In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • The Lake Poets and Professional Identity
  • Philip W. Martin
The Lake Poets and Professional Identity. By Brian Goldberg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Pp. viii + 297. ISBN 9780521866385. £53.00.

This is a fascinating book that positions the 'Lake poets' (Wordsworth, Coleridge and Southey) in a new but not unprecedented context: that of late eighteenth-century and early nineteenth-century professionalism. The argument, broadly summarised, is that these poets modelled their relationship to their readership and the public at large by way of the established, functional professions. Poetry was socially useful, but its utility and effectiveness in this field of influence depended significantly on an acknowledgement of the professional status of the poet. The poet, in this model, is not at the mercy of the marketplace; rather, the professional judgement of the poet controls the taste and aesthetics of the readership. This book therefore sits at the centre of a series of recent debates surrounding Romanticism's relation to its reading audience or nation, print culture and the market, as well as making a significant contribution to our understanding of the time-honoured question of the definition of the Romantic poet.

Brian Goldberg presents his argument in a cogent and irresistible manner, so that by the end of the book one is left wondering why we have not seen these poets illuminated in this way before. His argument about Wordsworth, for example – 'the terms of the relationship between writer and reader may be voluntary and contractual, but it is still the role of the poet to 'ascertain what is his duty,' not to seek out and provide what will answer the demands of the marketplace by answering the unprofessional 'expectations' of readers. Wordsworth demands that poetic work be treated as educated, cultural work' – solves many of the difficulties that frequently attend our reading of this poet's writings and the nature of his democratising principles. It also (entirely incidentally) crystallises precisely what it was that Leavis admired in Wordsworth (Wordsworth keeps us healthy), and how, indeed, as Lucy Newlyn has argued elsewhere, he continuously tests his readership's capacity, or, more stringently, its competence. Similarly, though perhaps slightly less persuasively, Goldberg argues that Robert Southey's notion of professionalism depends on the relatively new concept of intellectual activity as work, and the notion that status or identity may be built here, rather than through birth. Much of the evidence for this comes from Southey's dialogue with Herbert Croft about some of Chatterton's letters, and this is a narrow evidence-base on which to construct such a broad argument. Even so, Goldberg is a subtle, astute reader of Southey, and he has rightly identified in this interchange a crucible in which the questions of authority, identity and gentility are being worked out.

The strength of this book rests also on its historical dimension. Romantic professionalism is rooted in the eighteenth century, argues Goldberg, and he builds a case for an understanding of Savage as a writer who worked hard to establish the poet's independent and 'notional' professional standing. The relationships between patronage, merit and standing or recognition are explored in particularly interesting ways, and Goldberg drags Savage out from the overbearing influence of Johnson's Life to show that his significance exceeds that of the tragic case. The argument is then followed through with reference to Hume, Johnson and Beattie, this latter being taken in this frame of understanding as a far more important precursor of Romantic professionalism than that offered by Goldsmith or Gray. There is an alternative and powerful genealogy of Romanticism being offered in this book.

Readers of this journal will share my disappointment that such a good book on Romanticism and professionalism should miss out on the golden opportunity to take into its discussions Byron's volcanic eruption on the subject in the famous and gloriously ranting letter to Moore [End Page 184] of 1 June 1818 ('Hunt's letter is probably the exact piece of vulgar coxcombry you might expect from his situation'). The passage is worth quoting:

Did you read his skimble-skamble about [Wordsworth] being at the head of his own profession, in the eyes of those who followed...

pdf

Share