|
|
| |
Three "Natures":
Teaching Romantic
Ecology in the Poetry
of William Wordsworth,
Dorothy Wordsworth,
and John Clare
Scott
Hess, Earlham College
-
One
of the first
things I try
to teach my
students, in
any discussion
of literature
and environment
(Romantic or
otherwise),
is that "nature" cannot
simply be taken
for granted. That
is, there is
no monolithic,
clearly defined
entity, "nature," to
which we can
appeal. Instead,
as William Cronon
puts it in Uncommon
Ground, "nature
is a human idea,
with a long
and complicated
cultural history
which has led
different human
beings to conceive
of the natural
world in very
different ways," depending
on their varying
social and cultural
backgrounds
(20). With this
understanding,
as Cronon goes
on to say, "it
is not nearly
enough to assert
that something
is ‘natural'
and assume that
this will end
all discussion
of what is to
be done" (21).
What counts
for us as "nature," with
all the rich
connotation
and emotional
power that the
term can carry,
depends very
much on our
own social positioning.
-
I
like to introduce
this issue to
students at
the start of
environment-related
discussion because
it is novel
and challenging
for many of
them. Students
often assume
that "nature" is
by definition
independent
of human meanings
and values,
and thus tend
to project their
own meanings
and values all
the more profusely
and uncritically
onto the term.
Establishing
that "nature" means
different things
to different
people, and
that our own
meanings are
not as self-evident
as they sometimes
seem, greatly
increases a
classroom's
capacity for
critical thinking
and productive
discussion.
At the same
time, establishing
this connection
between different
models of nature
and different
social and discursive
positions provides
a powerful method
for reading
literary texts
in relation
to environment.
-
My
favorite theoretical
text on this
topic, which
I usually ask
students to
read right
at the start
of the semester,
is Raymond
Williams's wonderfully
provocative
and readable
essay, "Ideas
of Nature," in Problems
in Materialism
and Culture. This
essay not
only introduces
the relationship
between
ideas of
nature, self,
and society,
but also
condenses
an overview
of the entire
history
of Euro-American
ideas of
nature into
a concise
nineteen
pages. Williams's
essay is
both readily
accessible
(on some
levels)
and deeply
challenging
and provocative
(on others)—I
have read
it ten
times or
more, and
still
find it
offers
me new perspective
and insights
with each
rereading.
The essay
insists
that we
understand
our relation
to "nature" holistically,
in terms
of our
larger
social
and economic
situation;
or as
Williams
puts it, "what
is being
argued,
it seems
to me,
in the
idea
of nature
is the
idea
of
man;
and this
not only
generally,
or in
ultimate
ways,
but the
idea
of men
in society,
indeed
the ideas
of kinds
of societies" (70-71).
In short,
how
we imagine
nature
always
informs
how
we imagine
ourselves,
both
as individuals
and
in our
social
relationships.
-
Even
before I expose
my students
to Williams's
essay, though,
I like to give
them an example
of two very
different versions
of the same "nature" in
literary texts,
to let them
experience
just how differently
the same environment
can be represented.
For this purpose,
on the first
day of class,
before students
have even
read a single
page or had
any theoretical
or other orientation,
I often give
them William
Wordsworth's "I
wandered
lonely as
a cloud" and
Dorothy Wordsworth's
description
of the same
scene in
her journal,
side by side.
After briefly
explaining
the relationship
between the
two texts—William's
composition
of the poem
two years
or more after
their shared
experience,
using Dorothy's
journal
to stimulate
his memory
and imagination—I
ask students
to compare
their representations
of environment.
After we
have established
a general
comparison,
I then ask
students
to describe
and compare
the overall
versions
of nature
expressed
by the two
texts. Finally,
after I provide
still more
background
information
about the
two writers,
we discuss
how William
and Dorothy's
social positioning
and their
representations
of environment
might be
related.
-
By
the time we
have done all
this and I
have said a
few words about
the syllabus
and the first
assignment
(which is often
to read Williams's
essay), the
opening class
is usually
over. If the
discussion goes
quickly, however,
and I have a
particularly
eager and brilliant
group of students,
I will sometimes
ask them to
look at a third
poem, by John
Clare, to give
them yet another
social position
and version
of "nature." More
often, I turn
to a Clare
poem in the
following class,
in conjunction
with our discussion
of the Williams
essay. One
could use other
texts by other
Romantic writers
to discuss
varying representations
of environment,
of course,
but I have
found that
these three
writers provide
an especially
provocative
range of techniques
and social
positioning
that gives
a broad frame
of reference
for discussing
other Romantic
texts. William
Wordsworth's "I
wandered
lonely as
a cloud" offers
a short,
memorable
text in the
male canonical
Romanticism
of the imagination,
while Dorothy
Wordsworth
and John Clare's
texts provide
different
alternative
traditions
associated
with female
and laboring
class writing.
None of these
texts need
to be presented
as paradigmatic
for an entire,
coherent
tradition—a
position
most scholars
would likely
contest, or
at least heavily
qualify—but
they do present
a broad range
of social
positions
and environmental
representations.
This range
alerts students
right away
that we will
not be dealing
with a single
Romantic ecology,
but with multiple
Romantic ecologies,
all with
their own
structures
and significances.
-
This
essay focuses
primarily on
that first
comparative
exercise in
order to demonstrate
a teaching
methodology
for environment-related
texts in the
period, but
I have included
links also
to versions
of syllabi I
use in teaching
Romanticism
with an environmental
emphasis: one
version exclusively
British,
and one which
combines British
and American.
In keeping
with my preferred
critical
approach,
these classes
do not attempt
to focus
on
environment
exclusively,
but in relation
to other
specific social
themes:
class and
identity
in the former
example,
gender
in the latter.
Because representations
of nature
are closely
implicated
in social
positions,
I have found
that teaching
Romantic
ecology
demands teaching
these
positions
also. Given
my interests,
I like to
build my
Romantic
period
survey
around the
intersection
of environment
and one or
more such
significant
issues (which
might also
include race, colonialism,
or
Revolution/politics).
I.
Two Versions
of the Same
Environment:
William and
Dorothy Wordsworth
-
I'll
begin with the
texts I set
side by side
for students
in this first
classroom exercise
(note that I
usually use
the three-stanza
version of "I
wandered lonely
as a cloud," initially
published in
1807, rather
than the longer
version of 1815
and subsequent
editions, because
it presents
a similar position
in condensed
form; one could
just as easily
use the longer
version).
William
Wordsworth, text
from 1807 Poems,
in Two Volumes [untitled]:
I
wandered lonely as a
Cloud
That
floats on high o'er Vales
and Hills,
When
all at once I saw a crowd
A
host of dancing daffodils;
Along
the Lake, beneath the trees,
Ten
thousand dancing in the breeze.
The
waves beside them danced,
but they
Outdid
the sparkling waves in glee:—
A
Poet could not but be gay
In
such a laughing company:
I
gaz'd—and
gaz'd—but
little thought
What
wealth the show to me had
brought:
For
oft when on my couch I lie
In
vacant or in pensive mood,
They
flash upon that inward eye
Which
is the bliss of solitude,
And
then my heart with pleasure
fills,
And
dances with the Daffodils.
Dorothy
Wordsworth, from Grasmere
Journal,
15 April, 1802:
It
was a threatening, misty
morning, but mild. We
set off after dinner
from Eusemere. Mrs.
