Surveying the Frontier of Culture: Pastoralism in Eighteenth-Century England

SurveyingtheFrontierofCulture: PastoralisminEighteenth-Century England MICHAELMCKEON IfirstmetJamesCliffordonthesixthfloorofPhilosophyHallatColumbia University,inthefallof1966.Burdeneddownbyoldvolumes,hewas makinghiswaytotheseminarroomattheendofthehall,wherehewould passaroundfirsteditionsforhisPhD.studentstoinspectastheydiscussed modernpaperbackreprintsofthesametexts.Notyetarrivedatthisexalted stageofgraduatestudy,IwonderedifI'deverattainthebibliographical masteryrequiredtosatisfyascholarofClifford'sstature.ItturnedoutI didn'tneedto.IthinkitwouldberighttodescribegraduatestudyunderJamesCliffordasakindofapprenticeship,butitwasnotalaboriousand dauntingdiscipline.EvenbeforeIleftColumbiaI'dcometoseethatinClifford I'dhadamentorwhosenotionofhisjobincluded,butwentbeyond,intellec- tualandtechnicalpedagogy.Likemanygraduatestudents,Ilivedmylifeas amixtureofoverweeningfantasyandcynicalself-loathing.Throughthekind- nessandunfeignedinterestwithwhichhetreatedme,Cliffordtacitlyrefused toplayhispartinthiswretcheddrama.Heshowedmethatgraduatestudy needn'tbeadegradationceremonial,andheseemedtocarelessaboutput- tingusthroughthehoopsthanabouthelpingusimagineourselvesasprofes- sional adults. Once,whenIwaspassinghisoffice,healmostranmedownwhenhe suddenlyemergedintothehallway,onehanddraggingJohnRichettiinhis wake,theotherjubilantlywavingtheletterfromOxfordUniversityPress 8/MCKEON thathadjustacceptedJohn'sreviseddissertationforpublication.Inseminar hewouldhangexpectantlyonourreportsonrecentcriticism,sometimes emittinglittlegasps,sharpintakesofbreath,andlow-pitchedwhistlingnoises toacknowledgetherigorandferocityofourcritiques.Myoralsweresched-uledforthespringof1968,whenbuildingswerebeingoccupiedbyprotest- ors,andstudentswerebeingofferedtheoptionofpostponingtheirexamsin deferencetotheoccupationanditscause.TornasIwasbetweenintractable politicalambivalenceandaparalyticdreadoforals,mydespairfeltsome- howparadigmaticofmyentiregraduateschoolexistence.Wasn'tittrue— wasn'titobvioustoeveryone—thatIwasacharlatanandahypocrite,can- celingmyexamonthepretenceofpoliticalconvictionbutreallyoutofab- jectpersonalcowardiceandintellectualincompetence?Cliffordpatientlyheard meoutinmyagony,andmanagedtoconveyrespectforboththehornsof whatseemedmyignominiousdilemma.IntheendIpostponedorals,took themlateron,and,swallowingmypanic,acquittedmyselfwellenoughon thecanonicalfiguresforCliffordtoendbyinquiringroguishly:"Well,what canyoutellusaboutEustaceBudgell?"AndIwassurprisedtofindIcould reply,"Nothingatall,"withsomeequanimityandalmostnoabjection.Inthe end,JamesCliffordgavemetherarestgift,asimplemodelofhumanity.For thisreasonitgivesmethegreatestpleasuretohonorhismemorybydeliver- ingtheCliffordlecturetoday. Ourtopicthisyear,"thefrontiersofculture,"maybesaidtohaveaspe- cialrelevancetoeighteenth-centurystudies.Theacknowledgmentofcul- turaldifference—itspower,itsdeepprevalence,itsindefeasiblelegitimacy— isacentralfeatureofmodernitythatgainsacrucialmomentumduringthe Enlightenment.Thismomentumisinseparable,however,fromthecelebrated andapparentlycontraryEnlightenmentdiscoveryof"generalnature,"ofa