For class on Friday, read Mary Jones's "Epistle to Lady Bowyer," which you can find on pp. 300 - 303 of your poetry anthologies (yes, the same Mary Jones who wrote "Holt Waters").
You should also bring to class the readings that we discussed on Wednesday (Rambler 23, "The Blessings of the Press," and "The Pernicious Effects of the Art of Printing").
You can respond to this post by offering your thoughts about what this poem reveals about either (a) Jones's sense of vocation as a poet, (b) her relationship to the world of print, or (c) her feelings about having her poetry published.
Deadline: Friday (3/11), 1pm.
12 comments:
Jones has a obligatory sense to create poetry that she will be proud of. It seems that she appreciates poetry more if it carries an important message and if it is not about empty flattery. She is writing for herself and her beliefs rather than a king or patronage. Thus, she will not write poetry of praise for kings or courts unless they deserve it. This person would have to be honest, generous, and compassionate to all classes. Furthermore, these ideals seem to stem from her humble background. She says that she was born to honest, frugal, and plain parents. This places her outside of the courtly world which offers her a different perspective.
In some ways Jones can be compared to Johnson. In The Rambler, Johnson says that it is important "that every man should regulate his actions by his own conscience". This seems to be in line with Jone's message about personal integrity.
I agree with what Michelle says about Jones wanting to write for herself and not to glorify a nobleman or lord. But she says if she were to write for a lord it would have to be one who is modest: “Is there a Lord whose great unspotted soul, not places, pensions, ribbons can control: Unlac’d, unpower’d, almost unobserverd, eats not on silver, while his train are starv’d…To Him I’ll dedicate, for Him I’ll write.” I feel as though her unwillingness to write for lords is due to her “frugal and plain” upbringing. In terms of her feelings about putting her writing in print it seems as though she doesn’t care much for it, but rather it is her friends who are adamant about having her poems published. I get this sense when she says, “No, but you’d have me write to get a name,” here I feel she is addressing her wealthy friends since they are the ones who helped her get published (line 18). I feel like they wanted her to “get a name,” so she would seem less of an outsider in their circle of aristocratic friends since Jones did not come from the same wealthy background. However, like every writer Jones is still excited to see her name published: “Well but the joy to see my works in print!” (line 29)
I found Jones's feelings about having her poetry published to be very pompous and jaded. She talks about men in court as if they're too high and mighty to consider good poetry. She wants her reader to be a certain kind of person: they must be well-bred, but not eat off silver plates or ride in coaches or be left large sums of money by their parents. She rejects a footman who offers to hear her poetry, showing that she believes him to be beneath her. I feel as if she has been let down by men in court so many times that she hates them all. She sounds like a girl who can't find a boyfriend, so she swears off all men, saying that none will ever be good enough for her. She has completely given up on the idea of finding someone of her caliber to read her poems. But once her work goes to print, she won't be able to pick and choose who reads her works. She will have to let everyone be her critic. This she cannot stand, so she ends up not letting anyone but her closest friends read what she has written.
A) I'm not sure about the tone of this piece. It seems for the most part to be sort of lighthearted. The previous comments said Jones is being serious or pompous, I saw her tone more as joking, almost to the point where she's making fun of herself.
In lines 5-7, Jones talks about how in each generation, there is a chance of a genius, and then she begins talking about Pope, who (I'm guessing) is referring to Alexander Pope. It seems as though Jones is very aware of Pope's ability to write and his popular reception from his readers. Jones even compares Pope's popularity to hers and how her own fan-base cannot survive as long as Pope is writing (line 10). She then asks a serious of rhetorical questions and implies that her own writing won't do anyone any good other than for insignificant purposes.
We know from her other work "Holt Waters" that Mary Jones has a sense of humor, albeit a rather strange one and also the autonomy to write about unconventional themes. And I'm willing to bet that "An Epistle to Lady Bowyer" is also meant to be humorous, just not in a typical way. All in all, it seems that Mary Jones seems to take a carefree and almost facetious perspective when it comes to her vocation as a writer, which is contrary to what most people would probably expect, especially from a time period with elevated rhetoric and such.