Clarkson went a short
way with us, but turned
back. The wind was furious,
and we thought we must
have returned. We first
rested in the large
boat-house, then under
a furze bush opposite
Mr. Clarkson's. Saw
the plough going in
the field. The wind
seized our breath. The
Lake was rough. There
was a boat by itself
floating in the middle
of the bay below Water
Millock. We rested again
in the Water Millock
Lane. The hawthorns
are black and green,
the birches here and
there greenish, but
there is yet more of
purple to be seen on
the twigs. We got over
into a field to avoid
some cows—people
working. A few primroses
by the roadside—woodsorrel
flower, the anemone,
scentless violets, strawberries,
and that starry, yellow
flower which Mrs. C.
calls pile wort. When
we were in the woods
beyond Gowbarrow Park
we saw a few daffodils
close to the water-side.
We fancied that the
lake had floated the
seeds ashore, and that
the little colony had
so sprung up. But as
we went along there
were more and yet more;
and at last, under the
boughs of the trees,
we saw that there was
a long belt of them
along the shore, about
the breadth of a country
turnpike road. I never
saw daffodils so beautiful.
They grew among the
mossy stones about and
about them; some rested
their heads upon these
stones as on a pillow
for weariness; and the
rest tossed and reeled
and danced, and seemed
as if they verily laughed
with the wind, that
blew upon them over
the lake; they looked
so gay, ever glancing,
ever changing. This
wind blew directly over
the lake to them. There
was here and there a
little knot, and a few
stragglers a few yards
higher up; but they
were so few as not to
disturb the simplicity,
unity, and life of that
one busy highway. We
rested again and again.
The bays were stormy,
and we heard the waves
at different distances,
and in the middle of
the water, like the
sea. Rain
came on—we
were wet when we reached
Luff's, but we called
in. Luckily all was
chearless [sic] and
gloomy, so we faced
the storm—we must have
been wet if we had waited—put
on dry clothes at Dobson's.
I was very kindly treated
by a young woman, the
landlady looked sour,
but it is her way. She
gave us a goodish supper,
excellent ham and potatoes.
We paid 7/- when we
came away. William
was sitting by a bright
fire when I came downstairs.
He soon made his way
to the library, piled
up in a corner of the
window. He brought out
a volume of Enfield's Speaker,
another miscellany,
and an odd volume of
Congreve's plays. We
had a glass of warm
rum and water. We enjoyed
ourselves, and wished
for Mary [Hutchinson,
whom William married
that October]. It rained
and blew, when we went
to bed. N.B. Deer in
Gowbarrow Park like
skeletons.
Although
the description of the
daffodils takes only
a portion of Dorothy
Wordsworth's journal
entry, I deliberately
give students the entire
entry so that they can
access the fuller context
in which the description
is embedded. One point
that inevitably comes
up during the discussion,
in this respect, is
the issue of form—the
difference between an
essentially private
or semi-private journal
entry and a lyric poem
published for a largely
unknown, mass print
audience. The two descriptions
of the daffodils are
structured as much by
form and audience expectation
as by social positioning
or sensibility. By providing
a different version
of the experience, however,
the journal entry can
indicate much that William
did not include in writing
his poem: the other
people present and working
in the landscape; social
contacts before and
after seeing the daffodils;
the process of walking
and repeated experience
of resting; the kind
and cost of dinner;
the snug evening of
reading in the inn afterwards;
and, of course, the
presence of William's
sister, Dorothy, effaced
in the poem's presentation
of extreme individual
isolation and even "loneliness."
-
I
should say a
word here, also,
about pedagogical
method. I teach
at Earlham College,
a small liberal
arts college
in Richmond,
Indiana, adjoining
the Ohio border
in the east-central
part of the
state, which
draws students
from across
the United States,
together with
a substantial
number of international
students. Classes
at Earlham are
quite small—the
average for
an upper level
English class,
such as my Romanticism
class, is about
10-12, and rarely
does any class
exceed 25. Also,
there is a strong
culture of liberal
arts, discussion-based
education at
Earlham. Students
are used to
sitting in a
circle in all
their humanities
classes, and
are generally
expected to
help shape the
discussion as
an active, group
exploration
of the material.
On the whole,
the students
are wonderfully
engaged and
quite insightful—although,
inevitably,
some students
more so than
others, and
all of them
(like me) have
their off days
and their off
semesters. Because
of the school's
Quaker traditions,
students are
also used to
silence, so
I can let my
questions hang
in the air for
much longer
than I could
with the same
group of students
at a different
institution.
-
My
approach to
teaching is
very much determined
by these contexts.
I am used to
presenting texts,
setting up an
issue or question,
and letting
discussion develop
from there based
on the students'
own interests
and initiative.
I intervene
with follow-up
questions when
discussion slackens
or to direct
attention to
particular issues
I feel we ought
to address,
if the students
do not raise
them on their
own. As a result
of this method,
I tend to let
discussions
take their own
shape within
certain general
parameters,
rather than
moving through
a pre-determined
checklist of
points, and
I can never
predict the
exact direction
discussion will
take or order
in which issues
will come up.
I can't, therefore,
present such
a plan in the
current essay.
What I will
try to present,
though, are
the kinds of
issues which
often do arise,
and which I
will sometimes
prompt students
to notice, at
appropriate
times, if they
don't seem likely
to emerge organically
from the discussion.
Different classroom
cultures, I
realize, will
require different
teaching strategies,
but I trust
that what follows
will provide
raw material
for any teacher
or professor
to adapt to
his or her particular
classroom format
and needs.
-
One
of the first
things students
tend to notice
in comparing
the two texts
is the difference
between William
Wordsworth's
presentation
of a solitary
experience and
Dorothy's record
of shared experience.
Characteristic
of William's
poetry generally,
this poem begins
with the word "I" and
uses the word
repeatedly,
never using
the third-person "we." Dorothy's
journal entry,
in contrast,
characteristically
uses the word "I" sparingly,
far less than
the communal "we." William's
poem, in fact,
removes all
social context,
even the company
of his sister,
to present the
experience of
the daffodils
as a radically
solitary and
decontextualized
one. Its narrator
encounters the
daffodils in
an unspecified
location, after
a detached and "lonely" wandering
that separates
him from any
specific set
of social relations.
The simile of
the narrator
as cloud indicates
this sense of
distance and
detachment from
the landscape,
presenting the
poet as literally
floating free
from his environment.
The poem's final
stanza then
recreates this
lonely detachment
indoors, as
the poet dramatically
recollects the
daffodils in "vacant
or in pensive
mood," transformed
by memory into "the
bliss of solitude." Even
indoors, the
narrator remains
separated from
any specific
social context
or relationship.
So why, the
first question
arises, would
William want
to remove his
sister and present
a self isolated
from all social
contexts before,
during, and
after the experience?
And how does
this emphasis
on the separateness
of the self
connect with
the representation
of the natural
scene in the
poem?
-
Once
these issues
are raised,
students will
often call attention
to the communal
metaphors within
Dorothy's description
of the daffodils
and the social
contexts within
which her description
is set. Dorothy
presents the
flowers as a "unity," or
image of community,
not disrupted
by the fact
that a few "stragglers" have
separated from
the common body
(the term "straggler" suggests
a positive communal
norm). Yet
Dorothy does
not present
the daffodils
only as a single
unified body
or abstraction.
Instead, she
describes different
individual behaviors
within the group:
some daffodils
resting heads
on stones as
if on pillows,
some straggling,
others tossing
and reeling
and dancing
and laughing
in the wind. The
daffodils are
part of a community
but recognized
also as distinctly
individual.
