Westminster Review (1864)

A few decades after Scott's death, the Westminster Review [vol 81 (1864), p.264] summed up the enduring appeal of Scott's long poems:

Did Sir Walter Scott really revivify the past in his poems and romances? No, he stopped short on the threshold, preferring that which would interest to that which was true. Had he painted the past as he knew it to have been, the picture would have shocked the majority of his readers. He dared not draw either the voluptuous enthusiasts of the Revival, or the heroic brutes and ferocious beasts of the Middle Ages. His real glory lay in throwing a poetical and unfading halo over his native land, in making Scotland forever attractive to mankind.

Millgate's Walter Scott

A good portion of the first chapter of Jane Millgate's Walter Scott: The Making of the Novelist (University of Toronto Press, 1987) -- about the poetry -- is (I've just noticed) available on Google Books. It's worth reading.

Essential Resources!

I've had a few queries about the edition project from various students (feel free to contact me: in person, via email, or through this blog); and these have in turn made me think I should flag up a few absolutely essential resources for anybody working on a critical edition.

Number 1: the OED. I mentioned in the lecture that if a word is in the Concise OED, then you probably don't need to explain it in a footnote. But you should not limit yourself to the Concise version. If you haven't done already, have a look at the complete OED. The physical edition is in the Library, and there's one in the Department too. One advantage here is that you can cite the OED -- which you can't do for 'I did a google search and some random stuff came up'. Another advantage is that it gives illustrative quotations for all its definitions, so you can see where Scott likely got his obscure or archaic word from -- and if Scott's the only or the earliest source the OED quotes for any given word, then you can be pretty sure that he made that word up.

Number 2: the DNB. The Dictionary of National Biography is also in the library in hard-copy form, in one volume concise form, but much more usefully for us in its original multi-volume form. If Scott mentions a noble medieval Scottish family, you could do worse than have a look in the DNB and see if they were still influential aristocrats and friends of Scott's in the early 1800s. Also good for tracking down Scott's aristo connections is Debrett's and Who's Who.

'Managing his pen with a careless and negligent ease.'

Robert C Gordon's Under Which King? A Study of the Scottish Waverley Novels (1969) doesn't deal with Scott's poems, but it does have some interesting things to say about Scott's relationship with Byron -- which, as you'll remember, we touched on in the lecture.

Sir Walter Scott was a great novelist with a weak aesthetic conscience. He never entirely escaped from a cinviction that writing was a scribblers trade, unworthy of the landed gentleman or the man of business. The magnificence of his successes was a virtue achieved by a powerful imagination working upstream against a current of doubt and prejudice that would have defeated a lesser talent. He once praised Byron, in words that chill, for achieving literary fame whilst "managing his pen with the careless and negligent ease of a man of quality" [MPW iv.375]. It was a justification of literary Whiggery by an appeal to aristocratic principle, a characteristic compliment. [1]

Two questions, then: one, does this seem to you also to apply to the poetry? And two: what does Gordon mean by 'literary Whiggery'?

Ruskin on Scott's poetry

John Ruskin was one of the nineteenth-century's most widely-read and influential critics and thinkers. He thought highly of Scott's verse ('Scott's poetry,' he write in Modern Painters III:235-6, 'is the saddest I know'), and wrote about it many times. Here, for instance, is his lecture on 'The Poetry of Sir Walter Scott', in which he identifies Scott's chief power as 'word-painting'. We might expect a prominent art critic like Ruskin to see this as a virtue, but do you think that's right? -- I mean, do you think that Scott's visual, painterly qualities are his main achievement?

Herbert Tucker on Lay and Marmion

Herbert F. Tucker has written an enormous book on epic and long poetry of the Romantic and Victorian periods, called Epic: Britain's Heroic Muse 1790-1910 (Oxford University Press 2008) (you can use Amazon's 'click to look inside' facility to read p.121f. on Lay or p.137f. on Marmion).

