1/20/09 "Verses on the Death of Dr. Swift" continued; introduction to Pope's "Essay on Criticism"

What we've seen so far in "Death of Dr. Swift" is an extremely complex layering of ironies.

• The speaker of the poem seems to be serious--that is, non-ironic--in saying that humans are prideful and that they put others down in order to raise themselves up. But that's not what he does with Pope: he admits that he is jealous of Pope, but instead of putting him down, as his words would lead us to think he would, he actually PRAISES Pope, especially his skill with language. By implication, however, Swift is praising himself, by making himself appear to be the exception to the rule that humans are prideful. But if he is praising himself, he is being prideful, and is therefore not an exception to the rule. But he is being prideful in a poem condeming pride, and is therefore criticizing himself. And we could probably add more layers to this if we factored in the reader. It would be natural for the reader--for us--to feel quite proud of ourselves for figuring all this out: "wow! I've figured out five layers of irony here! Aren't I clever?" But if we see it that way, we've missed the whole point about pride and self-awareness.

Continue:

1. 99-102 speech of the "special friends" (l. 75)
   • how does it make Swift look, as a writer?
   • how does this make the friends look?
   • how does it compare with Swift's own envy of Pope?
2. 81-93 more from the special friends. What does it say about Swift?
3. 147-155. Markers of irony: tone, disjunction between tones
4. 225-242. Similar markers.
5. 281-298. Clearest irony: speaker who is partial or foolish.
   • who is the speaker?
   • what do we know about his taste?
   • would Swift, an Anglican cleric, be likely to approve of a tract that shows that Jesus was a "grand imposter"?
6. Note mutual reinforcement: if you aren't sure what we're supposed to make of Colley Cibber or Stephen Duck, we can figure it out from what he says about Woolston
7. Note the speaker, then, of the final long description, 299-306. But...
8. Does the description that follows seem impartial?
   • 309-314
   • 334-338
   • 347-350
   • 351-354 Does it matter that this is true?
   • 355-359
   • 379-390 Definitely not impartial, but is it ironic?
   • 455-474 the "fault." Is it really?
   • 483-484
9. Assuming that this is not impartial at all, where do we stand in figuring out what to DO with that irony? Is everything untrue? Is any of it untrue? Or is it just partial?
10. In the end, what is the poem saying about pride? About the original maxim by Rochefoucauld? About Swift?

Essay on Criticism

What is it?

• headnote quotes Addison in saying that it assembles the "most known and most received observations on the subject of literature and criticism."
• some truth to this: nothing revolutionary about what Pope is saying, in part because everywhere he aims for the middle of the road. And for that reason the poem is a good survey of main 18th C literary concerns, at least insofar as poetry is concerned.
• however, this view has led to some misconceptions:
  • mistake to think that the poem isn't taking a stand on anything; it does. Example of this on Thursday, when we try to figure out what Pope is saying about wit.
  • mistake to think that the poem is a formless list of disconnected observations. In fact, although there are list structures all over the poem, the argument of the poem is structurally tight. I've tried to show this in my handout on the structure of the poem.
    • example in part 1. Two most important points in this section are probably "follow nature" and "learn from the classical authors." These are quite traditional principles, and in that sense could be considered "the most known and most received observations" on literature. But these two conventional maxims are part of a definite argument.
      • Question: what should good criticism do? (Crit here means evaluating merit, not interpreting meaning.)
      • Problem: judgment is partial. Where do we look for a standard of judgment that exceeds mere "I like this"?
      • solution 1: Nature, in the sense of "what is eternally true." Note mimetic view of poetry here.
      • solution 2: classical authors--both what they say poetry should be and the implicit example of the best poetry. Unspoken assumption: if it lasted over a millenium and a half, it has to be good.
      • but: don't apply the above inflexibly; great authors break the rules.
    • even in sections which are essentially lists, attention is paid to logical ordering. Part 2 begins, for example, with pride. That is fundamental to much else in the section: "a little learning" is dangerous, for example, because it causes one to think one knows more than one does (as opposed to deep learning, which shows you that there's an awful lot of stuff that you'll never know).
      Even if this section is a list of observations, it forms, as a whole, a coherent world view.
      

For Thursday: What we'll try to do is look at a relatively implicit issue in the poem, Pope's attitude towards wit and judment. In the 18th C, the terms are often opposed, or even seen as mutually exclusive; we'll try to figure out which, if either, Pope prefers. To prepare:

• Read the excerpt from Locke's An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. You only need to read the marked passage, but read it carefully--be able to spell out the differences between the two.
• Reread "Essay on Criticism." Try to follow the argument as closely as possible--try to see how the whole hangs together. The handout is intended to help you do that.
• mark any passages that you see that mention either "wit" or "judgment."