-
In
contrast, William
describes the
daffodils always
as a single
monolithic body,
without individual
distinction: "ten
thousand," "a
crowd," "a
host," "a
laughing company." There
is no sense
of individuation
here, only a
collective "they." What
purpose, I ask
students, do
these different
characterizations
of the daffodils
serve? In William's
poem, the collective "they" of
the daffodils
is represented
primarily in
relation to
the isolated "I" of
the narrator
who describes
them. Though
they "outdo" the
waves in glee
and stand "along
the lake, beneath
the trees," the
daffodils aren't
defined in direct
relationship
to these other
elements of
the environment,
but only as
part of a scene
composed from
the unifying
perspective
of the central
narrator. William's
description,
from this detached
panoramic viewpoint
above the landscape,
has nothing
like Dorothy's
description
of the daffodils
resting their
heads on the
stones and laughing "with" the
wind that blows "to" them,
creating a sense
of agency and
relationship
between the
various elements
in the scene.
Although she
projects her
own emotions
onto the daffodils
in her valorization
of their community,
Dorothy does
not make their
significance
depend on the
central presence
of the observer,
as if the unity
and beauty of
the daffodils
existed already
before she arrived.
Dorothy's journal
entry presents
her as merely
another participant
in a scene which
already has
its own relationships
and values independent
of her. William's
daffodils, in
contrast, are
made to depend
on the speaker
and his overall
composition
of the scene.
The narrators'
positioning
also indicates
these differences:
Dorothy situates
herself among
the daffodils,
while William
separates himself
at an elevated
distance.
-
Val
Plumwood theorizes
the processes
of homogenization
and separation
evident in "I
wandered lonely
as a cloud," in
her discussion
of the philosophical
structures of
dualism in chapter
2 of Feminism
and the Mastery
of Nature.
Dominant groups,
she argues,
tend to use
the marginalized
and supposedly
inferior other
to define their
own identity,
while at the
same time stressing
their radical
separation from
this other.
Such groups
tend to homogenize
the subordinate
others into
a single monolithic
category of
identity, eliding
differences
and individuality
within the other.
Humans, for
instance, impose
the single homogenous
category "nature" on
a vast range
of various beings
and environmental
features, eliding
in that single
term the complex
networks of
interactions
and relationships
among these
entities. Humans
often define
their identity
in relation
to "nature" while
at the same
time claiming
to be radically
separate and
superior to
it. This same
structure of
homogenization
and separation
applies between
dominant and
oppressed human
groups, as when
men construct
their identity
in relation
to the homogenized
and essentialized
category of "woman," or
white Europeans
or Americans
construct their
identity in
relation to
blacks, "Orientals," or "savages." For
Plumwood, human
relationships
to environment
are thus structured
in the same
way as human
social relationships,
often through
overlapping
and mutually
reinforcing
networks of
oppression.
-
In
Plumwood's terms,
William Wordsworth
constructs a
hierarchical,
dualistic relationship
to the daffodils
in his poem,
while Dorothy
Wordsworth in
her journal
entry constructs
a non-hierarchical
and relational
model of difference.
Even as he defines
himself through
his relation
to the daffodils,
the narrator
of the poem
stresses his
superiority
and radical
separation from
them, in terms
of elevation,
detachment,
and mobility,
including his
ability to internalize
and carry them
within his memory.
Dorothy, in
contrast, even
as she emphasizes
the strong communal
association
of the daffodils,
seems to recognize
the differences
between individual
flowers and
the complex
networks of
relationship
within which
they exist—both
within the group
and with other
elements of
their environment,
such as the
wind and the
lake.
-
William
Wordsworth's
poem presents
the daffodils
in order to
emphasize the
autonomy and
separation of
the self, making
that self the
imaginative
focal point
for the production
of unity and
value in the
scene. In order
to do so, he
also removes
Dorothy's presence
and alternate
subjectivity
entirely. Dorothy,
in contrast,
presents herself
in relation
to the daffodils
both as an individual
and as part
of a collective "we" which
also includes
her brother.
At the same
time, she situates
her identity
in relation
to a larger
social community
in her references
to the Clarksons
and "Mrs.
C." She
extends this
inclusive sense
of community
to the daffodils
as well, emphasizing
her similarity
to them rather
than her difference.
The daffodils
seem to experience
the same joyful
immersion and
companionship
in their environment
that Dorothy
records in her
journal; and
they rest out
of "weariness," just
as she describes
herself and
her brother
resting "again
and again."
-
I
want to emphasize
that it is not
just a matter
of Dorothy observing
the daffodils
more closely
or taking a
more "objective" relation
to the scene,
as critics have
argued, though
both points
are true enough
in their way.
Dorothy infuses
the daffodils
with her own
meanings and
values, just
as William does;
it's just that
those meanings
and values are
different, constructing
a communal,
relational and
participatory
version of environment
rather than
an environment
focused exclusively
on the isolated
human self.
Another way
to put it is
that Dorothy's
relational sense
of identity,
expressed throughout
her journal,
finds a metaphor
in her perception
of the community
of daffodils,
while William
uses the daffodils
instead as a
metaphor for
his models of
creative imagination
and solitary
individualism.
It's not a matter
of one being
truer to nature
than the other,
but of radically
different modes
of perceiving,
organizing,
and understanding
the non-human
environment.
From this perspective,
there is no
single pre-given "nature" to
relate to and
represent, but
radically different
versions of "nature" depending
on how we relate
to and represent
it. Pointing
out that both
William and
Dorothy project
aspects of themselves
onto the daffodils
and asking the
class to explore
the different
effects of these
projections
is a good way
to introduce
this more general
point about "nature."
-
Students
may also notice
differences
in the narrators'
perspectives
and physical
positioning
in the two versions
of the scene.
Dorothy records
the experience
of moving through
the landscape,
encountering
the daffodils
at ground level.
William, in
contrast, presents
an elevated
perspective
that separates
him physically
and imaginatively
from the daffodils,
just as he separates
himself from
them rhetorically.
The opening
lines establish
this elevated
position, as
he compares
his wandering
to a "lonely" cloud,
floating without
connection above
the landscape.
Then he sees
the daffodils,
not gradually
but "all
at once" in
a single panoramic
spectacle. From
this elevated
position, William
presents his
relation to
the scene as
entirely visual—he "saw," and "gazed
and gazed"—never
acknowledging
any other aspect
of his embodiment,
as if he is
all eyeball. Although
Dorothy's journal
entry also describes
the daffodils
in primarily
visual terms,
she includes
the feeling
of the wind
and a much more
dynamic sensual
and kinetic
engagement with
her environment.
Instead of flashing
upon the view
all at once
in a single
panoramic spectacle,
the daffodils
in her journal
entry emerge
as a gradually
developing experience,
as the walkers
encounter first
a few and then
the main body
of flowers.
The poem presents
the scene in
ways analogous
to a landscape
painting, in
exclusively
visual terms
seen from the
outside. The
journal, alternatively,
is more like
an interactive
art installation,
bringing the
reader into
a continuously
unfolding, ambient
experience that
involves a full
range of embodied
responses.
-
The
forms and styles
of the texts
also reflect
these differences.
Dorothy Wordsworth's
prose moves
fluidly between
various images,
emotions, and
metaphors, while
William's verse
uses punctuation,
syntax, and
stanza breaks
repeatedly to
frame the scene
and separate
observer and
landscape: the
semicolon after
the forth line,
the first stanza
break, the colon
and dash after
the eighth line,
the colon after
the tenth line,
and finally
the stanza break
after the twelfth
line that separates
the present
scene from its
later remembrance.
