:: The Young Enthusiast ::

Introduction: Griffin begins by arguing that to ignore the system of financing, distribution and promotion that was an integral part of the 18c literary scene is to abstract the literature from its cultural context, which results in a limited understanding of what the text meant to its original audience. Previous criticism on this topic has been unsatisfactory because it makes the moral assumption that the only proper relationship between the author and his audience is one of “proud independence” (1); taking this as an assumption, Griffin argues, blinds critics to the subtle ways in which literary production influenced the composition and reception of texts.

After giving a brief methodological statement of purpose, Griffin identifies six key aspects of the changing historical landscape in 18c England that are particularly pertinent to his argument:

1. The consolidation of a central government apparatus in the 1690s; 2. The rise of “Country Part” ideology and rhetoric; 3. The well-developed system in which political “patrons” controlled the electoral process; 4. An equally powerful—an controversial—system of church patronage, in which appointments to “livings” were the gift of the local landowner, whether peer or squire; 5. The intricate interweaving of the systems of literary, political and church patronage; 6. The commercialization of culture.

Griffin ends the introduction by stating his argument in the form of nine propositions, which I will quote here for the sake of convenience:

(1) The patronage system, as inherited from the Renaissance adn strengthened during the first part of the eighteenth century, operated in such a way as to sustain the cultural authority of the traditional patron class—peers and country gentlemen.

(2) Despite the conventional view, there was no rapid or complete changeover during the century from an aristocratic culture to a commercial culture, no sudden change from a patronage economy to a literary marketplace.

(3) The “golden age” of literary patronage, in which all the best English poets enjoyed handsome pensions from the court or from aristocrats with literary tastes, is a myth fostered by disappointed writers in later years who assumed that things must have been better in the past, and that England must have once been as enlightened in this respect as Louis XIV’s France.

(4) The system of patronage was never simply a form of noblesse oblige or disinterested generosity. It was in effect an “economic” arrangement that provided benefits to both parties.

(5) The system of patronage was always political. Walpole, usually branded as the villain who politicized literature and patronage, was simply making effective use of well-established principles, and his practice does not significantly differ from that of the ministries that followed or preceded him.

(6) During the course of the century booksellers gained both economic power and cultural authority, but did not supplant the traditional patrons: the period is characterized by overlapping “economies” of patronage and marketplace.

(7) Patronage in the later eighteenth century depended relatively less than previously on wealthy peers like Dorset and Halifax, and relatively more on other forms of support such as subscription and employment in church or civil service, but in many respects the patronage system of 1800 was similar to that of 1700: it never involved an exclusive and dyadic arrangement between a patron and relatively small grants; it almost always provided not primary but supplementary income.

(8) Although the system sustained patronal authority, it was roomy enough to allow for resistance and manipulation on the part of the writers who worked within it. Indeed, what is most striking about the system in operation is that it was always a site of contestation, as authors and patrons, later joined by booksellers and critical reviewers, jockeyed for position adn for authority.

(9) That contestation can be observed in the language of dedications, prefaces, letters, novels, and poems, in which authors, whether explicitly or obliquely, engage the topics of obligation, debt, gratitude, dependence and independence.

Chapter 4: John Dryden: Griffin begins by acknowledging the previous critical lines on Dryden; first the Johnsonian idea that he was a servile flatterer and then the idea that in his critical prefaces he has a certain kind of poetic bravado that he uses to constantly assure his audience that they are reading/seeing the work of a great poet. He also gives some attention to the idea that Dryden instructed his patrons with his panegyrics, using the form to suggest ways in which they might improve themselves. Griffin also notes that despite the fact that his prefacse are viewed as some of the biggest pieces of flattery in the century, at any time Dryden only received a minority of his income from literary patrons. Griffin’s own argument, however, is that Dryden used the preface to firmly establish the limits of the author and the patron’s role in their relationship, always insisting that while he may compliment the patron’s house or political achievements, that authorial and editorial control always remains in Dryden’s own control despite any gratitude that he might owe the patron for his monitary support.

Chapter 5: Jonathan Swift: Griffin begins by noting that Swift, like Pope, sought to establish himself as outside (or, more properly, above) the system of literary patronage, and that this strategy was founded, at least somewhat, in an attempt to soothe what they saw as the sting of injured or unrecognized merit. However, Swift’s strategy for doing this was far different than Pope’s. Swift, in effect, became a patron himself, using his influence in the political world and at court to be a matchmaker of sorts between writers and patrons, putting him above the whole system since he puts himself in the position of being an advisor to both parties. However, when he was forced to confront the system of patronage he was keenly aware of the authors servility, and he is always devising what Griffin calls “strategies (or fantasies) of retaliation” (110).

Chapter 6: Alexander Pope: Like Swift, Pope ostensibly rejected the system of literary patronage, but at the same time benefitted from it a great deal. While he presented himself as financially independent thanks to his Iliad, Pope was also fond of boasting of his connections to high society (as friend, not as client) in his works. He also put those connections to work in interesting and innovative ways; for instance, in the system of subscription that made him his fortune, the men who were the biggest literary patrons of Pope’s day were not only subscribers themselves, but also advertised the subscriptions and encouraged their friends to subscribe as well.

Tags:
Fatal error: Call to undefined function: the_post_keytags() in /usr/home/deepfry/public_html/18cblog/wp-content/themes/desert_theme/index.php on line 22