uniformityandpermanenceinbothnatureandhumannature,adeeponto- logicalgroundingwhoseexistencehadgoneundetectedinpreviouseras. Therelationshipcouldhardlybeotherwise.Themoderncategories"nature"and"culture"entirelydepend,fortheirantitheticalauthority,oneachother's capacitytocarveoutaterritorywhoseboundariesdefinethelimits—but thereforealsothescope—oftheother'sdominion. Ofcourse,surveyingthefrontiersofnatureandcultureistheworkofall timesandallcultures.IntheWest,theancientgenreofpastoralisthediscoursemostexplicitlydedicatedtothiswork .Fromoneperspective,thehis- toryofpastoralintheeighteenthcenturyisquitecontinuouswiththehistory thatprecedesit.Fromanother,eighteenth-centurypastoralisanunprece- dentedlyinnovativeversionoftheform,aradicalinstrumentofinquirythat providesamodelforhowthefrontiersofculturemaybeexperimentally negotiated.InthefollowingtalkI'llexploresomehighlightsofthisnegotia- SurveyingtheFrontierofCulture/9 tionasitoccursinEnglishliteratureoftheperiod,butI'llbeginwithafew wordsaboutpastoralassuch. Whateveritsmoreparticularliteraryform,pastoralpartakesofanoppo-sitionalstructurethat'sbasedinageographicalantithesisbetweenthecoun- tryandthecity,theruralandtheurban,astructurethatyieldsafamiliar seriesofvalue-ladenextensions:simplicityversussophistication,innocence versuscorruption,contemplationversusaction,contentmentversusambi- tion,privateretirementversuspublicactivity,otiumversusnegotium,fe- maleversusmale,peaceversuswar,communalaffiliationversusindividual aggression,andthelike.Thespatialoppositionfindsitstemporalequivalent intheantithesisbetweenpastandpresent,GoldenAgeandhonAge;andat themostbasiclevel,alltheseanalogousarticulationsaremutuallytranslat- ableastheabstractoppositionbetweennatureandartifice—orsimplyart. Fromthebeginning,however,pastoralhasfunctionedbothtosponsorandtoquestionthisoppositionalstructure.Anartfulimpersonationofnature, pastoraldeploysthesophisticatedtechnologyofpoeticculturetorepresent itsabsence,andit'sintheself-consciousnessofthisparadoxthatwerecog- nizethecharacteristiccomplexityofthegenre.WeoftendistinguishVirgil's pastoralecloguesfromhisgeorgics,wherethenormisnotthenaturaltran- quillityofanimalherdingbuttheindustrioustechnologyoflandcultivation, theimprovementofnaturebytechniquesofart.Buttheeclogueandthe georgicoperatewithinthesamebasicschemeofopposition,andenforce differentfacetsofthesamesystemofvalues.Recollectinghisownyouthful exerciseinpastoralsong,VirgilinfactendstheGeorgicswiththeopening lineoftheEclogues.Theantithesis,inotherwords,isalsoacircle.Pastoral worksbothtoaffirmandtosuspendtheoppositionbetweennatureandculti- vation,toopposetheminsuchawayastointimatesimultaneouslytheir complexinterpénétration.It'sfelttobeinseparably"about"bothnature,and thetechniquesbywhichnatureisacculturated,enclosed,andrepresented. Pastoralisthesupremepoeticformofconventionality:notonlybecauseit presentsitselfasacritiqueofsocial,political,andpoeticconvention;nor onlybecauseit(inevitably)elaboratesthiscritiqueinconventionalways; butbecause,inseekingtobemindfulofboththeseconditionsatonce,it takesasitssubjecttheproblemofconventionalityitself. Bythiswayofthinking,theinstabilityofpastoralisnotanadventitious