The poem progresses
in this way
in tightly compartmentalized,
two-line formal
units, creating
a sense of formal
separation between
viewer and scene,
as well as a
sense of separation
between immediate
perception and
later acts of
memory and imagination. Dorothy's
description,
on the other
hand, spills
dynamically
from initial
description
to feeling ("I
never saw daffodils
so beautiful")
to metaphor
and then back
to the physical
activity of
the observers,
who, during
and after the
experience, "rested
again and again." This
phrase alone
presents a fully
embodied experience
almost entirely
elided from
William's poem.
-
Students
may need to
be prodded to
attend to these
issues of form,
but as a teacher
I can often
introduce such
issues in ways
that complement
and build on
points students
have already
made. I also
ask students
to attend to
the way Dorothy's
journal entry
acknowledges
the various
kinds of human
labor going
on in and shaping
the landscape,
as opposed to
the absence
of labor or
any other shaping
human presence
in William's
poem. Even Dorothy's
mention of Mrs.
C.'s name for
the pile wort,
a seemingly
insignificant
detail, recognizes
how other people
shape her perception
of her environment,
while William's
poem claims
complete autonomy
to define the
landscape and
his identity
in relation
to it, independent
from all other
human influence.
Dorothy is also
much more specific
and detailed
in her descriptions
than William,
here as throughout
their writing.
I also like
to point out
to students
that William's
description
of the non-human
environment
in this famous "nature
poem" in
fact really
occupies only
four lines—from
lines five to
eight—framed
in multiple
layers of the
poet's own separate
observation
and mental processing.
This difference
in emphasis
dramatizes how
much more the
poem is concerned
with the self
and its mental
processes than
with the physical
environment
for its own
sake, as is
true in almost
all Wordsworth's
environment-related
poetry. By abstracting
the landscape
and describing
it in broad
strokes, he
can much more
easily appropriate
it for the construction
of his own autonomous
identity.
-
I
also ask students
why the final
stanza of the
poem creates
a physical and
temporal break,
unfolding the
full significance
of the scene
only in the
future, as the
poet lies indoors
on his "couch
[. . .] in vacant
or in pensive
mood." Why
doesn't the
narrator recognize
the "wealth" the
scene brings
to him in the
moment? Why
does his heart
only fill with
pleasure and
dance with the
daffodils afterwards,
when he has
separated himself
from them and
from the rest
of their environment
in both space
and time? Though
he claims that
he is joyful "in" the
flowers' "laughing
company" earlier
in the poem,
the entire structure
and presentation
of the experience
belies this
sense of immediate
immersion in
the scene, and
the poet's imagination
only fully participates
in the scene
after he has
separated himself
from it and
internalized
it in his memory.
His heart can
only dance with
the daffodils
when he has
established
a secure distance
to keep him
separate from
them. Why, I
ask students,
does the poem
end indoors?
Why describe
the process
of viewing the
scene as one
of accumulating "wealth," from
a "show?" Why
does the narrator
describe himself
as first "pensive" and "vacant," before
the daffodils
flash on his
memory and bring
the "bliss
of solitude?"
-
These
are often hard
questions for
students, but
such questions
get them thinking—and
more specifically,
thinking in
terms of very
close reading
right at the
start of the
semester, in
a way that intense
scrutiny of
a short poem
encourages.
Such questions
also allow me
to introduce
William Wordsworth's
position as
a poet in relation
to his reading
audience, another
social context
that informs
his overall
representation
of "nature." As
a publishing
writer, Wordsworth
does literally
accumulate "wealth" (albeit
not very much
or very quickly)
by turning his
experience into
poetry for readers
to buy. The
daffodils flashing
on the narrator's
memory, in this
sense, may also
evoke the process
of composition,
as he sits down
years later
with Dorothy's
journal to help
him compose—yet
another aspect
of human influence
elided from
the poem. At
the same time,
the narrator's
final indoors
relationship
to nature presents
the experience
of most of William
Wordsworth's
readers, offering
a model for
how he might
hope his readers
will relate
to the poem
as the experience
of the daffodils
bursts, second-hand,
on their consciousness
as well through
the activity
of reading. Just
as the memory
of the daffodils,
separated in
time and space
from their original
environment,
enlivens the
narrator in
times of loneliness
and vacancy,
so too the poem
enlivens the
solitary vacancy
of the reader,
whose individual
heart is also
invited to fill
with pleasure
and dance with
the imagined
daffodils from
the secure distance
of reading.
The poem thus
brings the daffodils
both literally
and figuratively
indoors—into
the text for
solitary indoor
reading, and
into the mind
for solitary
individual imagination.
-
If
I try to put
these points
together into
a single coherent
reading, I might
argue that the
poem converts
the daffodils
into the equivalent
of imaginative
aesthetic capital,
for the individual
production of
meaning and
value. Already
separated from
social contexts
in the staging
of the initial
encounter, the
daffodils are
further separated
from their natural
environment
when they are
internalized
in memory and
imagination
in the concluding
stanza. The
poet's protracted
gaze converts
the daffodils
into both literal
and symbolic "wealth" (line
12), accumulating
a kind of portable
imaginative
capital for
the production
of future meaning
and identity
which it then
transfers second-hand
to the reader. Internalizing
the daffodils
in this form
allows a vicarious
participation
in "nature," through
private reading
and imagination,
which at the
same time separates
the self from
both the human
social and non-human
natural environment.
The daffodils
become generalized
symbols of "nature," affirming
the autonomy
of the self
and converting
its potential "vacancy" into
the "bliss
of solitude." The
poem's version
of environment,
in short, authorizes
a society of
individual bourgeois
writers and
readers, claiming
autonomy from
one another
while at the
same time producing
their identities
and social relationships
through this
shared symbolic
internalization
of nature, apart
from any specific
local environment.
Dorothy Wordsworth's
journal entry,
in contrast,
supports a relational
model of identity,
produced through
immersion in
a specific environment
and complex
overlapping
networks of
human and non-human
relationship—an
identity which
cannot easily
be abstracted
from its contexts.
-
By
the time I get
this far, my
students' obvious
conclusion is
that English
professors read
too much into
things. In practice,
I wouldn't advise
laying out this
full position—or
a comparable
full reading
of your own—for
undergraduates
in the first
class of the
semester, unless
you have a very
talented group
of students
indeed. By asking
students to
compare the
two versions
of the scene
and the versions
of nature, identity,
and social relations
that they support,
however, you
can introduce
your class to
a relatively
sophisticated
model of reading
environment
in literary
texts and a
useful framework
for the study
of Romantic
ecologies.
-
At
some point in
the discussion,
I also like
to comment on
the difference
between William's
position as
a male poet,
appealing to "nature" in
part to support
his poetic authority
in relation
to a potentially
indifferent
or scornful
public, and
Dorothy's more
domestic position
as a woman in
the Wordsworth
household, pointedly
eschewing public
authorship.
I ask students
to consider
how these different
social and gender
positions might
be reflected
in the different
presentations
of the daffodils.
As Anne Mellor
and other feminist
scholars have
argued, Dorothy's
relational self
and greater
attention to
the physical
details of her
environment
identify her
with a larger
tradition of
female Romantic
writers, as
opposed to many
male Romantic
poets' attempts
to transcend
or imaginatively
master their
environment.
II.
John Clare and
the Aesthetics
of Engagement
-
After
this first comparative
reading, I find
it helpful to
introduce students
to another short
text by a different
Romantic-era
author, to offer
yet another
version of "nature." Doing
so right from
the start breaks
down binary
models and makes
it clear that
we are not working
with an either/
or framework,
but with complex,
multiple, and
overlapping
social positions
which each author
combines in
unique ways
into his or
her own versions
of nature. I
like to use
John Clare's
poetry for this
purpose, both
because I want
to introduce
students to
Clare and because
he provides
a significantly
different approach
to environment
in terms of
social class,
writing from
the tradition
of laboring
class or peasant
poet (an identification
about which
he had mixed
feelings, but
which defined
him at the time).