So what does he say? Well, with The Lay of the Last Minstrel, Tucker dashes through some of the material I covered in the lecture:

The Lay skirted epic borders. This would have been instantly apparent to readers whose sharp memory of the Ossian controversy was kept fresh by editions of balladry, themselves controversial ... from revised versions of Percy's Reliques to Joseph Ritson's Ancient Songs (1790) and subsequent collections to Scott's own Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border (180203), which would reach a third edition by 1806. George Ellis's thorough scholarship in Specimens of Early English Metrical Romances, published the same year as The Lay, set Scott's chosen genre on a continuum running from trouveur balladry through 'something like an epic fable' in the 'ruder hands' of the Normans, to the Italian refinement of 'a new and splendid species of epic poetry.' Among contemporary poets, Wordsworth and Coleridge had adapted these forms with epoch-making originality in Lyrical Ballads (1798) and the unpublished but circulating 'Christabel'. [121-22]

There's some interesting stuff on the other end of that link to Ellis's collection, up there; you might want to check it out. Tucker goes on to argue that the Lay's success lay in 'foregrounding narrative as performance':

Neither the central-casting Minstrel, not the Duchess who favours the entertainment is memorably drawn; and it is plan from the kindly intercalations of the Dickess and her ladies that even they do not value the story he offers them much more highly than the dispassionate modern reader can. Yet all this scarcely matters. The secret of the poem's success lay elsewhere: in the means of its transmission, in the ingenious modulation of new-old verse and in the presentation of the narrative frame as itself a text in motion, ie a narrative possessing independent value. ... For [contemporary epic poets] Cumberland, Blake, Southey and the rest the relation of past to present remained serenely unproblematic, Not so, however, for Scott or, to judge from the enthusiasm The Lay excited, for the reading public either. History was a problem, not just a resource. With unobtrusive genius Scott both acknowledged the problem abd proposed to solve it through the continuity-therapy that a sympathetic writer and reader might conspire to effect. [123-4]

This 'continuity-therapy', I think, has to do with the way Scott gives weight to both the present-day framing device and the historical tale, and does so in a way that engages and involves his readership. But Tucker thinks Marmion is an even greater achievement.

This poem of 1808 was an epic transaction that brilliantly infused into the entertaining sophistication of the Lay a tone and an ethos addressing the national trouble that contemporary epics of a more turgid sort had begun churning up. Instructed perhaps by [Southey's] Madoc, which he read more than once, Scott showed in Marmion how heroes' guilt and victims' history might conspire to support a narrative economy of loss and gain; and he suggested how a reader's speculative investment in such a narrative economy might redound to the national interest. He did so by correlating the breaking and keeping of faith, at several stuctural levels, with the maintenance of continuity between past and present on which personal identity and British history alike depended; and by infusing into the narrated flow of heroic psychology the epochal theme of historical change which The Lay of the Last Minstrel had been content merely to stage. [137]

Tucker's reading of Marmion is a dozen dense-pages long, and I can't do justice to it here. His main argument is that Scott uses medieval history as a way of writing about Modernity, paradoxical as that sounds: 'Modernity is a chronically recurrent condition, one that sustains itself by running back to an origin it discernibly yet incompletely differs from. harbouring the incompleteness of that difference as guilt -- accepted because shared, and carried forward because perennially unpaid -- is the work of national history as Scott momentously defined it for the nineteenth-century. And he taught the world how to do this work in the novel only after undertaking it first in epic poetry, the literary genre with which national history was most firmly associated in his lifetime.' [144] Tucker doesn't have much time for the other Scott long poems, though.

In The Lady of the Lake (1810) and Rokeby (1813) Scott untwined for separate consideration historical factors that the epic web of Marmion had woven together: in the former, the conflict between waning and emerging cultural formations, represented in figures who are nearly allegories of thsoe formations; in the latter, the narrative burden of guilt as it fastens on, and bends inward into personhood, figures enmeshed in the density of national events, the latter now further complicated by New World buccaneering. Scott's decline hereafter through perfunctory self-imitation in The Bridal of Triermain (1813) and The Lord of the Isles (1815), towards the outright parody of Harold the Dauntless: a Poem in Six Cantos (1817) confirms that by mid-decade he had designated Byron his heir in metrical romance and was saving himself for prose fiction. [146]

Harold is pretty weak, I agree; but this seems to me hard on both Triermain and Lord of the Isles, both pretty interesting poems in various ways, I think.

Editing Scott 2010-11

Welcome to this year's Romantic Texts project. For this project you will be divided into six groups, and each group will be assigned one of the following six Walter Scott poems:

The Lay of the Last Minstrel (1805)
Marmion (1808)
The Lady of the Lake (1810)
The Bridal of Triermain (1813)
Rokeby (1813)
Harold the Dauntless (1817)

You will then produce a scholarly edition of your assigned text. Your individual contribution to this group task will constitute 20% of your overall mark for this course.

