James Boswell
Robert Burns
Edmund Burke
Frances Burney
William Cowper
Olaudah Equiano
Benjamin Franklin
Oliver Goldsmith
Thomas Gray
Thomas Jefferson
Samuel Johnson
Thomas Paine
Hester Thrale Piozzi
Ignatius Sancho
Phillis Wheatley
Mary Wollstonecraft
This list not meant to be definitive or canonical--it's simply meant to give you a map--of sorts--to the terrain that you'll be covering this semester. Chances are a few of these names will resurface in your group projects, but if they don't, that's okay.Feel free to respond to this post with your reflections on the British literary canon, the processes by which some authors from the past fade into obscurity while others rise to prominence, or the particular authors identified here.
Deadline: Friday (1/28), 1pm.
8 comments:
What I really appreciated most about class today was the "elephant in the room" acknowledgement, the idea that later eighteenth century literature is rarely taught, canonized, and/or appreciated because it's boring, not well-written, or simply because "no one cares." Personally, I don't agree with this wholeheartedly (although I will admit I was a little relived to know I wasn't alone in my initial thinking). After all, it is being taught in a university setting and for many of us it's even a requirement, so it must hold some degree of importance. What is interesting, however, is that even in a room full of English majors, key authors and texts from this period are completely foreign to us.
In my group, we theorized that the absence of later eighteenth century literature (apart from the Romantics that appear at the very end of the period we're studying) in basic, gen-ed textbooks is a result of its lack of being tied to a specific literary or historical movement. After all, Romanticism, for example, is a response to Enlightenment thinkers, as well as the spark that ignited Transcendentalism, etc. The texts we'll encounter from the period we're currently studying, on the other hand, seem difficult to categorize because they're "in between" major literary movements and not specifically labeled as either/or. Then again, it'd be silly to say that there just so happens to be a gap in literature at the time (it's not as though people simply stopped writing); couldn't it be possible, after all, that there were earlier, pre-Romantic responses to the Enlightenment? Couldn't we argue that perhaps Romantic thought was egged on by more than just the Enlightenment, by authors and texts more closely related to it, at least chronologically?
I have to admit that I did not initially think this exercise would be as thought-provoking and interesting as it actually was (not to mention incredibly surprising), however now I'm quite interested in finding out how and why this particular period goes hazy, and why it matters. Whether I'll enjoy the majority of the literature we'll be presented with this semester is still completely unknown to me, however I am looking forward to discovering more about this "white bear" that continues to remain so illusive.
I thought that it was very intriguing to realize that the work will not be easily provided to us that we actually have to do some in depth searching. What really happened with 18th Century Literature? Why hasn't anyone stepped up to the plate to retrieve some of its lost literary artifacts? Better yet why hasn't this been brought to our (English Majors) attention until now?
Now, that my attention is fully captured. I will like to know we will be expected to fulfill the requirements of this course.
What is it about this "white bear" that continues to reappear again and again in our class discussions and through various images projected on our blog site?
Finally, how should we view literature? Is it through categories (Romanticism, Enlightenment, etc) or by dates and location (17th Century British Literature, 18th Century American Literature, etc)?
The one observation that struck me during Monday's lecture was the scarcity of any defining literature for the 18th century. Other than a few authors such as Blake, who actually wrote in the later 18th century, there are not many authors still focused on. The Enlightenment was the defining movement of the century and produced numerous texts. Rousseau, Voltaire, and Diderot developed unique and revolutionary ideas in their works, but these are not fictional. The lack of this quality and the inability of these texts to be defined through a specific literary movement prevent these texts from belonging to the "popular" domain of 18th century literature. The Enlightenment writers were followed by the Romantics who embraced a specific genre. Authors like Keats, Wordsworth, and Blake would be found in a basic English anthology.
My group like all the others struggled to compile a list of authors from that defined the 18th century. These years do not exhibit a lack of literature, but rather that lack of any structured movement. The works produced out of the Enlightenment are largely criticized according to a philosophical approach. The content, while radical, did not represent any literary movement, but rather an intellectual pursuit. This difference is what creates the void in texts deemed appropriate for an introductory English textbook.