Many of Clare's
poems present
a solitary first-person
narrator moving
through or exploring
a landscape,
in a way that
offers useful
comparisons
with "I
wandered lonely
as a cloud," but
with quite different
modes of description,
social positioning,
sense of self,
and relationship
to environment.
-
One
way to present
a Clare poem
in relation
to Wordsworth's "I
wandered lonely
as a cloud" is
by contrasting
what I will
call Wordsworth's "aesthetics
of spectatorship" against
Clare's "aesthetics
of engagement," or
participatory
relation to
environment. The
first section
of this essay
has already
suggested some
of the ways
in which William
Wordsworth's
poem takes a
spectatorial
perspective:
it presents
a disembodied
visual experience
of a panoramic
spectacle, composed
into unity by
the observer's
single perspective,
and makes this
solitary observer
the sole focal
point for the
production of
meaning and
value in the
scene. In taking
these positions,
Wordsworth's
poem assumes
the detached,
spectatorial
relationship
towards environment
characteristic
of the Western
landscape tradition,
as described
in the work
of Dennis Cosgrove,
John Barrell,
Gina Crandell,
and others.
Presenting a
single fixed
perspective
outside the
pictured landscape,
the poem's subject
position resembles
that of a landscape
painting, and
it dramatizes
how this position
can allow the
viewer to construct
a sense of autonomous
identity and
imaginative
ownership over
the scene. Wordsworth's
poem also presents
the daffodils
as entirely
isolated from
ordinary daily
experience,
human social
relations, and
physical production
or labor, in
ways that match
the emerging
Romantic construction
of the aesthetic
as disinterested
individual contemplation.
Much of Clare's
poetry, in contrast,
exemplifies
what the aesthetic
philosopher
Arnold Berleant
terms an "aesthetics
of engagement," offering
a sense of participation
in, rather than
detached observation
of, his environment.
Clare's poetry
typically presents
a much more
fully embodied
experience than
Wordsworth's,
immersing the
narrator in
a more diverse
and complex
natural environment
which also includes
a wider array
of other human
presence and
activity. In
contrast with
Wordsworth's
tendency to
frame the landscape
as separate
from the self
and from ordinary
social and economic
life, Clare's
sense of self
and imagination
cannot be easily
separated from
his immediate
environmental
and social contexts—at
least not until
some of his
later, asylum
poems take a
more alienated "Romantic" position.
Aesthetic experience,
for Clare, involves
active and present
participation
in environment
and is not segregated
from the rest
of life. In
many of the
poems of his
middle period,
including his
bird poems,
Clare invites
his readers
to accompany
him imaginatively
into the scene,
while Wordsworth
more often invites
the reader to
share his position
of detached
observation
and contemplation.
-
A
variety of
Clare's poems
might be used
to highlight
these different
relations to
environment.
The two poems
I have used
most often
for this exercise
in my teaching,
and which I
will discuss
here, are the
sonnets "The
passing traveler" and "The
Beans in
Blossom." Both
poems can
be found
in the Everyman's
Poetry edition
of Clare,
edited by
R. K. R.
Thornton
and entitled
simply John
Clare—a
very inexpensive
edition
that can
be used
to bring
a varied
selection
of Clare's
poetry
into the
classroom,
to supplement
poor coverage
of his
work
in most
Romanticism
anthologies.
Here is
the text
of "The
passing
traveler," as
edited
from
manuscript
in Edward
Blunden's
1920
edition:
The
passing traveller
with wonder
sees
A
deep and ancient stonepit
full of trees;
So
deep and very deep the place
has been,
The
church might stand within
and not be seen.
The
passing stranger oft with
wonder stops
And
thinks he e'en could walk
upon their tops,
And
often stoops to see the
busy crow,
And
stands above and sees the
eggs below;
And
while the wild horse gives
its head a toss,
The
squirrel dances up and runs
across.
The
boy that stands and kills
the black nosed bee
Dares
down as soon as magpies'
nests are found,
And
wonders when he climbs the
highest tree
To
find it reaches scarce above
the ground.
Like
Wordsworth's
poem, this sonnet
begins with
a traveler coming
upon a new and
startling scene. Rather
than presenting
the scene from
a single stationed
point as a panoramic
spectacle, however,
Clare places
the traveler
or "stranger" as
an embodied
observer moving
within the landscape.
He "oft
with wonder
stops," implying
full bodily
movement, and
even "stoops" to
look into the
stone pit—an
active verb
that catches
the sense of
the observer
positioning
his body to
gaze down into
the pit, as
opposed to Wordsworth's
blandly disembodied
visual relationship
to landscape
in verbs such
as "see" and "gazed." Unlike
Wordsworth's
lonely wandering
I, Clare's traveler
is not detached
or separated
from the environment
in which he
moves. His full
participation
and "wonder," stressed
by the repetition
of that word,
occurs in the
continuous moment
of embodied
experience instead
of being framed
by the spatial
and temporal
separation of
Wordsworth's
poem. Clare's
traveler even
imagines himself
walking on the
tops of the
trees: an impossible
but vividly
physical imagination
of relationship
to the place,
again implicating
his full bodily
feeling in his
perception.
While Wordsworth's
poem takes the
static visual
position of
a picturesque
viewing station
or someone viewing
a landscape
painting, Clare's
poem presents
his observer
in active physical
relationship
with the scene
-
In
addition to
asking students
to compare the
role of the
traveler in
the two poems,
you can also
ask them to
compare the
poems' evocation
of perspective,
point of view,
and agency.
Why is the boy
introduced in
Clare's poem?
Why all the
animals? Wordsworth's
environmental
poetry tends
to create an
intense relationship
between the
speaker or poet
and some one
specific creature
or entity in
the natural
world—a
crowd of daffodils,
a daisy, a lesser
celandine, a
butterfly, a
cuckoo, a mountain,
and so on—generally
screening out
the rest of
the environment
in order to
define the narrator
in exclusive
relationship
to this one
entity. In screening
out this ambient
environment,
Wordsworth's
poetry tends
to isolate each
single non-human
entity from
its overlapping
relationships
with other entities
in its environment,
defined instead
in exclusive
relationship
with the narrator.
Isolating a
single feature
of the landscape
also allows
Wordsworth's
poetic narrators
to define themselves
in separation
from their wider
social and environmental
contexts, allowing
him to define
the self as
isolated and
autonomous.
Clare's poetry,
in contrast,
tends to immerse
the narrator
in a more multi-faceted
environment,
full of multiple
overlapping
relationship
between different
creatures and
elements of
the landscape.
The narrator
is central to
many of Clare's
poems as well,
but he does
not present
himself as central
or necessary
to the environment
with which he
engages, and
whose multiple
relationships
he represents.
-
"The
passing traveler" indicates
these overlapping
networks of
relationships
both in its
shift from the
traveler's perspective
to that of the
boy, with which
the poem concludes,
and by the wide
range of animals
and animal activities
included within
the poem. Though
the poem never
explicitly assumes
a non-human
point of view,
even the "busy
crow," the "wild
horse" which "gives
its head a toss" ("his" head
in the Everyman
edition), and
the squirrel
who "dances
up and runs
across" seem
to show their
own active agency
and purposes. "Nature" here
is thus not
presented as
a single framed
view, seen from
the outside
by an essentially
disembodied
spectator, but
as a multi-centered
participatory
experience from
the inside,
in which each
living creature
has its own
agency and purposes
independent
of the observer.