accidentorahistoricalaccretion,butcongenitalandconstitutiveofitasagenre.Theeighteenth-centurydifferenceisthereforeonenotofkindbutof degree.Itentailsareconceptionofthefrontierbetweennatureandartwhose veryconfidenceisthepreconditionforitsobscuringcomplication.IfIwere totrytoexplainthisdevelopment,Iwouldwanttohaverecoursetoanumber offactors,amongthemthematerialandsocialtransformationsentailedin 10/MCKEON thecapitalistrevolutionoftheEnglishcountryside.Myaimtodayisratherto describethisdevelopment,tosuggestthedimensionsofpastoralinnovation byreferencetosomeexemplaryandwell-knowntexts.I'llintroducethese readingswithabriefallusiontothefamousdebateaboutpastoralpropriety thatoccupiedthepagesoftheGuardianin1713. Thatthisexchangewasindeedadebatewasnotimmediatelyevidenttoitsreaders—partlybecauseoftheparodiesubtletyofAlexanderPope'scon- tribution,andpartlybecausehispastoralprinciplescanseemrathercloseto thoseofhissupposedantagonist,ThomasTickell.Evenontheissueofhow fartheproceduresoftheancientpastoralistsmaybenaturalizedtoamodern Englishsetting,thetwoarebynomeansutterlyatodds.Tickell,forhispart, instancesSannazaro'spiscatoryecloguesasthenegativelimit-caseofnatu- ralization.1Havingdrawnthisline,Tickellispleasedtoassurehisreader that"Ishallnowdirecthimwherehemaylawfullydeviatefromthean-cients."Acountryscene,hesays,isessential,butlawfuldeviationsmaybe indulgedwithrespecttoclimate,soil,vegetation,andsuchcustomsasrustic superstition.2Tickell'sphraseissuggestive,andI'lluseittoexploreabroad rangeofpastoralexperimentation.Duringtheeighteenthcentury,thestan- dardof"lawfuldeviation"operates,bothexplicitlyandtacitly,asasliding measureofhowthefrontiersofculturemaybesurveyed. Sannazaro'simproprietyconsists,inTickell'swords,inhaving"changed thesceneinthiskindofpoetryfromwoodsandlawns,tothebarrenbeach andboundlessocean___"3Howmuchmoreillicitmustbeachangeofscenefromthepastoralcountrysidetoitsantithesis,tothecityitself?Jonathan Swift'sfamous"descriptions"ofthecity,whichappearedintheTatlerin 1709and1710,clearlyexemplifytheproblemsingenericcategorization thatarecreatedbythewillingnesstoindulgecertainkindsofpastoral"de- viation."ByTickell'sstandards,Swift'spoemsmustsurelybeseenaspa- rodieandself-canceling"anti-pastorals."ButSirRichardSteele'sintroduc- tionpraisesthem,withsomeplausibility,fortheirinnovativeandhighlypar- ticularizedrealism:theauthor"neverformsFields,orNymphs,orGroves, wheretheyarenot,butmakestheIncidentsjustastheyreallyappear.Foran Exampleofit,"Steelecontinues,"IstoleoutofhisManuscriptthefollowing Lines:TheyareaDescriptionoftheMorning,butoftheMorninginTown; nay,oftheMorningatthisEndoftheTown...."4AsOliverGoldsmithlater remarkedofthesixecloguesthatcomposeJohnGay'sextremeexercisein thetheocriteanmode,TheShepherd'sWeek(1714),"theywereoriginally intended,Isuppose,asaburlesque...but,perhapswithoutdesigningit,he hashitthetruespiritofpastoralpoetry."5Fromthisperspective,Swift'spo- emshaveoftenbeenseenaslawfuldeviations,urbanor"town"pastorals (orperhaps,towngeorgics)thatextendtheancientformbyaccommodating SurveyingtheFrontierofCultureI11 itscelebrationofruralnaturetothedomainofurbanculture.Toputitthis waymayappeartoreducetoabsurditythefounding,oppositionalprinciple