It seems as if Jones’s sense of vocation as a poet involves telling the truth regardless of critical reception. She begins saying that writing is “an easy trade; / But to think well requires—at least a Head.” For Jones, a “Head” seems to relate to both the intellectual and emotional aspect of writing poetry. For her, it is not enough to impress people or gain approval with her writing; the most important thing is her own honesty. Jones seems suspicious of praise and notoriety, saying, “What’s fame to me, who pray, and pay my rent? / If my friends know me honest, I’m content.” She divorces herself from what she believes are the shallow trappings of fame, instead opting for a simple life with close friends who understand her ideas and feelings.
Looking at this epistle alone (although we’ve looked at another writing from Jones) it’s hard to get a sense of exactly what she means when she uses word like “honesty.” But she’s at least very confident in the way she spurns so-called “slaves…who sell their country for a place.” Jones is suspicious of foreign praise. For example, she doesn’t want to write for Lords, saying that most are dishonest and unwilling themselves to even look at what she reads. A previous poster argued that there’s pompousness involved in her rejecting a footman from intercepting her poetry. But from my reading I get the sense that she doesn’t want her poetry accepted arbitrarily on the word of others.
Jones attributes her sense of vocation to her upbringing. She has pride in this upbringing and connects it to her happiness and creative output. She writes, “Of honest parents, not of great, I came…” Throughout, Jones is proud not to be “great.” She wants rather “in some calm retreat, / To sleep in quiet, and in quiet eat.” She goes on to say that she is content with modest approval. Jones feels that her readers will relate to her honesty. She wants her words to resonate with her audience, and feels that her own persona does not need to be connected to these words.
My interpretation of the poem mirrors that of Jillian's. In reading the material, I feel it was fairly easy to detect a note of heavy satire in the text (not every line, though frequently enough) and was able to review it from that perspective. As such, I think it's not too difficult to suggest that from her experiences Jones just is frustrated with the process established in order for one to become well known/famous in the world for literature produced. I think she is equating fame with selling out to benefits of riches and recognition, and in the process dissociating it with the possibility (or impossibility) of a writer drafting literature of an "honest" or "true" value from that literature termed as quality material. I think the determination she makes here is an oversight on her interpretation as the advent of print culture developing during this period should destroy this notion as literature now should be available to those individuals of the lower classes of society as opposed to just those of the more influential categories. Then again, this point may be the issue she wishes to explore ultimately anyway.
I agree with the above poster as well. Jones utilizes satire to note on what I have interpreted as writing for other people. In lines 13-18, she questions why someone else would have her write, concluding with her efforts being directed towards making a name for herself. As she discusses later in the poem, her quaint upbringing and simple life has incited her to write for herself, and not anyone else. At line 40, she discusses that she as "neither a friend, nor interest at Court." Jones recognizes her insignificance in the eyes of society and makes certain the reader understands that it does not bother her. In my opinion, Jones's use of satire almost makes her sound as though she is bothered by her position in society as both a female and a female author. Her sarcasm seems to be a defense mechanism.
In terms of Jone's sense of vocation as a poet, I think she has mixed feelings about her own abilities. We see this in the beginning of the poem where she assumes that writing in general "is an easy trade;/But to think well requires--at least a Head." (lines 3-4). Right away, Jones is establishing that there is a difference between good writing and good poetry. If writing alone is relatively easy then admirable poetry must be well-written but must include critical thinking. She then begins talking about Alexander Pope as a singular genius who came to define her generation. The biographical introduction to Mary Jones noted the fact that she believed she was writing beneath Pope. From the beginning of this poem, I get the feeling that she doesn't feel that she deserves to be a poet. Not only is she being extremely modest, but her poetry and diction are actually quite clever. I find it interesting that in her self comparison to Pope where she undermines her own writing abilities she's actually employing the same well-cultur'd wit of Pope's to describe his very talents.
The biographical note also said that Jones wrote very little poetry after the 1730s. I get the sense from the rest of the poem that she has trouble acknowledging her own writing abilities and assumes they are almost frivolous. Lines 27-28 read: "What's fame to me, who pray, and pay my rent?/If my friends know me honest, I"m content". This is a theme that surfaces throughout the poem and I get the sense that she has no interest in identifying herself as a poet at all. If this was one of the last poems that she published, this means she had over 40 years to live out the rest of her days yet she wrote no more. I don't feel like I'm going out on a limb by saying there is a lot of poetic self-reflection here for Jones. It's kind of sad to see Jones give up on herself and effectively proclaim it in a poem that actually bolsters her credibility as a poet.