The traveler's
wonder is not
privileged over
the boy's search
for nests and
desire to kill
bees, or even
the squirrel
and the horse
and the crow
with their own
unspecified,
non-human purposes.
To indicate
this equality
of perspective,
the same word, "wonder," is
used both for
the traveler
at the beginning
of the poem
and for the
boy at the end,
further undermining
any sense of
the traveler's
superiority
through greater
elevation, mobility,
or breadth of
experience.
Appropriate
to an aesthetics
of engagement,
the boy's wonder
breaks upon
him in the middle
of the intense
physical activity
of climbing
a tree to get
at the magpies'
nest: suspended
in the branches,
he reaches the
same height
as the traveler
and in effect
lives out the
traveler's imagined
desire to walk
upon the treetops.
In contrast
to the dominant
tradition of
landscape aesthetics,
with its emphasis
on disinterestedness,
cool separation,
and distance,
the boy's aesthetic
response erupts
suddenly out
of this intense
participatory
experience as
he pursues a
specific goal,
finding himself
literally immersed
in the branches
of the trees
and the lives
of the birds
and squirrels
that they support.
This middle-of-the-tree
perspective
is about as
far as one can
get from the
detached prospect
position of
the typical
landscape poem
or painting
of the period,
such as Wordsworth's
poem.
-
Students
may make many
of these comparisons
on their own
initiative,
especially if
they have just
finished discussing
similar issues
in William and
Dorothy's texts.
If not, a few
leading questions
should call
their attention
to such differences.
Why does the
point of view
change from
traveler to
boy, and what
associations
do these two
figures carry?
Why is the word "wonder" used
for both? Why
does the poem
begin from the
traveler's perspective
on the edge
of the stone
pit and end
from the boy's
perspective
in the middle
of the tree?
What is the
role of the
animals in the
poem, and why
are there so
many of them?
Why aren't there
any animals
in Wordsworth's
poem, and relatively
few objects
or features
of any kind?
What kinds of
verbs do the
Clare and Wordsworth
poems use, in
relation to
their overall
presentation
of environment?
What sense of
bodily activity,
or lack of activity,
do the two poems
evoke? Why does
Wordsworth create
a break in space
and time in
his poem, while
Clare does not?
And so on. As
with the William
and Dorothy
Wordsworth texts,
students' attention
can also be
steered to formal
qualities: the
accretive, run-on
quality of Clare's
poem, hurrying
on from image
to image without
any clear grammatical
hierarchy, as
opposed to Wordsworth's
more careful
syntactical
containment
and framing
of the scene. Clare's
poem, like much
of his poetry,
is paratactic,
while Wordsworth's
is hypotactic.
You can also
compare Clare's
social positioning
as a "peasant
poet" or "laboring
class poet" with
Wordsworth's
more genteel
poetic identity. Clare's
typical ground-level
point of view
and participatory
relationship
to environment
may reflect
in part his
lower-class
status and ongoing
experience working
in the fields,
even after he
achieved poetic
reputation.
Clare also had
far less experience
with the aesthetic
detachment of
the traveler
than Wordsworth,
whose life was
thoroughly informed
by travel in
the picturesque
mode. The boy
climbing into
the treetops
to come to the
level of the
traveler, in
this respect,
resonates provocatively
with Clare's
attempt to "rise" from
his laboring
class status
to the level
of genteel literary
authorship.
At the same
time, Clare's
poem challenges
the period's
standard equation
of aesthetic
appreciation
with detachment,
distance, and
elevation, associated
with elite social
standing and
disinterestedness,
as John Barrell
explores in
his essay on
landscape conventions
and social class, "The
public prospect
and the private
view: the politics
of taste in
eighteenth-century
Britain."
-
Barrell's The
Idea of Landscape
and the Sense
of Place offers
another way
to present
the difference
in subject
positions
between the
two poems.
The book argues
that Clare's
poetry emerged
from a local
sense of place
at odds with
the universalizing,
cosmopolitan
relation to
landscape
typical of
eighteenth-century
and Romantic
art and poetry.
The paratactic
multiplicity
and particularity
of Clare's
descriptions—what
Barrell calls
his "aesthetics
of disorder" (152)—contrast
with the picturesque,
and specifically
Claudian,
conventions
of unified
landscape
composition
favored by
elite culture
at the time.
Barrell argues
that while
Wordsworth
generally
tries to "see
through" a
landscape
to underlying,
universal
truths, in
the spirit
of this picturesque
cosmopolitanism,
Clare's relation
to his specific,
local environment
provides his
primary subject
matter in
its own right.
In related
positions,
Tim Chilcott
claims in ‘A
Real World
and Doubting
Mind' that
Clare presents
nature as
autonomous,
having its
own value
apart from
human concerns
and purposes
(67, 223);
and James
McKusick argues
in Green
Writing: Romanticism
and Ecology that
Clare's local
knowledge
and environmental
advocacy mark
him as the
first "deep
ecological" writer
in English,
conveying
a place-based
identity through
his local "ecolect," or
environmentally-attuned
language,
that contrasts
with Wordsworth's
tendency to
subordinate
descriptions
of nature
to his own
autonomous
subjectivity
(78, 89).
-
Viewing
different styles
of landscape
painting associated
with the picturesque
and the Romantic
period provides
another way
to illustrate
these differences
in the classroom. Searching
by painter in
web art databases
or clearinghouses
such as The
Web Gallery
of Art <http://www.wga.hu/index1.html> or
ArtCyclopedia <http://www.artcyclopedia.com>,
you can show
students examples
of these painting
styles and point
out analogies
with literary
texts. The paintings
of Claude Lorraine,
for instance,
use framing
techniques and
panoramic views
to distance
the observer
from the landscape,
in what became
a standard Romantic-era
aesthetic position
of disinterested
picturesque
connoisseurship.
William Gilpin's
drawings illustrate
the generalizing
tendencies of
the picturesque
mode, in ways
also similar
to William Wordsworth's
poem. Peter
De Wint, in
contrast, provides
a counter-example
of a Romantic
era painter,
celebrated by
Clare in his "Essay
on Landscape" manuscript,
who provides
a more intimate,
ground-level
sense of participation
in the scene,
with a greater
emphasis on
realistic natural
detail—a
point of view
closer to that
of Clare's poetic
narrators.
-
Another
Clare sonnet, "The
Beans in Blossom," presents
a first-person
voice that demonstrates
this typical
ground-level
engagement and
participation.
Here is the
poem as it appeared
in Clare's 1835 Rural
Muse,
much more heavily
punctuated than
in versions
edited from
manuscript (such
as the Everyman
edition):
The
south-west
wind! how
pleasant in
the face
It
breathes! while, sauntering
in a musing pace,
I
roam these new ploughed
fields; or by the side
Of
this old wood, where happy
birds abide,
And
the rich blackbird, through
his golden bill,
Utters
wild music when the rest
are still.
Luscious
the scent comes of the blossomed
bean,
As
o'er the path in rich disorder
lean
Its
stalks; when bees, in busy
rows and toils,
Load
home luxuriantly their yellow
spoils.
The
herd-cows toss the molehills
in their play;
And
often stand the stranger's
steps at bay,
Mid
clover blossoms red and
tawny white,
Strong
scented with the summer's
warm delight.