ofpastoral.YetSwift'sstrategyentailsthemicroscopicrediscovery,withinthesupposedlydiscretecategoryofurbanculture,ofthesameopposition thatdividesthecityitselffromthenaturalcountryside.Thus"TheDescrip- tionofaCityShower"subjectstheheterogeneousvarietyofcitycultureto thehomogenizingeffectsoftherainstorm,anaturalforcethatsubmergesall culturaldifferencewithintheuniformityoftheflood(reinforcedbytheuni- formityoftheendingtriplet): SweepingsfromButchersStalls,Dung,Guts,andBlood, Drown'dPuppies,stinkingSprats,alldrench'dinMud, DeadCats,andTurnip-TopscometumblingdowntheFlood.6 Inthisway,someeighteenth-centurypastoralistsdeviatefromstandard practicebydisclosingthecountryatthecenterofthecity.ThusTobias Smollett'sMatthewBramble,inthralltoavisionofbucolicpurity,isdis- tractedbytheparadoxicalpresenceof"publicgardens"attheheartofLon- don,andhelatercomplainsof"noisyrustics"hawkingtheirproduceunder hiswindow.7ThusJamesBoswellobservestheoddcapacityoftheLondon crowdtoconferanonymityandsolitude,toreproducetheruralretreatin otherterms:"Londonisundoubtedlyaplacewheremenandmannersmaybe seentothegreatestadvantage___thesatisfactionofpursuingwhateverplan ismostagreeable,withoutbeingknownorlookedat,isverygreat....In- deedthereisagreatdifferencebetweensolitudeinthecountry,whereyou cannothelpit,andinLondon,whereyoucaninamomentbeinthehurryand splendouroflife."8Thissortofdeviationmightbeseenasaspatialdisplace- mentofruralvaluesontothecity.Thedisplacementphenomenoniseven morestrikinginwhatmightbecalledtheeighteenth-century"macro-pasto- ral,"inwhichtheintranationaloppositionbetweencityandcountryispro- jectedoutwardasthemfernationalorimperialoppositionbetweenEngland andothernations.Tofindtheimplicationofsuchmacro-pastoraldisplace- mentoneneedlooknofurtherthanthetitlesofsomecontemporaryVirgilian experiments—likeWilliamCollins'sPersianEclogues(1742),Thomas Chatterton'sAfricanEclogues(1770),EdwardRushton'sWest-Indian Eclogues(1787),orRobertSouthey'sBotany-BayEclogues(1797).But themacro-pastoralimpulsealsopermeatesadiverserangeofEnglishtexts thatarenotstrictlyvirgilian,anditcomplicatesthepastoraloppositionbe- tweenEnglishcityandcountrysidebyignoringthefrontierbetweenthese localessoastoconjointhemintoametropolitanunitthatstandsoveragainst theunderdevelopedrusticityofthecolony. 12/MCKEON Oneofthemorecompellingexamplesofthissortofspatialdeviationis Collins's"OdeonthePopularSuperstitions"(composed1750).Addressed toJohnHomeonhisreturntoScotland,Collins'sodeurgeshiscultivated friendtoemulatethenativeHighlander(or"untutoredswain"),torecoverin Scotlandwhatcannolongerbefoundfarthersouth:"Northou,thoughlearned, hishomelierthoughtsneglect;/Letthysweetmusetheruralfaithsustain. ..."9ItissignificantthatCollinsassociates"theruralfaith"notwithreli- gion,butwithpopularsuperstition.ScotlandistoEnglandasthecountryis tothecityinthehighlytemporalizedsensethatitrepresentsanarchaicmode ofbeliefwhoseauthorityresidesinitsveryanachronism.Shelteredfrom modernityanditsculturaloverdevelopment,thehighlandsarestillpopulated bynotionalbeings—fairypeople,oldrunicbards,wizardseers,pigmyfolk— whobespeaknotreligiousbutpoeticspirituality.Spatialdistancefacilitates theauraofhistoricaldistance,whichinturnunderscorestheaestheticdis- tancerequiredtoconceiveHighlandcultureasanimaginativeconstruct,and