Samuel Richardson (1689 – 1761)

He preserved the same factual approach to literature as Defoe did. Some scholars consider his name must follow Defoe, because his novels came to possess some characteristic features of the genre Swift’s stories lack.

He was a book-seller & did not come to novel-writing until he was 50. There was new reading public composed chiefly of women, belonging to middle-classes. Richardson featured it. He also captured the most famous theme of this time: Russo spoke of him as of Homer of 18th century. We take into consideration his 3 novels: “Pamela”, “Clarissa Harlow”, Sir Charles Grandison”. All the novels are written in the same manner & not only the manner, the atmosphere & the method were the same. The 3 novels were told in letters & the letters were of such immense length that the writer had to scribble them day & night in order to produce them at all. Never were the letters longer than they were in Richardson’s stories. The stories themselves were thin & slight, particularly if we compare them to the time it tries to tell them. One can’t read Richardson for the story but for the sentiment, which is the key.

Not a tear or a sight was overlooked. He gave a record of characters, emotions & the way they were expressed & the circumstances under which they were experienced. At that time Richardson was the only who could liberally share his emotions with the others. This explains Richardson’s manner of writing. You have to spend a week reading a day’s experience of his character. The preparation for wedding takes 70 volumes. Richardson put a human heart under the microscope. His sentiment was their sentiment.

Richardson spent more time among women than among men. He wanted to give his audience what they wanted. His “Sir Charles Grandison” is a spinster’s idea of a fine gentleman & Lovelace is the idea of a wicked man. Richardson shaped his characters accordingly. His strength as a story-teller lies not in the plot but in the steady movement of his story. It captures you & you can’t get rid of it.

He was more popular in his time than any of his contemporary writers. But all of a sudden he lost his popularity. There were many reasons for that – Richardson demanded much leisure time. Now we realize that what he thought to be fine morality ran false with the readers.

The main character of his 1st novel “Pamela” was a servant girl, who after the death of her mistress was persecuted by her young master. Pamela used many tricks to escape from him. She did it successfully & at last he married her. Analyzing her behavior we understand that she is not that innocent as she pretended to be. Richardson writes that Pamela was kid & tolerant.

“She is a broad, squat, pursy, fat thing, quite ugly if anything human can be so called: about 40 years old….”

Clarissa Harlow is even a more sentimental novel. The intrigues against Clarissa are so pervasive that she can’t escape like Pamela. She becomes a victim of Lovelace & finally she dies. The public asked Richardson save Clarissa’s life but he refused.

“Sir Charles Grandison” – Richardson’s 3rd & weakest novel, was not very popular with the public.

The atmosphere that Richardson showed was an atmosphere of a hot house. Literature could not develop under such circumstances & needed a man who could smash two men in a hot house.

 

Henry Fielding (1707 – 1754)

 

His works:

“The adventures of Joseph Andrews” (1741)

“Tom Jones, a foundling” (1749)

“Amelia” (1751)

“History of the life of the late Mr. Jonathan Wild the Great”

It was Fielding who created a whole panorama of contemporary life. People belonging to different societies show how these societies come to operate. It was Fielding who was used by W. M. Thackeray as a sample.

Fielding has written a few different comedies that were of no success. Then the success of “Pamela” tempted Fielding to parody it – “Joseph Andrews” (a story of a virtuous footman, who equally resisted an attempt of his mistress to seduce him). It was only in the beginning of a comedy that Fielding tries to parody. Then he built another novel “Tom Jones” that was far more elaborated. Then he was old enough to compose his 3rd novel.

“Joseph Andrews” is full of criticism & humor. It produces an impression of a light breeze. And in it he gives us an opportunity to regard even the saddest scenes with a grain of optimism.

 

“Tom Jones, a foundling”

This is on e of the best books in the history of literature & all of a sudden we find out that the intention of Fielding was very much from his intention, when he started writing “Joseph Andrews”. Tom Jones is not presented as such a virtuous character as Joseph – he’s more credible. Tom & his beloved Sophia have many problems to overcome. Tom is an intelligent person & this tells on the development of the story. Tom wanted to marry Sophia & the fact that she is above him on the society ladder does not trouble him. What really troubles him is that he is not able to say “no” to a lady. Fielding believes in personal qualities 7 he believes that they are far more important than social standing.

Tom is tempted & fails to resist it. But he is so much sincere that he keeps to his only love Sophia & tries hard to win her love. If you’re influenced by passions they cam cause collapse in a good person, and if you are sincere & honest you will achieve whatever is good & honest.

Ton Jones is reared by Mr. Allworthy, a gentleman of high moral standards, who loves Tom & tries to preserve his attitude whatever Tom does. A nephew of Mr. Allworthy is a hypocrite. He always tells on Tom & tries to poison Mr. Allworthy’s heart against Tom. Finally he manages to do it & Tom is sent away. We find him traveling through the roads of England trying to search London. Sophia learns about it & sets along the road in order to catch up with Tom. Both Sophia & Tom are up against a lot of misfortunes but they are brave enough to overcome them. Finally they get married.

