English Thesis Collectionhttp://hdl.handle.net/10429/3832024-03-29T11:32:30Z2024-03-29T11:32:30ZThe Literary Criticism of G. K. ChestertonReilly, Robert Jameshttp://hdl.handle.net/10429/8532016-01-22T16:38:26Z2016-01-22T00:00:00ZThe Literary Criticism of G. K. Chesterton
Reilly, Robert James
The purpose of this paper is to show that Chesterton's literary criticism is not a thing distinct from his thought as a whole, but is rather a by-product, a necessary extension of his philosophical concepts. In order to do this, Chesterton's philosophy as a whole will have to be examined, though it be only roughly. This will be dealt with in the following chapter. The contention will be made in that chapter that the Chestertonian philosophy hinges on three very basic notions: the notion of wonder at the universe; that of gratitude for existence, both personal and general; and that of appreciation of things as things.
In Chapter III, Chesterton's literary criticism itself will be examined with the purpose in mind of demonstrating that this criticism is in no way different from the philosophy examined in Chapter II--except through application. It will be shown that the three key notions--wonder, thanks, and appreciation--are also key notions, indeed the same notions, in his literary criticism. The next four chapters, Chapters IV through VII, will be devoted to showing Chesterton's theory of criticism at work. Each chapter will deal with one of his more ambitious works of criticism: those on Chaucer, Browning, Dickens, and Steven- son. Chapter VIII will sum up what has been attempted and what, it is hoped, has been demonstrated.
This writer feels that it is fairly general knowledge that Chesterton's early work differs hardly at all from his middle and later work--this in spite of the fact that he has converted to Roman Catholicism quite late in life. It is true that his later years produced books of sound Catholic theology, but it is also true that his early work, such as Orthodoxy, is also sound, if rather boisterous, theology. It may be that he grew more profound in later years; it may be that he became more lucid; but the message is essentially the same. This really curious consistency is either explicitly mentioned by his commentators, or tacitly admitted by an ignoring of it amounting to an assumption of it. It has even been a criticism that he kept saying the same thing over and over; this, it will be pointed out, is quite true. Says Kenner:
"There is a penultimate state of disillusion in the study of Chesterton wherein he seems merely to be saying the same things over and over again; the ultimate stage is to realize that he says it so often because it can never really be said; in fact, because there is nothing else to say."1
And Chesterton himself, reviewing his intellectual life in his autobiography, says:
"... I recognize a sort of symbol in all that I happen to like in imagery and ideas. All my life I have love edges; and the boundary-line that brings one thing sharply against another. All my life I have loved frames and limits; and I will maintain that the largest wilderness looks larger seen through a window. To the grief of all grave dramatic critics, I will still assert that the perfect drama must strive to rise to the higher ecstasy of the peep-show. I have also a pretty taste in abysses and bottomless chasms and everything else that emphasises a fine shade of distinction between one thing and another; and the warm affection I have always felt for bridges is connected with the fact that the dark and dizzy arch accentuates the chasm even more than the chasm itself ... And I believe that in feeling these things from the first, I was feeling the fragmentary suggestions of a philosophy I have since found to be the truth."2
The writer mentions this consistency because he thinks that without the existence of it certain objections might be raised against the procedure of this paper. For example, it might be objected that the present writer recklessly quotes the early works in one breath and the later works in the next--and that this is unwise in the case of a free-thinker turned Catholic. The same objection may be raised against nearly all of Chesterton's critics; but the very real consistency invalidates it. The doubting reader may consult the early chapters of Maisie Ward's biography, Belloc's small but penetrating book on Chesterton's place in English letters, or Chesterton's autobiography. Or he may make the longer and perhaps more interesting experiment of perusing Chesterton's hundred odd volumes.
