| Posted to Google
Groups TechnoRomanticism Discussion Board 2/20/08:
MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS: Coleridge,
"Rime" & Discovery of New Text
The below relates to our
discussions about Frankenstein and Romantic-era literature because
it discovers relationships between German and British literature
that could have influenced the production of the literature that
we're reading in class. Here's just a taste of the literary debates
that go on behind closed online doors (an oxymoron, yes).
How fortuitous: Just as we conclude discussing Coleridge's "Rime of
the Ancient Mariner," a conversation erupts on
NASSR-L (a listserv for discussing all things Romantic) about
particular images within the poem:
ORIGINAL POST:
In discussion of "The Rime of
the Ancient Mariner" yesterday, a student asked me if the image
of the "horned Moon, with one bright star/ Within the nether
tip" might be a reference to the symbol of Islam. I know that
Coleridge glossed this as a reference to the maritime
superstition that "something evil is about to happen whenever a
star dogs the moon," but I wonder if anyone has explored the
possible connections there. Perhaps the word "nether" works
against this, but it seems possible.
(Citation: Anderson,
Robert. "Coleridge & Islam." NASSR-L Email Post. February
20, 2008.)
A MEMBER RESPONDS:
While we're on the subject,
however, has anyone noticed (in print-- i'll bet lowes has,
somwhere) that this is, in fact, an astronomical impossibility?
the "horned moon" is, of course, the sliver of a waxing or
waning moon that appears when the dark side is almost entirely
turned earth-wards. but that means that this "horn" comprises
but the visible portion or arc of the complete circle coinciding
with the invisible outline of the dark moon, whose bulk would
hide from view any star, or other celestial object, in a direct
line of sight running "within" that circle, i.e., within its
"nether tip"--or upper tip, for that matter. coleridge must have
known this, which leads me to think that he expected
knowledgeable readers to conclude that the AM had been
hallucinating.
(Citation: Rzepka,
Charles. "Re: Coleridge & Islam." NASSR-L Email Post.
February 20, 2008.)
***********************************
On the same listserv
(and the same day), a ferocious conversation began about a major new
finding that Coleridge translated Goethe's Faust. Professor
Fred Burwick contends (and has published a huge volume on this) that
Coleridge translated this literary masterpiece but published it
anonymously. Some other Romantic literary scholars disagree with
Burwick
in an article that was just published today. Burwick responds in
a point-by-point listserv post which I've included below:
To those
interested in the arguments put forward in "A Gentleman of
Literary Eminence," by Roger Paulin, William St Clair, and
Elinor Shaffer.
Please consider
the following points:
-
the letters
from Bohte and from Goethe stating that Coleridge is
translating Faust cannot be dismissed as literary gossip.
-
the argument
that Boosey claimed that Faust was being translated by a
"gentleman," and that Coleridge wasn't really a gentleman,
is specious wordplay.
-
in my
annotations to the text, I cite over 800 verbal echoes from
Coleridge's other poetry, some of passages of several lines;
some with characteristic phrasing often repeated in
Coleridge's poetry. The reviewers do not acknowledge these.
-
all the
evidence, circumstantial and textual, points to Coleridge;
no evidence points elsewhere. And "gentlemen" like Soane and
Mellish aren't viable candidates for the edition published
by Boosey in 1821.
-
Mellish might
well have been considered a rival of Coleridge when he
translated Schiller's Wallenstein (1800), a play that
Mellish wanted to translate, but then translated Schiller's
Maria Stuart (1801) instead.
-
the reviewers
overlook the fact that Bohte published another edition of
Faust after Soane let him down and abandoned the project.
-
the reviewers
fail to mention that, in addition to twice referring to
Coleridge as translator of Faust, Goethe also translated
from Coleridge, and appropriated to himself, the lines on
'an orphic tale' originally entitled "To a Gentleman" (later
"To William Wordsworth"). Of course, according to the
criteria of the reviewers, Wordsworth would not properly be
considered a "gentlemen" either.
-
the reviewers
challenge the attribution of Boileau as author of the prose
translation (Boosey 1820), but fail to notice that in his
review of Hayward's translation, Boileau cited this work as
his own.
This review
provides a well researched commentary on the illustrations, and
includes excellent reproductions of many plates, a luxury not
available to me at Oxford University Press. Roger Paulin, an
expert on German Romanticism and the work of Tieck, has been
researching book illustrations for at least the past 15 years.
At Trinity, Cambridge, he has worked extensively in the Julius
Hare collection.
See also the
TLS review. Rather than extending this list of
oversights, misstatements, and misrepresentations in the review
article, let me encourage readers to look at the work being
reviewed:
Faustus: From the German of Goethe Translated by Samuel Taylor
Coleridge (Oxford, 2007)
(Citation:
Burwick, Frederick. NASSR-L Email Posts. February 20, 2008.)
|