Article Responses: The Rise of the Novel

In “Gendered Cultural Criticism and the Rise of the Novel: The Case of Defoe,” Maximillian E. Novak is voicing his concern with literary scholars who want to remove Defoe from his place in “the rise of the novel.” He indicates that these scholars see no real literary value in Defoe’s Robinson Cruosoe. He continues to defend Robinson Crusoe as a novel that had a large impact throughout Western Europe, and urges critics to reconsider “revising Defoe’s place in the canon” (243). What was most interesting to me was Novak’s discussion of Ian Watt’s exclusion of female authors in his book, The Rise of the Novel. He agrees that Watt took a “male-oriented vision of the novel” (252), but understands this exclusion of female authors indicating, “Watt’s work is rooted in its time” (246). Novak urge critics to reshape the canon by including significant female authors, but not at the expense of prominent male authors, like Defoe. He claims that it is not “sensible” to insist “entirely on the feminine nature of the form” and dismiss “male writers solely on the basis of gender” (252). After our discussions of the canon this semester, and having read Janet Todd’s The Sign of Angellica, I realized how far removed women are from current literary study focusing on the rise of the novel. I thought it necessary to reshape our canon by including prominent female authors; prior to reading Novak’s article, however, I hadn’t thought about how we will approach this. I think he poses a fair concern and is right in urging critics not to exclude male authors in the process of including female authors. Instead of devaluing certain works, it would be best that critics begin to value marginalized female authors and their works.

In “A Question of Beginnings,” Robert B. Alter also discusses Ian Watt’s The Rise of the Novel in terms of its biases. Nonetheless, he indicates the importance of Watt’s work and stresses its influence on eighteenth-century literary scholarship.  Alter makes an interesting observation: “The choice, then, of a particular beginning for the novel will always be in some degree arbitrary, inevitable dictated by the critic’s perception of what the eventual characteristic traits of the genre turn out to be” (215). I agree with this notion; it seems impossible to me for critics to distance themselves from their own biases that tend to make claims on which characteristics best represent the genre itself. According to Alter, Watt’s shortfall is in failing to cover “all the teeming variety and unpredictability of the genre” by deeming “realism” as the main criterion for the novel (216). Nonetheless, Alter ends his article by claiming that The Rise of the Novel is unparalleled “in its identification of the importance for the novel of individual experience” (225).  Alter warns critics against rejecting Watt’s work because of its shortfalls, and instead urges critics to consider what it does offer in terms of scholarship.

On a different note, Deidre Lynch’s “Personal Effects and Sentimental Fictions” was a challenging article that discusses the emotional attachments people have to things in sentimental novels and how keepsakes become “props” intended to invoke feelings and tears in readers. From what I have learned about eighteenth- century morality, luxury and the collection of “things” was associated with the upper class and hence, with vice.  In Lynch’s article, she recognizes “people’s new willingness to….value the luxury of good as a vehicle for the finer feelings” (346). Lynch discusses how keepsakes actually help move the narrative forward, which was a new outlook for me.

I have to say I gained novel insights this week. I am curious about how we can reform the canon to make it more democratic (keeping in mind that we don’t want to reverse the marginalization process by excluding prominent male authors). I am trying to be more open about Ian Watt’s The Rise of the Novel, although his exclusion of female authors troubles me. I am also interested in the association of luxury with finer feelings rather than luxury with vice. I hope we can touch upon some of these topics in class!