Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-cx56b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-26T03:18:55.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Matthew Arnold and the Modern Apocalypse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

James Longenbach
James Longenbach*
Affiliation:
University of RochesterRochester, New York
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Most readers have rejected conceptions of modern literature that depend on ideas of apocalypse and historical crisis, especially as writers like Pater and Stevens have replaced Arnold and Eliot at the center of the modernist canon. For some of these readers, however, Arnold and Eliot are rejected precisely because their work appears to be bolstered by untenable ideas of historical crisis. While this essay argues that modernist literature sometimes promotes such ideas, it also argues that the very same literature provides the terms for undermining those ideas. Surveying a range of post-Romantic texts and then focusing on Arnold's “Empedocles on Etna,” the essay proposes that the tradition of modern apocalypse contains its own critique, complicating a dualistic sense of the canon (split between Arnold and Pater or Eliot and Stevens). This internalized critique is so stringent that it exposes a blindness in some postmodern assessments of apocalypse.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 104 , Issue 5 , October 1989 , pp. 844 - 855
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Abrams, M. H. “Apocalypse: Theme and Romantic Variations.” The Correspondent Breeze: Essays on English Romanticism. New York: Norton, 1984. 225–22.Google Scholar
Abrams, M. H. Natural Supernaturalism: Tradition and Revolution in Romantic Literature. New York: Norton, 1971.Google Scholar
apRoberts, Ruth. Arnold and God. Berkeley: U of California P, 1983.Google Scholar
Arnold, Matthew. The Complete Prose Works of Matthew Arnold. Ed. Super, R. H. 11 vols. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1960–77.Google Scholar
Arnold, Matthew. God and the Bible. God and the Bible. Vol. 7 of Complete Prose. 139–398.Google Scholar
Arnold, Matthew. “Heinrich Heine.” Lectures and Essays in Criticism. Vol. 3 of Complete Prose. 107–10.Google Scholar
Arnold, Matthew. The Letters of Matthew Arnold to Arthur Hugh Clough. Ed. Lowry, H. F. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1932.10.1093/oseo/instance.00197026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, Matthew. Literature and Dogma. Dissent and Dogma. Vol. 6 of Complete Prose. 139–411.Google Scholar
Arnold, Matthew. The Poems of Matthew Arnold. 2nd Ed. Ed. Allott, Kenneth and Allott, Miriam. London: Longmans, 1979.Google Scholar
Arnold, Matthew. “Preface to the First Edition of Poems (1853).” On the Classical Tradition. Vol. 1 of Complete Prose. 1–15.Google Scholar
Arnold, Matthew. St. Paul and Protestantism. Dissent and Dogma. Vol. 6 of Complete Prose. 1–127.Google Scholar
Arnold, Matthew. Unpublished Letters of Matthew Arnold. Ed. Whitridge, Arnold. New Haven: Yale UP, 1923.Google Scholar
Browning, Robert. Robert Browning: The Poems. Vol. 1. Ed. Pettigrew, John. New Haven: Yale UP, 1981. 2 vols.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: U of California P, 1969.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. Permanence and Change: An Anatomy of Purpose. 3rd ed. Berkeley: U of California P, 1984.Google Scholar
Burke, Kenneth. A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: U of California P, 1969.Google Scholar
Cameron, Sharon. Lyric Time: Dickinson and the Limits of Genre. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1979.Google Scholar
Conrad, Joseph. Lord Jim. Ed. Moser, Thomas C. New York: Norton, 1968.Google Scholar
Culler, A. Dwight. Imaginative Reason: The Poetry of Matthew Arnold. New Haven: Yale UP, 1966.Google Scholar
de Man, Paul. “Literary History and Literary Modernity.” Blindness and Insight: Essays in the Rhetoric of Contemporary Criticism. 2nd ed., rev. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1983. 142–14.Google Scholar
