Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell

IF 0.1 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Pub Date : 2007-09-22 DOI:10.5860/choice.45-4233
M. Brady
{"title":"Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell","authors":"M. Brady","doi":"10.5860/choice.45-4233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell by Diane Kelsey McColley. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2007. Pp. 252. $89.95. Halfway through his essay \"Walking,\" H. D. Thoreau asks \"Where is the literature which gives expression to Nature?\" The question is rhetorical. He has already announced his own intent to speak for Nature, and turned to survey the territory behind, where he finds little in the way of precedent or guidance: English literature, from the days of the minstrels to the Lake Poets--Chaucer and Spenser and Milton, and even Shakespeare included, breathes no quite flesh and in this sense wild strain. It is an essentially tame and civilized literature reflecting Greece and Rome. Her wilderness is a green-wood--her wild man a Robinhood. There is plenty of genial love of Nature, but not so much of Nature herself. The literature that speaks for Nature is yet to come, or so it would seem. Thoreau's gesture is at once a ground-clearing and an investiture; it heralds the American tradition of nature writing, which has at heart the belief that before the nineteenth century \"Nature herself\" is mostly absent from Western literature. This is also a central tenet of ecocriticism, which generally does not regard early modern literature as ecological in its concerns or sensibilities. Although Thoreau's name does not appear in Diane McColley's Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell, it is largely his judgment on English literature and its formidable critical legacy that the author has in her sights when she announces her intent to challenge the notion \"that pre-Romantic and pre-Darwinian poetry, especially if it is monotheistically religious, is intrinsically unecological, or that 'ecocriticism' of it is intrinsically anachronistic\" (1). The book's central argument is that many English poets of the seventeenth century, including Milton and Marvell, but also George Herbert, Henry Vaughan, and Margaret Cavendish, among others, demonstrate sensibilities properly deemed \"ecological\" when they criticize contemporary practices of deforestation, pollution, and large-scale mining; show regard for plants and animals as \"fellow creatures whose lives belong to themselves\"; and promote a sense of kinship with and empathy for all living things by means of \"language responsive, in sound and form as well as image and thought, to the lives of plants, animals, elements and places\" (1, 7). McColley chooses the modern term \"ecology\" over the classical and early modern term \"economy\" because, she says, \"economy,\" with its roots in the Greek words oikos (household) and nomos (law), designates the management of an estate for human benefit, while \"ecology,\" with its root logos (word, knowledge), \"suggests that our use of knowledge needs to be good for the whole household of living things\" (1). Ecology, then, concerns the knowledge of nature in itself, as opposed to knowledge of its use-value for humans; it also involves the intimate personal engagement of the human subject with the natural world. \"Ecological\" poetry of the seventeenth century, whose language McColley describes as fluid and responsive to the lives of animals and plants, promoted just such respectful attention to nature and empathetic connections with it. By contrast, she says, \"the Baconian program of empirical science required a rational, explicit, unambiguous language,\" which promoted the domination of nature, its reduction to a body of ascertainable facts, and its exploitation for human benefit (4). McColley's readings of the \"living language\" of poetry are sensitive, beautifully realized, and powerful; they make an important contribution to critical understanding of how seventeenth-century poetry reworks traditionally allegorical and emblematic readings of nature and reflects an emerging awareness of the natural world. Readings of the language of science are less nuanced by comparison, but the primary sources brought together in this book, including several texts of early modern science, will be useful to other scholars and critics looking to interrogate critical commonplaces about nature in early modern literature. …","PeriodicalId":43889,"journal":{"name":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2007-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PHILOLOGICAL QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.45-4233","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell by Diane Kelsey McColley. Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2007. Pp. 252. $89.95. Halfway through his essay "Walking," H. D. Thoreau asks "Where is the literature which gives expression to Nature?" The question is rhetorical. He has already announced his own intent to speak for Nature, and turned to survey the territory behind, where he finds little in the way of precedent or guidance: English literature, from the days of the minstrels to the Lake Poets--Chaucer and Spenser and Milton, and even Shakespeare included, breathes no quite flesh and in this sense wild strain. It is an essentially tame and civilized literature reflecting Greece and Rome. Her wilderness is a green-wood--her wild man a Robinhood. There is plenty of genial love of Nature, but not so much of Nature herself. The literature that speaks for Nature is yet to come, or so it would seem. Thoreau's gesture is at once a ground-clearing and an investiture; it heralds the American tradition of nature writing, which has at heart the belief that before the nineteenth century "Nature herself" is mostly absent from Western literature. This is also a central tenet of ecocriticism, which generally does not regard early modern literature as ecological in its concerns or sensibilities. Although Thoreau's name does not appear in Diane McColley's Poetry and Ecology in the Age of Milton and Marvell, it is largely his judgment on English literature and its formidable critical legacy that the author has in her sights when she announces her intent to challenge the notion "that pre-Romantic and pre-Darwinian poetry, especially if it is monotheistically religious, is intrinsically unecological, or that 'ecocriticism' of it is intrinsically anachronistic" (1). The book's central argument is that many English poets of the seventeenth century, including Milton and Marvell, but also George Herbert, Henry Vaughan, and Margaret Cavendish, among others, demonstrate sensibilities properly deemed "ecological" when they criticize contemporary practices of deforestation, pollution, and large-scale mining; show regard for plants and animals as "fellow creatures whose lives belong to themselves"; and promote a sense of kinship with and empathy for all living things by means of "language responsive, in sound and form as well as image and thought, to the lives of plants, animals, elements and places" (1, 7). McColley chooses the modern term "ecology" over the classical and early modern term "economy" because, she says, "economy," with its roots in the Greek words oikos (household) and nomos (law), designates the management of an estate for human benefit, while "ecology," with its root logos (word, knowledge), "suggests that our use of knowledge needs to be good for the whole household of living things" (1). Ecology, then, concerns the knowledge of nature in itself, as opposed to knowledge of its use-value for humans; it also involves the intimate personal engagement of the human subject with the natural world. "Ecological" poetry of the seventeenth century, whose language McColley describes as fluid and responsive to the lives of animals and plants, promoted just such respectful attention to nature and empathetic connections with it. By contrast, she says, "the Baconian program of empirical science required a rational, explicit, unambiguous language," which promoted the domination of nature, its reduction to a body of ascertainable facts, and its exploitation for human benefit (4). McColley's readings of the "living language" of poetry are sensitive, beautifully realized, and powerful; they make an important contribution to critical understanding of how seventeenth-century poetry reworks traditionally allegorical and emblematic readings of nature and reflects an emerging awareness of the natural world. Readings of the language of science are less nuanced by comparison, but the primary sources brought together in this book, including several texts of early modern science, will be useful to other scholars and critics looking to interrogate critical commonplaces about nature in early modern literature. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
弥尔顿与马维尔时代的诗歌与生态
《弥尔顿与马维尔时代的诗歌与生态》黛安·凯尔西·麦考利著。奥尔德肖特,英格兰:阿什盖特,2007年。252页。89.95美元。梭罗在他的散文《行走》中写到一半,问道:“表现自然的文学在哪里?”这个问题是反问句。他已经宣布了自己要为自然说话的意愿,并开始考察背后的领域,在那里他几乎找不到任何先例或指导:英国文学,从吟游诗人的时代到湖畔诗人——乔叟、斯宾塞、弥尔顿,甚至包括莎士比亚,都没有真正的气息,从这个意义上说,没有野性。它本质上是一种温和而文明的文学,反映了希腊和罗马。她的荒野是一片绿林——她的野人是罗宾汉。人们对大自然有许多和蔼可亲的爱,但对大自然本身的爱却不多。为自然说话的文学作品还没有出现,或者看起来是这样。梭罗的姿态既是一种开阔地,又是一种授职;它预示着美国自然写作的传统,这种传统的核心信念是,在19世纪之前,“自然本身”在西方文学中几乎是缺席的。这也是生态批评的核心原则,它通常不认为早期现代文学在其关注或情感上是生态的。尽管梭罗的名字并没有出现在黛安·麦考利的《弥尔顿和马维尔时代的诗歌与生态》一书中,但当作者宣布她打算挑战“前浪漫主义和前达尔文主义的诗歌,尤其是一神论宗教的诗歌,本质上是不生态的”这一观念时,主要是梭罗对英国文学及其令人敬畏的批评遗产的判断。这本书的核心论点是,许多17世纪的英国诗人,包括弥尔顿和马维尔,还有乔治·赫伯特、亨利·沃恩和玛格丽特·卡文迪什等人,在批评当代滥伐森林、污染和大规模采矿的做法时,表现出了恰当地被认为是“生态”的情感;把植物和动物视为“生命属于它们自己的同类”;并通过“以声音、形式、形象和思想回应植物、动物、元素和地点的生活的语言”(1,7),促进与所有生物的亲近感和共情感。麦考利选择现代术语“生态学”而不是古典和早期现代术语“经济”,因为她说,“经济”源于希腊语oikos(家庭)和nomos(法律),表示为人类利益管理财产,而“生态学”,它的根标(词,知识)“表明我们对知识的使用需要对整个生物家庭有益”(1)。因此,生态学关注的是对自然本身的认识,而不是对人类使用价值的认识;它还包括人类主体与自然世界亲密的个人接触。17世纪的“生态”诗歌,其语言被麦考利描述为对动植物生命的流动和反应,促进了对自然的尊重和对自然的移情联系。相比之下,她说,“经验科学的培根纲领需要一种理性的、明确的、明确的语言”,这种语言促进了对自然的统治,将自然还原为一组可确定的事实,并为人类的利益而加以利用(4)。麦考利对诗歌“活的语言”的解读是敏感的,实现得很美,也很有力;他们为批判性理解十七世纪诗歌如何改写传统的自然寓言和象征解读做出了重要贡献,并反映了对自然世界的新兴意识。相比之下,科学语言的阅读没有那么微妙,但本书中汇集的主要来源,包括几篇早期现代科学的文本,将对其他学者和评论家在早期现代文学中对自然的批评司空见惯的质疑有所帮助。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
The Intelligible Ode Ellipsis in English Literature: Signs of Omission Desire in the Canterbury Tales About Geoffrey Hartman The Practice of Satire in England, 1658-1770
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1