As
with "The
passing traveler," you
can begin discussion
of this poem
by asking students
to consider
the speaker's
point of view
and relationship
to his environment,
including his
sensual and
embodied relationship
to place. Instead
of beginning
with vision,
the poem begins
with the tactile
experience of
the wind against
the speaker's
face, and it
evokes a rich
range of sensual
experience:
the "wild
music" of
the blackbird,
the "luscious" scent
of the blossomed
beans, and the
concluding synesthesia
of "the
Summer's warm
delight," combining
touch and smell
and indeed all
the senses.
The diversity
of sensual experience
in the poem
contrasts with
the almost entirely
visual experience
of Wordsworth's "I
wandered lonely
as a cloud." Though
Wordsworth often
invokes sound
in his poetry,
he rarely invokes
the proximate
senses of smell,
taste, and touch
with their much
more intimate
sense of participation
in environment—perhaps
because such
proximal experience
tends to break
down boundaries
between self
and world and
dissolve the
self's claims
to autonomy.
-
Clare's "Beans
in Blossom" also
gives the sense
of physically
moving through
the landscape,
complementing
its evocation
of embodiment
and full sensual
immersion.
The
reader
almost
has
to
duck
to
get
through
the "rich
disorder" of
the
beans,
which
seem
to
lean
over
the
path
with
an
intimate
sense
of
space,
then
is
stopped
short,
together
with
the
narrator,
by
the
physical
obstruction
of
the
cows.
Though
Wordsworth's
poem
also
begins
with
movement
through
the
landscape,
the
metaphor
of
the
cloud
floating
through
the
clear
sky
removes
all
specific
sense
of
embodiment
or
sensual
relation
to
an
ambient
environment,
as
opposed
to
Clare's
rich
invocation
of
the
body
moving
through
tactile
and
aural,
as
well
as
visual,
space.
In
sum,
Wordsworth
presents
his
landscape,
in
the
picturesque
tradition,
as
a
framed
station
or
viewing
point,
isolating
the
spectator
at
a
safe
visual
distance
from
the
scene
he
surveys.
Clare's
landscape,
in
contrast,
unfolds
its
significance
unpredictably
as
the
narrator
moves
through
it,
fully
comfortable
in
his
environment
but
without
this
secure
sense
of
detachment.
The
sudden
challenge
of the cows
that stops the
progress of
the poem epitomizes
this difference
between a spectatorial
and participatory
relationship
to environment
and makes the
position of
disinterested
spectatorship
impossible.
Wordsworth's
poem encourages
the reader to
forget his or
her body in
vision, and
ultimately to
internalize
the landscape
in imagination.
Clare's playful
and challenging
cows confront
the reader with
the experience
of embodiedness,
in which the
narrator is
only one creature
among many others,
moving within
and enjoying
the "Summer's
warm delight."
III.
Romantic Ecologies
and the Significance
of "Nature"
- In
the end, getting
students to compare
different Romantic-era
versions of "nature" goes
beyond just literary
and historicist
investigation.
Though it is important
that students
understand different
Romantic-era approaches
to environment
in relation to
the cultural and
material history
of the time, it
is still more
important for
them to use this
knowledge to consider
their own material,
social, and cultural
relation to environment.
How, I like to
ask students at
some point in
the semester,
do Romantic versions
of nature continue
to inform our
current culture?
How do you imagine
your own relation
to environment,
and what are the
implications for
your sense of
identity, modes
of perception,
and social positioning? "Nature" understood
in this larger
sense becomes
a whole lot more
interesting and
challenging—no
longer understood
as a pre-given
entity outside
of us, but as
a broad array
of social, cultural,
and environmental
relationships
which we must
all actively negotiate.
To play a slight
variation on another
Wordsworth poem,
such a nature
is half given,
half created—given
by our cultural
legacy and social
structures, created
by how we negotiate
and shape that
inheritance. Yet
contra Wordsworth,
such a "nature" is
not exclusively
or primarily personal,
but social as
well.
-
One
issue that comes
to the foreground
in comparing
William Wordsworth,
Dorothy Wordsworth,
and John Clare's
representations
of environment
is the issue
of particularity
versus abstraction
in relating
to environment.
Although in
my experience
students tend
to value what
they see as
the "down-to-earth" quality
of Clare's poetry
and Dorothy
Wordsworth's
journal writing,
especially in
relation to
William Wordsworth's
occasionally
heavy-handed
didacticism,
they also frequently
object that
Clare and Dorothy
Wordsworth focus
too much on
description
and do not have
enough greater
meaning. In
raising this
objection, students
unknowingly
take their place
in a long critical
tradition, in
which they have
been trained. Such
students have
come to believe,
evidently, that
meaning is something
that needs to
be abstractable
and transferable
from particular
situations and
local environments;
that truth,
like nature,
exists primarily
in the abstract.
I too believe
in the value
of certain kinds
of abstraction—without
it, a work of
literature could
only speak to
its immediate
time and occasion,
and it would
be hard to justify
teaching literature
at all. But
if meaning is
defined only
by its ability
to be abstracted
or extracted
in this way—if
even environmental
writing produces
only general
meanings and
a generalized
sense of identity
and place—then
how can texts
teach us to
inhabit our
own environments
in anything
but abstract
ways? How can
we teach students
generalizable
skills and shared
cultural traditions,
while at the
same time teaching
them to be good
environmental
citizens, defining
themselves in
relation to
specific places
and relationships?
Using McKusick's
term, how can
Clare's "ecolect" and
intensely particular
relation to
place teach
us to develop
our own such
language and
relationships?
-
These
questions raise
issues which
remain unresolved
for me, but
which lie at
the heart of
my purposes
in teaching
Romantic (and
other) ecology.
I want to teach
my students
to relate to
and define themselves
through their
own local environments,
both social
and natural;
but at the same
time, I want
to teach them
the ability
to generalize
and compare,
to understand
and use rhetoric,
to be able to
extract the
assumptions
and implications
of any given
position. The
college classroom,
it seems to
me, is set up
to teach these
general skills
much better
than the particular
or localizing
ones. It creates
citizens for
a "plug-in" culture,
expert at analyzing
and synthesizing
information
but only incidentally
grounded in
their local
environments,
ready to pack
up and carry
their skills
away from college
at the end of
four years to
another location,
then pack up
again as many
times as necessary
in the migratory
experience of
middle-class
professional
life for which
we train them.
Anywhere they
go in this country,
they can plug
in to the same
media sources,
access the same
web pages, buy
their goods
from the same
stores, eat
at the same
chain restaurants,
and use the
same generalizable
interpretive
skills, independent
of the local
particularities
of place. Environmental
consciousness
can all too
easily become
another generalized
brand.
-
I
have come to
understand much
of William Wordsworth's
environment-related
poetry as encouraging
just this migratory
sense of identity—providing
the cultural
capital, as
in the daffodils
poem, for the
construction
of individual
identity and
value regardless
of any specific
environmental
or social relationship
and commitment.
Nature, like
art or literature,
takes on its
meaning and
value in this
model precisely
because of its
independence
from context,
protected in
its aesthetic
sphere from
the heartless
mundanity of
everyday life,
as Wordsworth
lays out so
memorably in "Tintern
Abbey."
-
I
teach Romantic
ecology in
part to challenge
this separation
between a valued
nature/art
and a devalued
everyday life,
which remains
a central part
of Romanticism's
cultural inheritance.
In the end,
I cannot provide
answers for
students, only
questions;
but with my
questions, I
try to get them
to see "nature" in
a broader sense,
in the spirit
of Raymond
Williams's essay.
Unless they
can see nature
as inseparable
from issues
of class, gender,
identity, social
structure,
politics, and
community (among
other issues),
it will remain
only an impossible
Romantic dream
of transcendence,
little different
from the consumer
fantasies that
this idea of
nature often
claims to oppose.