It is not the plot that matters. We’re given Fielding’s attitude to life & the structure of the novel itself helps us to realize what Fielding really wanted to say.

The first chapters illustrate Fielding’s attitude to life. He was a master of composition & his book was perfectly planned. “Tom Jones” can be regarded as a picture of manners that characterizes people of all times.

 

ROMANTICISM

 

The word “romance” meant originally the literature written in this language. The adjective “romantic” first appeared in English in the 17th century as a word to describe fabulous, extravagant, fictitious & unreal. Gradually the term “romanticism” was applied to designate the birth of literature depending on instinct & emotion. The romantic literature came to oppose the rational literature of the 18th century.

The literature of romanticism is very much diverse in all European countries. There it was characterized by features that weren’t represented in other countries. In every country it had its peculiar features. We can say that even in borders of one country the manifestation of romanticism is not the same. In England romanticism had no rigid program & we can’t speak of a simple school. Usually romantic writers are divided into 3 groups. This subdivision depended upon the vision of this or that writer. Some of them connected their hopes & desires with the future development of humanity. Some relied upon the past & the heroes of the past 0 served the subject matter for their writing. Others relied upon the human instincts of the human being & disregarded the outer world as being unworthy & corrupted.

The Romanist is a person who is amorous of the far (he’s not satisfied with the present); he is not satisfied with reality & this shadow-show called reality. They certainly saw details as points of departure & still they went to the marvelous, unreal, and remote. They all were against this vegetable reality. They relied upon the imagination as the only release of spirit. The attempt to find correspondence between actuality & desires results in joy.

A romantic writer is very sensitive trying to find some manifestations of his desires in the outer world. He usually realizes every single change that may be suggestive. He’s much sensitive to change it. This constant practicing makes people, who employ romanticism as an outlet for their feelings, profit.

The scale is very wide from fantasy to disillusionment. Looking for perfection romantic writers come to understand it’s unattainable. This brings misanthropy & the desire to escape from the actuality into the innermost castle of their spirit. So they concentrate upon a special wind of experience – the inner experience of human being, which is based upon the workings of spirit.

A rational writer is a member of an organized society – a romanticist is a rebellion against this society, because they have regulations & this can be regarded by the romanticist as limitations. Being mystical romanticists invent demonic characters: if it’s a woman – it’s femme fatale. The typical romanticist is a dreamer; a great significance is attached to symbolism. Romanticists give types, not characters; their works are full of symbolism; there are lots of overtones; dreary associations prevail. Romanticist tries to get away from the world, relies more upon his own associations than on logic; polysemy of words & structures.

 

William Blake (1757 – 1827)

 

One of the major romantic poets, whose verse & outwork became a part of a wider movement we call romanticism. W. Blake was an artist, an engraver& a poet. He was one of the most prominent writers in English culture.

His writing combines a variety of style. He’s an artist, a lyric poet a mystic, a visionary & his works had an inspiration on many poets of & bewildered readers ever since. For the 19th century reader he imposed one question. Blake could be difficult at times. His vision is very much different from the vision of an ordinary person. His works are multilevel. His desire was to create a philosophical system. His works range from deceptively simple & lyrical style of “Songs of innocence” & “Songs of experience” to the most sophisticated in “The Marriage of Heaven & Hell” & “The Book of Urizen”.

“Tiger

Tiger, tiger, burning bright

In the forests of the night,

What immortal hand or eye

Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

 

In what distant deeps or skies

Burnt the fire of thine eyes?

On what wings dare he aspire?

What the hand dare seize the fire?

 

And what shoulder and what art

Could twist the sinews of thy heart?

And when thy heart began to beat,

What dread hand? And what dread feet?

 

What the hammer? What the chain?

In what furnace was thy brain?

What the anvil? What dread grasp

Dare its deadly terrors clasp?

 

When the stars threw down their spears

And watered Heaven with their tears,

Did he smile his work to see?

Did he who made the Lamb make thee?

 

Tiger, tiger, burning bright

In the forests of the night,

What immortal hand or eye

Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?”

 

It describes the terror & beauty of one of God’s creations. Who can create such a fearful creation? Who possesses fierce strength? The gentleness of the lamb & the fierceness of the tiger are reconciled by God. The illustration of the biblical fact that the lamb 7 the lion will live peacefully.

First we see these evil eyes of the tiger that burn in the nigh. They are fury & can’t be tamed. Then comes the idea of some elaborative work that has been done to create such a creature & the insistence of Blake questioning “What for? Why?” This makes us think that God could not do this. The theme is seemingly commonplace & simple, but it focuses on a deep & sharp psychological content. It’s an endless philosophical discussion. The tiger symbolizes the qualities of the human being. The author contrasts gentleness & aggressiveness of our spirit.