Eliot, T. S. Complete Poems and Plays. New York: Harcourt, 1971.Google Scholar
Eliot, T. S. “A Note on Poetry and Belief.” Enemy 1 (Jan. 1927): 15–17.Google Scholar
Eliot, T. S. Selected Essays. New York: Harcourt, 1964.Google Scholar
Eliot, T. S. “Ulysses, Order, and Myth.” Selected Prose. Ed. Kermode, Frank. London: Faber, 1975. 175–17.Google Scholar
Eliot, T. S. The Waste Land. Complete Poems and Plays 37–55.Google Scholar
Frost, Robert. The Poetry of Robert Frost. Ed. Lathem, E. C. New York: Holt, 1967.Google Scholar
Eliot, T. S. Selected Prose. Ed. Hyde, Cox and Lathem, E. C. New York: Rinehart, 1959.Google Scholar
Howe, Irving, ed. and introd. The Idea of the Modern in Literature and the Arts. New York: Horizon, 1967.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. Stacy. The Voices of Matthew Arnold. New Haven: Yale UP, 1961.Google Scholar
Kermode, Frank. Romantic Image. New York: Chilmark, 1957.Google Scholar
Kermode, Frank. The Sense of an Ending: Studies in the Theory of Fiction. New York: Oxford UP, 1967.Google Scholar
Leithauser, Brad. “Poet for a Dark Age.” New York Review of Books 13 Feb. 1986: 11–14.Google Scholar
Meisel, Perry. The Myth of the Modern: A Study of British Literature and Criticism after 1850. New Haven: Yale UP, 1987.Google Scholar
Miller, J. Hillis. The Linguistic Moment: From Wordsworth to Stevens. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nietzsche, Friedrich. “On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense.” Philosophy and Truth: Selections from Nietzsche's Notebooks of the Early 1870s. Ed. and trans. Breazeale, Daniel. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities, 1979. 79–97.Google Scholar
Ozick, Cynthia. “The Muse, Postmodern and Homeless.” New York Times Book Review 18 Jan. 1987: 9.Google Scholar
Pater, Walter. “Coleridge.” Appreciations with an Essay on Style. London: Macmillan, 1900. 64–106.Google Scholar
Pearce, Roy Harvey. The Continuity of American Poetry. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1961.Google Scholar
Perloff, Marjorie. “Pound/Stevens: Whose Era?” The Dance of the Intellect: Studies in the Poetry of the Pound Tradition. New York: Cambridge UP, 1985. 1–32.Google Scholar
Poirier, Richard. The Renewal of Literature: Emersonian Reflections. New York: Random, 1987.Google Scholar
Richards, I. A. “A Background for Contemporary Poetry.” Criterion 3 (1925): 511–51.Google Scholar
Richards, I. A. Science and Poetry. London: Kegan Paul, 1926.Google Scholar
Shelley, Percy Bysshe. “Prometheus Unbound.” The Complete Works. Ed. Ingpen, Roger and Peck, Walter. New York: Gordian, 1965. Vol. 2. 178–262.Google Scholar
Spender, Stephen. The Destructive Element: A Study of Modern Writers and Beliefs. Boston: Houghton, 1936.Google Scholar
Stevens, Wallace. “Adagia.” Opus Posthumous. Ed. Morse, S. F. New York: Knopf, 1957. 157–15.Google Scholar
Stevens, Wallace. The Collected Poems. New York: Knopf, 1954.Google Scholar
Stevens, Wallace. “From the Journal of Crispin.” Wallace Stevens: A Celebration. Ed. Doggett, Frank and Buttel, Robert. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1980. 30–45.Google Scholar
Swinburne, Algernon Charles. The Complete Works. Vol. 2. Ed. Gosse, Edmund and Wise, Thomas. London: Heinemann, 1925. 20 vols. 1925–27.Google Scholar
Taylor, Mark. “Descartes, Nietzsche, and the Search for the Unsayable.” New York Times Book Review 1 Feb. 1987: 3, 34.Google Scholar
Tennyson, Alfred Lord. The Poems of Tennyson. Vol. 2. Ed. Ricks, Christopher. Berkeley: U of California P, 1987. 3 vols.Google Scholar
Tinker, C. B., and Lowry, H. F. The Poetry of Matthew Arnold: A Commentary. New York: Oxford UP, 1940.Google Scholar
Trilling, Lionel. Matthew Arnold. New York: Columbia UP, 1949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaihinger, Hans. The Philosophy of “As If.” Trans. Ogden, C. K. London: Kegan Paul, 1924.Google Scholar
Yeats, W. B. The Variorum Edition of the Poems of W. B. Yeats. Ed. Allt, Peter and Alspach, Russell K. New York: Macmillan, 1957.Google Scholar