Description
Book SynopsisEnlightenment critics from Dryden through Johnson and Wordsworth conceived the modern view that art and especially literature entails a double reflection: a reflection of the world, and a reflection on the process by which that reflection is accomplished. Instead “neoclassicism” and “Augustanism” have been falsely construed as involving a one-dimensional imitation of classical texts and an unselfconscious representation of the world. In fact these Enlightenment movements adopted an oblique perspective that registers the distance between past tradition and its present reenactment, between representation and presence. Two modern movements, Romanticism and modernism, have appropriated as their own these innovations, which derive from Enlightenment thought. Both of these movements ground their error in a misreading of “imitation” as understood by Aristotle and his Enlightenment proponents. Rightly understood, neoclassical imitation, constitutively aware of the difference between what it knows and how it knows it, is an experimental inquiry that generates a range of prefixes—“counter-,” “mock-,” “anti-,” “neo-”—that mark formal degrees of its epistemological detachment. Romantic ideology has denied the role of the imagination in Enlightenment imitation, imposing on the eighteenth century a dichotomous periodization: duplication versus imagination, the mirror versus the lamp. Structuralist ideology has dichotomized narration and description, form and content, structure and history. Poststructuralist ideology has propounded for the novel a contradictory “novel tradition”—realism, modernism, postmodernism, postcolonialism—whose stages both constitute a sequence and collapse it, each stage claiming the innovation of the stage that precedes it.
Published by Bucknell University Press. Distributed worldwide by Rutgers University Press.
Trade Review"The essays collected in these remarkable volumes offer a stirring defense of the revolutionary nature of early Enlightenment thought. McKeon reminds us—forcefully—just how much insight and reach can be achieved by an intellectual history as fearless and dialectical as his."— Wolfram Schmidgen, author of Infinite Variety: Literary Invention, Theology, and the Disorder of Kinds, 1688-1730
"Michael McKeon’s signal achievement as an intellectual historian and literary scholar is to capture the force of concepts in the making. His account of the Enlightenment is unparalleled in its depth and breadth."— Frances Ferguson, author of Pornography, the Theory: What Utilitarianism Did to Action
"With one party to the culture wars monumentalizing the dubious sides of imperialism and their opposition editing history to shame them, it is a welcome sign to see Michael McKeon returning to the history of the Enlightenment in order to use periodization ‘as a tool to think with.'"— Jonathan Lamb, author of Scurvy: The Disease of Recovery
"
Historicizing the Enlightenment adds to intellectual history’s customary mix of political, social, economic, and religious contexts a detailed analysis of literary works, period aesthetics, and cultural commentary. These two volumes will be essential reading for scholars across a number of fields."— April London, author of The Cambridge Introduction to the Eighteenth-Century Novel
Table of ContentsIntroduction
1 The Sciences as a Model for the Arts: A Synchronic Inquiry
2 From Ancient Mimesis to Modern Realism: A Diachronic Inquiry
3 The Historicity of Literary Conventions: Family Romance
4 The Historicity of Literary Genres: Pastoral Poetry
5 Political Poetry: Comparative Historicizing, 1650-1700, 1930-1980
6
Paradise Lost as Parody: Period, Genre, and Conjectural Interpretation
Acknowledgments
Source Notes
Notes
Index