therefore(paradoxically)morenaturalthanourown.Insistentlytheatrical, Collins'sexhortationsalsoinsistupontheaestheticmechanismwherebythe acknowledgmentofartificeonlypromotesthefeelingofthenatural: Proceed,norquitthetaleswhich,simplytold, Couldoncesowellmyansweringbosompierce; Proceed,inforcefulsoundsandcoloursbold Thenativelegendsofthylandrehearse; Tosuchadaptthylyreandsuitthypowerfulverse. Insceneslikethese,which,daringtodepart FromsoberTruth,arestilltoNaturetrue.... (11.183-89) Byreconceivingthelocal,intranationaloppositionbetweennatureand artasasingleEnglishunitwithinastructureofoppositionthatisinterna- tional,macro-pastoraldisplacementobligesustorethinktheethicsofcon- flictthatin"strict"pastoraltermsappearsnormative.BythetimeSmollett's herocomestoponderthesupposedlyabsolutedifferencebetweenthehigh- landsandthelowlands,thecontrastbetweenScotlanditselfandEngland— andindeed,betweennumerouspairedlocaleswithinEngland—hasalready renderedpastoraloppositionanexerciseinrelativity.SamuelJohnson's juvenaliansatireLondon(1738)opposesthecorruptionsoftheEnglishme- tropolistoseveralalternativeandincreasinglyfar-flungrealmsoftherural: "thewildsofKent,"theshoresofWales,theriversofHerefordandStaffordshire ,therocksofScotland.10Despitetheirregionalandevennationaldis- SurveyingtheFrontierofCulture/ 13 parateness,alltheseBritishlocalesareableinsomefashiontofigureanatu- ralinnocencethatstandsincontrasttothemonolithicartificeandcorruption ofLondon.OnceweleaveBritain,however,theschemeofvaluesbecomesmorecomplicated: London!theneedyvillain'sgen'ralhome, HecommonshoreofParisandofRome; Witheagerthirst,byfollyorbyfate, Sucksinthedregsofeachcorruptedstate. Forgivemytransportsonathemelikethis, IcannotbearaFrenchmetropolis. (11.93-98) It'snotthatLondonlosesherartificeandcorruption.It'sratherthather vicesaresorelentlesslyderivedfromaforeignsourcethatLondonbecomes ameremetonymyforBritain,andBritainalandofinnocentbumpkinsripe fortheculturalimperialismofmetropolitanFrance: Obsequious,artful,volubleandgay, OnBritain'sfondcredulitytheyprey. Nogainfultradetheirindustrycan'scape, Theysing,theydance,cleanshoes,orcureaclap; AllsciencesafastingMonsieurknows, Andbidhimgotohell,tohellhegoes. Theseartsinvainourruggednativestry, Strainoutwithfault'ringdiffidencealye, Andgetakickforaukwardflattery. Forartslikethesepreferr'd,admir'd,caress'd, Theyfirstinvadeyourtable,thenyourbreast; Exploreyoursecretswithinsidiousart, Watchtheweakhour,andransackalltheheart.... (11.111-16,129-31,152-55) Theeffectofthemacro-pastoraldisplacementisareversalofvaluesthat throwsthedominantperspectiveonLondoncorruptionintoquestion.The ruralandtheurbanbleedtogether—arelativizingeffectthatJohnsonalso achievesinthespaceofasinglecouplet:"Scarcecanourfields,suchcrowds atTyburndie,/Withhempthegallowsandthefleetsupply"(11.242-43). ThebeatusMeofHorace'ssecondEpodeinformsabroadspectrumof eighteenth-centurythoughtwiththeparadigmofapastoralretreatfromthe 14/MCKEON caresofpubliclifetothecontentmentofprivateretirement.Inhisverse epistle"TomyHonour'dKinsman"(1700),JohnDrydenemploysarange ofclassicalandChristianpastoraltopicstopraisehiscousin,"shunningCivil Rage,"asaparagonofprivatevirtue."WeseehimasthepacificJ...