://personal.georgiasouthern.edu/~dougt/lewis.htm>.

"MORE WONDERS." MORE WONDERS. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Oct. 2012. <http://www.litgothic.com/Texts/dermody_wonders.html>.

Peck, Louis F. A Life of Matthew G. Lewis. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1961. Print.

Thomson, Douglass H. "Information on Lewis and the Tales for Your Editorial Work."Personal Webpage of Douglass H. Thomson. Georgia Southern University, n.d. Web. <http://personal.georgiasouthern.edu/~dougt/lewis.htm>.

I cannot gush enough about Lewis. His work has been my favorite out of everything we've read so far. Maybe it's because I have a special fondness for him because I've been researching him for the research project, or maybe it's because I have a weakness for all things of a fantastical nature. But regardless, I love everything about him.

My personal favorites were "The Fire-King" and "The Water-King." One of the things I found the most interesting during my research was Lewis's influence on Walter Scott. I can see some of those similarities, not only in subject matter, but also in mood, although Lewis definitely seems darker than Scott. I also read about how Tales of Wonder was delayed because of Lewis's desire to translate the poems perfectly and maintaining perfect rhyme. I like the inconsistencies in meter and style across poems. I love the rhyme scheme. I love the subject matter. I LOVE EVERYTHING.

I don't know how I felt about "Lay of the Last Minstrel." I think I liked it. I'm not sure if I understood it though. It reminded me a lot of "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,"  but not just for the medieval imagery.

Like a lot of people, I had to look up a lot of words throughout the Cantos and I found the experience highly reminiscent of the footnotes in "The Loves of the Plants." I really loved the reading experience that this poem offered online (because those links were very helpful), but it was quite distracting. I had to go over the Cantos several times each. I also was quite distracted by the structure. Was this something characteristic of Sir Walter Scott? The stanzas don't seem to be consistent. At least the rhyme scheme seems pretty standard (at least in the sections with even numbered lines).

I can see some political themes and references throughout the poem and I found them much easier to understand than "Beach Head." As plain as it sounds, I loved the style, the rhythm, and the mood of the first 3 Cantos. I'm excited to continue! And to find out what I missed.

And just for fun, in section VIII of Canto 1, the final line of "Shall never, never be forgot!" reminded me of V for Vendetta :]

I liked these two poems a lot. I thought "Upon Seeing The Elgin Marbles" was extremely interesting. In context with our discussion of Byron on Tuesday, I thought that Keats dealt with the subject of human mortality in a fantastic way. The end of human life is something common to everyone; everyone must die. And even despite conquests and grandeur in this life, it all inevitably ends in death. I think it's a bit morbid and sad, but I kind of love it. The stanza recognizes the internal struggle of the heart of man, so be a glorified and do well in this life, but is each monumental occasion in this life just another step towards the end? Maybe I'm reading it in a completely macabre way, but what I think Keats is trying to say sounds a bit Pyrrhonic (obviously not to that extreme, but a little reminiscent) and a bit Platonic--nothing in this life can compare to the grandeur of the next life

Even if I'm reading this completely wrong, I did think that is was interesting how Keats changed the limitless ascension of a bird into the sky, a normally positive image, into something sad and echoing death. 

I found the beginning of "Reading in Detail" highly reminiscent of Gilpin's sense of the Picturesque. I wrote in my one of my blog posts about how I felt that Gilpin was admonishing the individual throughout "Observations on a River Wye." It was pretty evident, especially by Gilpin's repeated use of the term "deformity" that he felt that the Picturesque was something general and something to be taken as a whole, for most of the deformities he referred to were individual items that strayed away from their general counterparts. 

I can understand how Reynolds sees that detail and detailism can ruin the grandeur of nature and, in relevance to this discussion, the picturesque. Just like with anything of great magnitude, it is the first impression of something as a whole that communicates grandeur. Take that whole apart, break it into its individual, insignificant components, and the grandeur is lost. While I don't necessarily agree with Reynolds, I see the logic behind his argument (and maybe as a woman, it's inevitable that I don't agree, according to the article). I can also see the relationship between this thought and Plato/Aristotle, who were both concerned more about (respectively) essence rather than substance, the one over the many, quality versus quantity. 

The idea that The Sublime is beautiful as a general thing is something I think is reflective of the time. It is, I believe, why Realism (and the explication of the ugly of everyday life) and the significance of the individual in literature and art didn't rise in significance until later. Personally, I believe in the grandeur of both, of the whole and its parts--more so in the parts. For the parts can survive without the whole; it is the whole the is completely reliant on the details that compose it.

I found John Clare's poems very relatable. Like Wordsworth, Clare speaks (prominently in "Reccolections after a Ramble") of revisiting a place from the past. I don't know if I missed something or not, but I felt like Clare's poetry wasn't as dense. I read it and I understood it. I don't want to come across as unappreciative of Clare's work (because I felt there was a certain beauty to the poems and his wonderful diction), but the poems felt very physical and very surface, with not many retrospective philosophical components. This felt like what Wordsworth was doing, but to a different audience. Perhaps a lower, less educated class? Perhaps someone who experiences the same Nature, but doesn't necessarily think about the rain or the forest in the particular way Clare describes it in "Reccolections after a Ramble." Because the one thing that makes me think it could be for a higher educational level audience was his diction, but I don't think that this is a fair assumption; I don't know what words lower class people in Clare's time knew. Another thing I found interesting was Clare's complete lack of punctuation in all of his poems. I found myself creating my own sentences and my own rhythm. I'm wondering if this was intentional. Because unlike Bowles, Clare's lack of punctuation between stanzas (and frankly, in them as well) wasn't awkward.

There is a child-like wonder about the life (life other than humans) Nature holds in Clare's poems. This makes me think that the poems were intended for someone in the lower class, someone who has a desire to commune with Nature and goes about it in this way. The poems don't speak of extravagant trips or faraway lands. They explore the beauty of the everyday, the rain, a nightingale and her nest, the forest, all places that everyone has access to, but places that only people who don't have money to entertain themselves otherwise.

Another thing I noticed was that the speaker of the poems always entered the poem at a very surprising time and seemed ill-fitting, like they didn't belong there--much like the fact that human life doesn't seem to quite fit in with Nature. This is particularly evident in "The Badger," where men are mentioned more, but only kill the badger, a part of Nature.

But I really liked Clare, especially "The Nightingales Nest."

P.S. Is it just me or did every link on the blog change to an assaulting shade of blue? I like blue, but the shade makes the titles impossible to read; they won't focus and they hurt my eyes (as petty as that sounds, haha). It could just be my computer, but I was wondering if anyone else was experiencing this.