1. Hugh Kenner, Paradox in Chesterton, p. 9.
2. G.K. Chesterton, Autobiography, pp .25-26.
2016-01-22T00:00:00ZLewis Carroll and his InterpretersSchmoke, Margaret Annhttp://hdl.handle.net/10429/6802013-11-15T17:16:04Z2013-11-15T00:00:00ZLewis Carroll and his Interpreters
Schmoke, Margaret Ann
How did it happen that the Reverend Charles
Dodgson, thirty years of age, lecturer on geometry
at Christ Church, Oxford, hitherto remarkable
chiefly for his precision, on a single July afternoon,
while rowing up the Isis with a brother don
and three little girls, parthenogenetically gave
birth t o one of the most famous stories o f all
time?
asks Florence Becker Lennon. (Victoria Through the Looking Glass, p. 3.) Yes, how did it happen that in the Victorian Age are served, formal college don surprised
and delighted both adult and childish hearts with
the nonsensical caprices of a little girl named Alice?
This story of Alice was quite out of keeping with the
times. In the nineteenth century, children's literature
was devoted mostly to teaching dismal and fearsome morals.
Little people were reading such moral treatises as "Useful
Lessons for Little Misses and Masters", and "Paul
Pennylove's Poetical Paraphrase of the Pence Table", and
in the realm of verse they were compelled to gain inspiration
from such as this:
When up the ladder I would go
(How wrong it was I now well know)
Who cried, but held it fast below?
MY SISTER Once too I threw my top too far,
It touched thy cheek , and left a scar:
Who tried to hide it from Mamma?
MY SISTER
Or children were compelled to learn awesome lessons
like, "Oh, dear Mamma, if I had done as you bade me I
should not have had all this pain," or, "But I cannot call
her back; and when I stand by her grave, and whenever I
think of her manifold kindness, the memory of that reproachful
look she gave me will bite like a serpent and
sting like an adder."
Now suddenly a new kind of story, called Alice in
Wonderland, appears. It has no moral, but is brim full of
fun, a real childish boy and girl fun. And this new ~ind
of story is a success, a great success. Why? Probably
the answer to this question lies in the author of the story,
Lewis Carroll. The author was a man who delighted in
doing things backward and even lived his life backward.
Some writers say he never was a real little boy until he
had become a grown man. Perhaps after he had become a
grown man and began to be a little boy in heart he knew
what real little children would want. Perhap s there was
another reason why he succeeded in writing such a successful
children's story. Let us study this Lewis Carroll, examine his literary works, and find what others think of him. We ought to come t o some conclusion about h ow a lecturer
on g eometry could produce some of the most famous
stories of all time.
2013-11-15T00:00:00ZA Translation Into English of the De Tragoediae Constitutione of Daniel HeinsiusBaumgartner, Edward George, Reverendhttp://hdl.handle.net/10429/5642012-05-19T17:40:00Z2012-05-19T00:00:00ZA Translation Into English of the De Tragoediae Constitutione of Daniel Heinsius
Baumgartner, Edward George, Reverend
The name of Daniel Heinsius, the author of De Tragoediae Constitutione, is well known to students of the history of English literary criticism. Generally, however, it is by name and reputation only that Heinsius is known, for the De Tragoediae Constitutione, first published at Leyden in 1611, has never been translated from the Latin into English and has had no publication since 1643; it is available only in the rare book rooms of a few libraries. It would appear that a work which is considered to be a workmanlike exposition of neo-classic ideals is deserving of study both upon historical and absolute grounds. Daniel Heinsius was born at Ghent in 1580. The affairs of his father took the family to England and finally to Holland where they took residence at the Hague. Daniel was given a solid classical education at the Hague and at the University of Leyden where he was a student for a time of Joseph Scaliger. At the age of twenty Daniel was made a lecturer on the Latin and Greek authors at the University of Leyden and the authorities of that University later appointed him Professor of Politics and History. In later life Heinaius was involved occasionally and for short periods of time in politics, but in the main he devoted himself during his whole life to his work at the University of Leyden chiefly in poetry, literary criticism, and literary scholarship. He died in 1655. His chief works were commentaries on Si1ius Italicus; on the New Testament; on editions of Horace, Seneca's tragedies, Hesiod, and other classical Writers; some translations from the Greek; a considerable body of Latin poems; a Latin tragedy, Herodes Infanticida; an edition of Aristotle's Poetics with a commentary; and the De Tragoediae Constitutione. Daniel Heinsius must be distinguished from his son