We come to the level of passions we can speak of this verse as representing roth passions& fears. It’s the idea of being vulnerable & at the same time unbending (ability to forgive & forget). We associate tiger & lamb with our potential feelings & attitudes that are stimulated by the language of the poem.

The poem though seems simple on the surface becomes more complex when viewed on different levels. It would be bad mistake to ignore.

Blake’s short poems are much better than his long books. His poems rely upon the reader’s response, their bitter communication. They rely upon the human experience & for the most part it’s the inner experience of the human being. Blake is wrestling with the moral & psychological problems of people. They are regarded as symbols. The main problem Blake tries to solve is the problem of tyranny – of God, of the father of the family, of time, of society etc.

 

Robert Burns (1754 – 1796)

 

Robert Burns is quite a difficult poet for discussion. The attitude to him is very different (if we mean critics). The idea that he was peasant poet endowed with genius is partially true. He was quite an educated man, knew French was not good at Latin. He is shown by artists as a true representative of soil, some other artists show him as a gentleman poet.

“Holy Fair”

“Twa Dogs”

“Twa Herds”

“holu Willie’s Prayer”

“Address to the Deil”

“Death of Doctor Hornbook”

“The Jolly Beggars”

“To a Mountain Daisy”

“To a Louse”

“Is there for Honest Poverty”

“The Vision”

“Tam O’Shanter”

Burns is a romanticist but his romanticism is different from that of Blake, whose romanticism is philosophical. Burns may be considered as a contrast to Blake’s vision of life. His romanticism has a real world for a background, the world of everyday life. Burns understanding of democracy is very much different & was influenced by some historical events.

Magna Carta (1215)

The great charter of England signed by king John under pressure of barons & the archbishop of Canterbury. As a statement of law the charter was chiefly intended to guarantee feudal rights against royal abuse & maintain baronial privileges. By demanding reforms in local government and insisting on the freedom of the church & the rights of the merchants, it did provide safeguards for other sections of community besides the baronage.

Declaration of Independence (1775)

“We told these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights that among these rights are life, liberty & the pursuit of happiness.”

These 2 documents are no righter documents of democracy than verses of B urns. Being a peasant Burns understood the democratic doctrine – everybody & everything has a right to exist. The idea of mice & men is Burns’ idea, it’s an idea that people should bear it in mind that the world of animals & plants is as important as their own.

“To a Mouse, On turning her up in her Nest, with the Plough, November, 1785.

 

Wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie,

O, what a panic's in thy breastie!

Thou need na start awa sae hasty,

Wi' bickering brattle!

I wad be laith to rin an' chase thee,

Wi' murd'ring pattle!

 

I'm truly sorry Man's dominion

Has broken Nature's social union,

An' justifies that ill opinion,

Which makes thee startle,

At me, thy poor, earth-born companion,

An' fellow-mortal!”

Burns was a true poet & voiced a wide range of human experience. He wrote verses about things that are close to poor people. He was a poet of the working humanity. He grew up in a rural district speaking a dialect unintelligible at all. He made this dialect world-famous. He has given the literary expression & form to the most cherished feelings & tastes of all people. His poetry came into being at a time when the ballad was killed. The poetic genre of Scotland took a long sleep until it woke up once more in the works of Burns.

“To a Louse, On Seeing one on a Lady's Bonnet at Church

Ha! whare ye gaun, ye crowlan ferlie!

Your impudence protects you sairly:

I canna say but ye strunt rarely,

Owre gawze and lace;

Tho' faith, I fear ye dine but sparely,

On sic a place.

Ye ugly, creepan, blastet wonner,

Detested, shunn'd, by saunt an' sinner,

How daur ye set your fit upon her,

Sae fine a Lady!

Gae somewhere else and seek your dinner,

On some poor body.”

Here Burns shows us a lady. She goes to the church not to pray but rather to show her new hat. But she is still unaware. Burns expresses his comparison with a louse because it had worked its way to the top of the hat but there is nothing to eat there

Burns imagination runs riot. He says that there’s no single louse, because the whole population of lice torture humanity.

“Swith, in some beggar's haffet squattle;

There ye may creep, and sprawl, and sprattle,

Wi' ither kindred, jumping cattle,

In shoals and nations;

Whare horn nor bane ne'er daur unsettle,

Your thick plantations…

… O Jenny dinna toss your head,

An' set your beauties a' abread!

Ye little ken what cursed speed

The blastie's makin!

Thae winks and finger-ends, I dread,

Are notice takin!”

Then Burns becomes philosophical & comes to the all embracing conclusion.

“O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us

To see oursels as others see us!”

The verse itself is a satire different from the satire of other poets. It’s irony, not sarcasm that Burns relies upon. This small verse gives us an opportunity to understand Burns’ methods; from small detail to generalization & philosophical conclusion.