Widening the. Old Scope
Jane Austen : The Six Novels. By W. A. Craik. (Methuen, 30s.) CENTRING discussions of the novel around a single theme is always precarious. The Novelist
as Innovator (a collection of essays originally given as talks on the Third) selects Richardson, Sterne, Dickens, Mrs. Gaskell, Conrad and Henry James. What happened, one wonders, to George
Eliot and James Joyce? And in what sense is Mrs. Gaskell an innovator? In his discussion of her work, John Gross suggests that 'originality
in fiction is far more likely to be a question of making new types of subject-matter amenable to traditional treatment for the first time, or of being forced to look at conventional subject- matter with fresh eyes.' This is good common sense, but the second half of his sentence is widening the scope of the subject to include practically every novelist that has ever written. I assume that the organisers of the theme began from some other point—the quality of the critics and the writers they wanted to discuss, perhaps.
The obvious truth is that both 'how' and 'what' are relevant, and critical discussion deals with the angle at which the see-saw should be tilted. In his interesting essay on Sterne, Christopher Ricks quotes Henry James's advice to the writer vis-d-vis reality : 'Really, universally, relations stop nowhere, and the exquisite problem of the artist is eternally but to draw, by a geometry of his own, the circle within which they shall happily appear to do so.' This is echoed by Laurence Lerner in his definition of Conrad as 'a historical novelist': 'A historical movement, like the action of a novel, has ripples that go on for ever, if we had a fine enough eye to trace them, and a boundary must be drawn round it somewhere.' Graham Hough, in an informed piece on Henry James, defends the Master's con- cerns in a way that seems to pave the way for an onslaught by someone else. John Holloway eludes the problem of Dickens as a contem- porary activity by showing convincingly that Dickens's awareness of society was closer to a modern organic conception than it was to the 'condition of England question' used by Carlyle and Disraeli. His claim that Dickens 'recorded, for the first time in English, the Life of Megalopolis' omits any discussion of Blake's vision of the City, and reduces the theme of innovation to a who-wrote-first-about-what level that is trivial. Even so, there is a wealth of in- formation and valuable discussion about the six novelists in ninety-two pages, providing the title is not taken too literally.
Another lively work in the same genre is Walter Allen's George Eliot, an account of her life and work which uses the latest scholarship without attempting to duplicate the evidence. The strongest section of the book is undoubtedly the Life, a masterpiece of pace and accuracy that tells the familiar story with real freshness. It is an absorbing story of courage and discovery, even if one does jib at the finale, the acceptance by royalty and the spirit of presiding respect- ability which George Eliot assumed. But they never quite got her, thanks, one feels, to George Lewes, whose scurrility and iconoclasm were notorious in society. She never lectured him, whatever she did to her readers. Walter Allen tackles the difficult task of analysing her 'moral view' with precision and clarity. He shows, in his criticism of the novels, how George Eliot's conception of moral choice was never an abstract problem but 'agonisingly personal,' while at the same time he indicates that the world is not primarily a gymnasium for the exercise of the moral faculties, and that George Eliot's picture of life is more limited than her fervent admirers are willing to allow. This seems to me balanced and fair and if one disagrees with some of his verdicts (Silas Manner, so far from being 'a small miracle,' is surely the most overrated• novel in the language), this does not prevent it being a valuable and honest little book.
From the market-place to the groves of Academe and two critical works on Jane Austen which are, at first blush, identical. Both are the same price; both non-biographical; both keep closely to the texts. On closer examination, Pro- fessor Litz has the edge on Doctor Craik, in- cluding dullness. Professor Litz subtitles his work `a study of her artistic development' and dis- cusses the fragments, The Watsons and the uncompleted Sanditon. He uses these copiously and justifiably, but Doctor Craik confines her- self to the published work while attempting the same task, thereby depriving herself of valuable material. In scholarly machinery, Professor Litz wins hands down with a chronology of com- position and a full note on each manuscript, which helps place the work in the literary tradition that he is investigating. Dr. Craik has only a small bibliography. Finally. Professor Litz has a forceful, if somewhat ponderous, cutting edge to his critical vocabulary, while Dr. Craik is betrayed into such tautologies as: `[Mansfield Park] can only be compared with Emma because in some ways it seems to be on the point of excelling even that perfect work.'
.101-IN DANIEL
Previous page