The final deadline for task completion is Friday 25th March 2011. However, groups should be working on the project over the course of the two terms, meeting fortnightly to work on the task in the alternate, non-seminar weeks of term.

You will not submit hard-copy of your edition; it will be submitted as a word or .rtf file.

Assessment will be based upon this submission, as a group mark; and it will be subject to a 10% individuation, based upon the short personal reflection all of you will submit alongside the edition. We may also take things like the Group Log into account when individuating your mark.

Your edition WILL include:

• An introduction
• The text of the poem itself
• Explanatory notes
• A bibliography of relevant critical material

That is to say: your work will be penalised if it fails to include any of those four things. But because this component of the course is in part a test of your critical initiative, we are not going to specify the requirements of a good edition beyond this point. You should look at scholarly and critical editions of comparable texts to see what makes a good edition. You will be assessed upon the extent to which your edition makes its text readily comprehensible to a 21st-century audience, as well as the extent to which it contextualises and illuminates the work. You are not expected to provide detailed textual analysis of variants between MSS, first and subsequent editions (which is to say: you are not expected to produce a full variorum edition). Your aim should be explanatory in the first instance, and interpretive in the second: precisely, the annotation should be explanatory, and the introduction explanatory and interpretive criticism.

To say a little more about this: you MAY wish to divide your introduction as follows (but you are not obliged to do so).

1. Introductory remarks, including a brief account of the poem.
2. Biographical and historical context of the poem.
3. Literary influences upon the poem.
4. Immediate critical reaction, and longer term influence.
5. Critical or analytical reading of the poem.

You may, however, decide that a different structure for your introduction would work better.

The text can be otherwise simply downloaded from one of the many internet resources that contain Scott's poems, but must be clean (ie free from typos and misprints). You may wish to divide the cantos of your poem amongst your group to check this. Whilst you are not expected to produce detailed textual criticism, you may if you wish discuss any substantive textual cruces in the notes.

The notes should seek to be explanatory (by which I mean: whilst you are actively encouraged to develop your own critical interpretation of the poem, you should do this in the introduction, not the notes). Two further things about annotation: (1) Your notes should gloss any unusual or obscure vocabulary; but do not define words that are found in the Concise Oxford English Dictionary. You can assume your imaginary reader has a copy of that to hand. (2) You will find that Scott himself added notes to his own texts. These should be incorporated in your editions, in the footnotes, and, if you wish, discussed; although you may find that they are self-explanatory.

The bibliography should list any biographical and critical resources you have consulted on the poem.

A few more things you MAY (but are not obliged to) include:

• Illustrations. For example: 5 out of the 6 poems have medieval or post-medieval settings: you may wish to discuss this aspect of them in your introduction with reference to other contemporary medieval cultural discourse, such as paintings and illustrations;
• Appendices. For example including other relevant texts, published letters or poems on similar topics, provided these are not too long.
• A Chronology of Scott's life.
• Maps, diagrams and the like -- if they are liable to illuminate the text.

There is no word limit for this project. The notes should be as long as the text requires; and whilst it will be in your interest to limit the length of the introduction to make it manageable, you should be guided by the needs of the project rather than any artificial limit. That said we are offering you some suggested word limits, as guidance, and for those who would like it. The critical introduction should be at least 2000-2500 words

The word limit for the personal reflection is 750.

Publication. Our aim is for these editions to be e-published, under your names and no others, possibly in an annex to the departmental web page. The idea would be to make them available to the worlds of scholarship and education as a useful and stimulating resource. Of course, this will depend upon several things, though; one of which is the standard of submitted work. It will also depend upon you: the texts themselves are long out of copyright, but you will hold the copyright on the introduction and notes you write, such that any future publication will depend upon your permission. We will discuss this at greater length next term.

One final note on plagiary, about which I'm sure you don't need reminding. You'll find that there are several editions of Scott's poetry in the library with introductions and footnotes; and even some of the internet links I give above open with a brief introduction. DO NOT PLAGIARISE THESE, OR ANYTHING ELSE, WHEN WRITING YOUR OWN INTRODUCTIONS AND NOTES. You may draw on other editions of Scott as a research resource, and even quote them, provided you attribute the work correctly. We always take a dim view of plagiary, but for a project like this -- where it would hypothetically be possible to cut and paste intro, text and notes all from the internet -- we will be extra vigilant.