I really enjoyed reading "An Epistle to Lady Bowyer" because it did have a connection to the readings this week and the topic of print culture. Like Michelle said, "In some ways Jones can be compared to Johnson. In The Rambler, Johnson says that it is important "that every man should regulate his actions by his own conscience". This seems to be in line with Jone's message about personal integrity." I completely agree with this and its also important to point out that in the introduction to "An Epistle to Lady Bowyer" we find that Samuel Johnson and Mary actually had a sort of friendship where he referred to her as 'The Chantress'. So it's reasonable to consider that Mary's work was probably influenced in some way by Johnson and his views on writing and print.
In addition to this, the intro also mentions that "Although respected in her literary circle, Mary Jones appears to have written little poetry after the 1730s, and she never published a second volume" (300). The explanation for this seems to be what theblackbear said, "it's not too difficult to suggest that from her experiences Jones just is frustrated with the process established in order for one to become well known/famous in the world for literature produced...she is equating fame with selling out to benefits of riches and recognition, and in the process dissociating it with the possibility (or impossibility) of a writer drafting literature of an "honest" or "true" value from that literature termed as quality material."
I really felt that the first two lines made a very strong statement, "How much of paper's spoil'd! what floods of ink! / And yet how few, how very few can think!" It is clear here that she is addressing the matter of the increased distribution of print in this time era. While she enjoys writing poetry, she knows that her work will be criticized by many different people, thus taking away from the purpose of allowing the reader to interpret their own understanding of the poem. Like Johnson says in Rambler 23, "When a book is once in the hands of the public, it is considered as permanent and unalterable...he, therefore, accommodates his mind to the author's design." The danger that came along with the wide distribution of texts was that the reader was exposed to the possibility of conforming to the views and opinions of criticism, therefore taking away the quality and value of the author's work.
I really did not know how to take Jone's tone in "An Epistle to Lady Bowyer" because at points it seems serious and at some points it seems like she is joking. I read that other people commented on this similar thing so I definitely think this is something that could use more clarification. One thing I noticed was that the reading definitely did follow along with the theme of Print Culture which I now find interesting because I never really gave Print Culture much thought. After reading Jones I feel that though we are reading her work she does not really have faith in her writing abilities or the fame that comes to some writers more than other. It seems that Jone's is unsure about writing and what the point or focus really is and it comes through in the reading.
As Cholie stated above, I feel Mary Jones equates the printing press with selling out. Her poem is riddled with sarcasm, or satire, taking digs at the people who base their life off of printing their works and making a living off of the pay. Furthermore, I feel she places herself on a pedestal above all other writers/poet--"The knack of writing is an easy trade; But to think well requires--at least a Head". It's as if she's saying that people during that age wrote for the sake of writing, but never had much "Genius" to offer to the world. It's as if she is placing herself in the position of "Genius"; an apparently rare attribute at this time. Furthermore, in insulting people who print, she insults the people who indulge in printed material. They, too, are incapable of higher thinking at herself.
The focus of her poem seems to be the problem of fame. Instead of taking the standpoint that she may perhaps be educating people or opening their eyes to new thoughts, she's more interested in the demoralization of people thanks to fame. From what I gathered, the print culture was a degradation to society. To see her works published would be an insult to her intellect because it would be full of "lies".
I don't believe I can contribute any more insight than has already been mentioned by the everyone before me. It's apparent to me that Jones must have been very apprehensive towards print culture. Because of it, her poetry, if printed, would be open to criticism from anyone and everyone, and she is not comfortable with this, to say the least. She begins the poem by criticizing the aristocratic audience of which many poems hitherto were directed towards. Since these individuals had always had access to published works, the poem's theme is less evident at this point and less polemic, giving the the poem an agreeable, playful tone. However, the tone immediately changes when Jones mentions the servant of the house, who suggests reading her poetry and, if finding it to be good, distributing it to his friends and associates. Jones describes this offer as a "civil impudence," and from then on, the poem's tone is suddenly sardonic and terribly cynical. For her, the upper-classes are too devoid of humility to read her poems and the lower-classes are too incompetent and stupid. Her poetry is essentially too good for 99 percent of the population. It seems that, if she'd a choice, she'd only let a Lord with a "great unspotted soul" read her poetry. The poem's pretentious tone is annoyingly contradictory when considering its accusations. She speaks of only wanting modest, humble, educated individuals to read her poetry, and this in and of itself is an immodest idea.
Post a Comment