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

humanities 399 university of toronto quarterly, volume 72, number 1, winter 2002/3 the footnotes. There is so much detail that is fresh and even compelling in Carroll=s treatment, but alas no new conceptual insights ensue. The significance of all the negotiations between 1783 and 1842, he concludes, is that Canadian-American relations pioneered the use of arbitration for settling international disputes. This is rather a benign (and old) view of Canadian-American relations. There is much to be said for such a view, but the relationship was more contested than this characterization allows. Canadians living in the Union of the Canadas in the mid-nineteenth century and in modern Canada might argue that there was much pushing and shoving to go along with the arbitration. Lord Ashburton=s insistence that the 1842 treaty was >a good and wise measure= was itself an attempt to calm criticism at the time. In so powerfully capturing the common ground worked out by surveyors and the negotiating officials, Carroll has perhaps in the final analysis made the boundary issue too tame. It is a paradox that such a prodigious feat of scholarship has in a sense de-historicized its subject matter. Carroll ends by citing the dispute mechanisms set up by the North American Free Trade Agreement as a current example of the tradition invented in the 1783B1842 period, but writing a history of the NAFTA issue mainly from the internal records of the Canadian and American expert negotiators would not capture its full historical significance. (GORDON T. STEWART) David Blewett, editor. Passion and Virtue: Essays on the Novels of Samuel Richardson University of Toronto Press. xvi, 344. $55.00 This collection, culled from articles that have appeared in the journal Eighteenth-Century Fiction since 1989, sets out to offer testimony >to the vitality of Richardson studies today.= The book delivers what it promises, reprinting fourteen essays on Samuel Richardson=s novels, divided into three sections. Each section focuses on one of Richardson=s novels: Pamela (1740B41), Clarissa (1747B48), and Sir Charles Grandison (1753B54), with the section on Clarissa the most substantial. Editor David Blewett begins the book with an extremely useful five-page section titled >A Note on the Texts.= It describes the various editions available of Richardson=s novels (both his own and modern editions) and the complicated history of those editions. This section is perhaps the book=s most valuable contribution. It will be of use to those new to the field for its clear introduction to Richardsonian texts, especially because, to date, >there is no uniform modern scholarly edition of Richardson=s novels.= The book=s introduction is meagre at five pages, though it lays out nicely that >passion and virtue are the twin themes of this volume= as they are >important words in Richardson=s moral vocabulary.= Each essay centres on 400 letters in canada 2001 university of toronto quarterly, volume 72, number 1, winter 2002/3 one or both terms. Notable among those on Pamela is Albert J. Rivero=s fascinating consideration of the narrative position of Sally Godfrey, Mr B=s former mistress. Rivero=s essay investigates the ways in which >Sally Godfrey never gets a chance to tell her own story, except through the agency, the projections, and the obfuscations of others.= Essays on Pamela=s textual authority (by John B. Pierce), on Richardson=s complicated politics and the politics of virtue (by John Dussinger), and on the structural, social, and linguistic circle drawn to model social authority in Pamela 2 (by Betty A. Schellenberg) round out the section on Pamela. The Clarissa essays are wide ranging in approach and content, authored by Jocelyn Harris, Rachel K. Carnell, Daniel P. Gunn, Peggy Thompson, Robert A. Erickson, and Margaret Anne Doody. They consider the politics of epistolarity; class, economics, and art; passion and abuse; and other topics. The contribution with which I was most taken is Harris=s >Protean Lovelace,= looking at the character of Lovelace in relation to the philosophies of Thomas Hobbes and John Wilmot, Earl of Rochester. Harris makes these and other comparisons in order to consider >man=s Protean paradoxical capacity to create and to destroy.= Doody=s essay linking Clarissa...

pdf

Share