Nicholas Heinsius (1620-1681), also a famous scholar who published critical editions of the Roman poets. The De Tragoediae Constitutione has been described as “the succintest and best argued statement of the neo-and to a great extent pseudo-Aristotelian view of drama.” To a certain extent the work might be described as a paraphrase of those portions of Aristotle's Poetics which deal specifically with the drama; but the work is more than a mere paraphrase for Heinsius makes interpretations, amplifies, illustrates from the Greek and Roman drama to the point that the work can be properly considered as Heinsius' own original composition. There is no doubt that Heinsius has steeped himsel£ in his subject, has equipped himself for the task, and can speak with well-founded authority. The work can fairly be taken to represent the best traditions of continental thought on Aristotle's Poetics of Heinsius' age. Shortly after its publication, the De Tragoediae Constitutione became known in England. Ben Jonson approved of it, and it is through him that Heinsius enters into the stream of English literary criticism. Jonson's Discoveries contains large borrowings from the De Tragoediae Constitutione. Later in the century, Dryden indicates his knowledge and approval of Heinsius. The influence of Heinsius on the French neo-classic critics was great and so it may be concluded that, both directly and indirectly, the Heinsius influence on English neo-classic literary theory and literary criticism was considerable. For the purpose of this translation the Elzevir edition of 1643 was used because this edition is the one most easily available. For purposes o£ convenient reference to the Elzevir edition, the pagination of this Elzevir edition is indicated in the following translation by Arabic numerals on the right margin. The pagination of the Index of Chapter (pp. 5-7) accords with that of the Elzevir edition. Also for the convenience of the reader, translations of the passages from Greek and Latin authors have been taken, wherever feasible, from editions in the Loeb Classical Library; where these were not readily available, the translator has ventured his own renderings. For uniformity's sake, all references to the Aristotelian corpus or translations from it were taken from the eleven volume Oxford Translation of Aristotle, edited by J. A. Smith and W. D. Ross. Notes have been placed in back of the text.
*Please download the PDF file to view this document. URI not working.
2012-05-19T00:00:00ZA Study of the Parallelism and Evolution In the Imagery of Gerard Manley HopkinsMlodzik, Mary Nazaria, Sisterhttp://hdl.handle.net/10429/5452012-05-18T23:55:15Z2012-05-18T00:00:00ZA Study of the Parallelism and Evolution In the Imagery of Gerard Manley Hopkins
Mlodzik, Mary Nazaria, Sister
The main purpose of this paper is to show how the imagery of Gerard Manley Hopkins' verse is drawn from the notes in his Journal and to study the evolution to the fixed and definite forms of his imagery. Although Hopkins was a discriminating writer, even in recording his first impressions in a notebook, he entered more raw material than he actually used in writing poems. A passion for detail and analysis which was to become a poetic characteristic can be observed in studying the images and comparisons. "Hopkins used his Journal to fix images in the first heat of delighted perception, and it is instructive to see how the sense-impressions incorporated in the poem had been casually garnered over a period of from fourteen to eighteen years. “Most of the studies on Hopkins deal with a critical analysis and interpretation of his poetry or technique. It should be of interest to every enthusiast of Hopkins to trace the origin, method, and application of imagery which qualified his poetry with a depth, intensity, and richness in an unparalleled degree. In the artistry of Hopkins, poetic image evolved into more than a delightful sensory impression: it was an insight into the ultimate reality, seeing the image in things from God's side. The "Journal” and "Notes” from which this study is drawn are taken from The Note -Books and Papers of Gerard Manley Hopkins edited with notes and a preface by Humphrey House, published in full for the first time in 1937. Extracts had appeared previously in the Jesuit periodical Letters and Notices edited by Father MacLeod, in 1906 and 1907, and in Gerard Manley Hopkins by Father Lahey, in 1930. W. H. Gardner's edition of Poems of Gerard Manley Hopkins is used throughout. It remains to thank the authorities and friends, whose assistance and advice, generously given, were of incalculable value to the writer. I wish to thank the Reverend Burke O'Neill, S. J., and Mr. C. Carroll Hollis of the University of Detroit, Mr. John Pick of Marquette University, and Sister Catherine Racconigi, O. P.
*Please download the PDF file to view this document. URI not working.
2012-05-18T00:00:00Z