Honestly, I was initially a little confused about the intentions of the activity in class on Monday, but now that I completed it and have seen the outcome, I truly appreciate it. I never really noticed the lack of eighteenth century literature in popular culture, and even in English courses worldwide. Perhaps I never noticed it, because I myself, have never been too particularly fond of, or exposed to such literature. I feel a lot more comfortable with the course knowing what we are up against, but also feel more motivated to embrace all the works for what they are. Hopefully, I can find novels and poems which I truly enjoy through this course, and can gain an extensive appreciation for a genre of literature which seems to have slightly fallen off the map. Acknowledging the elephant in the room was a relief, though. Looking through the textbooks also gave me a better understanding of what era specific authors were a part of, regardless of whether it was before, during, or after our area of concentration. Hopefully taking this course, I will be able to give credit where credit is due!
I wasn't surprised to see Thomas Gray on this list simply because I have read "Elegy Written in a Country Church Yard" several times in different English courses. To be quite honest I'd really like to see a Professor assign one of his other works for once because I'm interested to see how students (and myself) react to his other poems. I've always wondered why "Elegy" appears time and time again but we rarely see any of his other works appear in class. Any guesses?
There were a few names on the list that I have never been exposed to such as James Boswell, Hester Thrale Piozzi, and Ignatius Sancho. I also did not come across these names in any of the books that my group looked through on Monday. But now that I know that they are key writers/survivors of the 18th Century period, I am curious about them and their writing.
I was really impressed with the outcome of the activity in class on Monday because it really got me thinking about the time period and made me realize how little I know about it. I will agree with "sols" and say that I am also not too particularly fond of the literature from this period but now that I know a bit more about the background, works, and authors of the time period, I am eager to find out what else I will learn this semester in this course.
This last semester I studied for the GRE literature subject test, which as anyone who has also taken the test can tell you, is extremely hard to study for. Basically the best chance you have to prepare for the test is to study the canonical work of various literary periods, and the only work that I read from the later 18th century was Thomas Gray's "Elegy." That is the only reason I was familiar with any of the names on the list, besides Oliver Goldsmith, whose novel I read at the start of my English 247 (the British Novel) class.
Like some of the above comments, I think its interesting that as English majors we are unfamiliar with most of the above names, and feel that the author's absence from general education or literature classes is more understandable than their absence from more narrowed literature classes. The fact that most of these "cannon" members are so obscure to English majors makes me curious about other authors of the period that are not recognized. I don't really enjoy studying a literature period solely based on "canonical" texts, and so hopefully our individual units open up additional possibilities, and offer some explanation as to why 18th century writers are often unknown.
I think my response may differ not too much from the responses listed above. I think many of the individuals in class could agree that for some reason the period of time in literature during the later 18th century seems to lack any sort of distinct characterization. This point has been expressed to us fairly well so far and our dear professor has sought actively to expose to us this notion common to seemingly a majority of English scholars/anthologies/surveys.
I tend to believe what some individuals would characterize as periods of thought, development, and dare I say 'progress' (those distinctions referring to periods such as Romanticism, Enlightenment, etc.), materialize as a result of the period or periods that come before it. Although more factors contribute to these shifts in thought and expression than represented here, it should be fairly easy to suggest each period is a reaction to the one that precedes it.
To me, the period involving Romantic elements stems from the ordered, structured world of the Baroque era in the 17th and early 18th centuries. Conveniently enough, because of this characterization, there exists in between the Baroque and Romantic eras a period of time (the one we're studying at the moment) not included under either heading. It is in essence something of a black hole without characterization or distinction (other than that of 'later 18th century literature'). I think the period of later 18th century literature may operate as a period of extended development between the Baroque and Romantic eras in which the formation of a clear effort towards the maturation of a 'defined' Romantic period was not definite by any means. Basically, I am not convinced entirely there was a clear direction towards something different as the Baroque era exhausted itself and there existed a period (later 18th century) that was directed towards developing what the next phase of expression might be.
The value of the works of some others, such as (in my opinion) Olaudah Equiano, may be heightened or lowered when looked at from a certain perspective. For instance, Equiano's book "The Interesting Narrative of the Life of Olaudah Equiano" provides an excellent account of the effects of imperialism on the indigenous people of Africa, and, more importantly, one that English-speaking people could appreciate (given how it is written in formal English). The perspective of a victim of slavery and imperialism is, at least for me, an influential utility. However, when the theme of imperialism isn't on the table, Equiano's work will likely not be appealed to, and thus its value with respect to other societal and global themes is diminished. I suppose, given the way I think, that works and authors fluctuate in significance in sync with shifts in focus and perceived importance of themes.
Post a Comment