Nature, I want
to teach them,
is not something
we simply return
to or escape
to; it is the
total network
of relationships
within which
we must actively
negotiate our
places, and
it includes
the human as
well as the
non-human.
In the same
way, I want
them to learn,
we should not
just read or
interpret literature
from a secure
aesthetic distance;
we must actively
negotiate our
relationship
to it in an
ongoing, open-ended
process, not
only as individuals
but as a classroom
community,
and ultimately
as a society.
This
is the version
of nature—and
the version
of literature—I
want to model
for them.
-
My
hope is that
by teaching
students to
recognize different
versions of
nature in the
Romantic period
and explore
the assumptions
and implications
of these positions,
I
can
teach
them
to
bring
that
same
kind
of
engagement
to
their
own
lives
and
environments.
In
presenting
these
models
of
relationship
to
environment
for
investigation,
the
literature
we
discuss
offers
students
various
aesthetic
and
moral
positions
to "try
on" and
explore:
necessarily
general
models
which
they
can
then
apply
to
their
own
particular
local
places
and
social
positionings.
I
hope
both
to
help
them
build
these
general
skills
and
at
the
same
time
to
foster
their
awareness
of
and
commitment
to
particularity.
At
the
very
least,
I
hope
my
students
will
be
impelled
to
take "nature" out
of
its
heavily
varnished
and
often
invisible
frame.
Citations
and Suggested Further
Reading
Primary
Sources
Clare,
John. John
Clare (Everyman's
Poetry Library).
Ed. R.K.R. Thornton,
London: J.M. Dent,
1997.
---. John
Clare: Poems
Chiefly From Manuscript. Ed.
Edmund Blunden
and Alan Porter.
London: R. Cobden-Sanderson,
1920.
---. "Essay
on Landscape." The
Prose of John
Clare.
Eds. J.W. and
Anne Tibble.
London:
Routledge & Kegan
Paul, 1951.
Wordsworth,
Dorothy. Journals
of Dorothy Wordsworth.
Ed. E. de Selincourt,
2 vols. London:
Macmillan, 1959.
Wordsworth,
William. Poems,
in Two Volumes,
and Other Poems,
1800-7.
Ed. Jared Curtis.
Ithaca: Cornell
Univ. Press, 1983).
Secondary
Sources
Barrell,
John. The
Idea of Landscape
and the Sense
of Place, 1730-1840. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge
Univ. Press, 1972.
A
classic study of John Clare in
his social and environmental contexts,
with emphasis on the structure
of his descriptions.
---. "The
public prospect
and the private
view: the politics
of taste in eighteenth-century
Britain." Reading
Landscape: country-city-capital.
Ed. Simon Pugh.
Manchester, England:
Manchester Univ.
Press, 1990, pp.
19-40.
Explores
the relation between the aesthetics
of landscape and social positioning
in eighteenth-century Britain.
Berleant,
Arnold. The
Aesthetics of
Environment. Philadelphia:
Temple Univ. Press,
1992.
Presents
a model of
an "aesthetics
of engagement" in
relation to environment, questioning
traditional aesthetic models
of detachment and disinterestedness.
Chilcott,
Tim. 'A
Real World and
Doubting Mind':
A Critical Study
of the Poetry
of John Clare. Hull,
England: Hull
Univ. Press, 1985.
Good
overview of Clare's poetry and
discussion of his style of description
and syntax, complements Barrell's Idea
of Landscape.
Cosgrove,
Dennis. Social
Formation and
Symbolic Landscape. Madison:
Univ. of Wisconsin
Press, 1984.
Influential
exploration of the history of
landscape representation and its
social significance.
Crandall,
Gina. Nature
Pictorialized:
the 'View' in
Landscape History. Baltimore:
Johns Hopkins
Univ. Press, 1993.
History
and significance of pictorial
relationship to landscape.
Cronon,
William, ed. Uncommon
Ground: Rethinking
the Human Place
in Nature. New
York: W.W. Norton,
1996.
A
provocative
and controversial
exploration
of how humans
construct "nature" and
the social
significance
of such constructions.
Homans,
Margaret. Women
Writers and Poetic
Identity. Princeton:
Princeton Univ.
Press, 1990.
Useful
consideration of women writers
as an alternative social position
and tradition within Romanticism,
with a good chapter on Dorothy
Wordsworth in particular.
Labbe,
Jacqueline. Romantic
Visualitues: Landscape,
Gender, and Romanticism New
York: St. Martin's
Press, 1998.
Discusses
various modes of landscape aesthetics
in relation to gender.
Levin,
Susan M. Dorothy
Wordsworth and
Romanticism. New
Brunswick, N.J.:
Rutgers Univ.
Press, 1987.
Good
overview of Dorothy Wordsworth's
writing.
McKusick,
James. Green
Writing: Romanticism
and Ecology. New
York: St. Martin's
Press, 2000.
A
concise overview of the British
and American Romantic environmental
traditions and some of their major
writers, including chapters on
William Wordsworth and John Clare,
with an emphasis on ecological
consciousness and relation to
the local.
Mellor,
Anne. Romanticism
and Gender. New
York: Routledge,
1993.
Contrasts
different masculine and feminine
traditions of Romantic writing
and varying constructions of gender,
including different relationships
to the physical or natural world.
Plumwood,
Val. Feminism
and the Mastery
of Nature. London:
Routledge, 1993.
Presents
ecofeminism as a challenge to
the dominant Western philosophical
and environment tradition, from
Greek philosophy through deep
ecology. A challenging, theoretically
sophisticated, and richly rewarding
exploration.
Williams,
Raymond. "The
Idea of Nature." Problems
in Materialism
and Culture. London:
NLB, 1980,
pp. 67-85.
Provocative
and concise
introduction
to the changing
history of "nature" in
the Western
tradition
and the
relation
between ideas
of nature
and ideas
of self and
society.
Web
Resources
SYLLABUS
for ENGL355:
Nature, Class,
and Identity in
British Romanticism
SYLLABUS
for ENGL355b: Nature
and Gender in British
and American Romanticism
The
John Clare Page (edited
by Simon Kovesi,
sponsored by Nottingham
Trent University) <http://www.johnclare.info>
Excellent
website on Clare with various
resources, including contexts,
scholarly articles, and debates.
T.C.G.'s
Wordsworth Page
(Thomas C. Gannon) <http://www.usd.edu/~tgannon/words.html>
Relatively
little content, but a good collection
of links on Wordsworth.
The
Wordsworth Trust <http://www.wordsworth.org.uk>
Includes
a virtual tour of Dove Cottage
and other information and images
on Wordsworth and Grasmere.
Women
Romantic-Era
Writers (Adriana
Craciun) <http://www.bbk.ac.uk/english/ac/wrew.htm>
There's
not much specifically on Dorothy
Wordsworth on the web, but this
link is a good resource for the
exploration of Romantic women
writers generally.
The
Web Gallery of
Art <http://www.wga.hu> and
ArtCyclopedia <http://www.artcyclopedia.com>
The
Web Gallery includes a substantial
database of searchable art images;
ArtCyclopedia provides a more
comprehensive list of links to
images on other websites, organized
under the artist's name. Both
databases can be used to access
paintings that defined the picturesque
style by artists such as Claude
Lorraine, Gaspard Poussin, and
Salvator Rosa, and landscape paintings
by Romantic era painters such
as William Gilpin, John Constable,
J.W.M. Turner, or Peter De Wint.
|
|