An Essay Upon Projects by Daniel Defoe, and: The Consolidator by Daniel Defoe, and: Political and Economic Writings of Daniel Defoe by Daniel Defoe (review)

52 dicrous pitch. For example, ‘‘In an important scene in Macklin’s The Spoiled Child, the uncle tells the mother that the only way to raise a virtuous child is to ‘check, correct, deter’ the child from doing wrong. . . . Constant discipline and vigilance will produce a docile subject. This same logic of surveillance and repetitive training explains the methods and goals of the censorship provisions of the Licensing Act.’’One might argue that Mr. Kinservik himself could occasionally use the touch of a blue quill: ‘‘like Gay does,’’ ‘‘Like Steele had urged.’’ Mr. Kinservik’s fingers itch to transform The Historical Register into the Sermon on the Mount. His first criterion for satire is that it be ‘‘corrective.’’ No one who has studied Pope and Swift could agree with this judgment. Pope’s Dunciad offers no escape, even for the poet’s muse; and all of Swift’s important works embody the futility of satire, both in intention and in effect: ‘‘Satyr is a sort of Glass, wherein Beholders dogenerallydiscovereverybody’sFacebuttheirOwn.’’Mr.KinservikjudgesFielding’s satire ‘‘punitive,’’‘‘topical,’’and ‘‘metonymic’’—the opposite of corrective. Macklin’s so-called ‘‘satire,’’ on the other hand, offers ‘‘fuller psychological creations, not onedimensional mouthpieces for given social, political, or aesthetic viewpoints’’; The School for Husbands ‘‘captures the dark tone and psychologically rich characterization that define the new satire’’; one exchange, in particular,aptlydisplaysthe‘‘stark,earnest tone.’’ Where is the pointed wit in Macklin’s ‘‘satires’’? Where is the attack? They do not exist, of course, because Mr. Kinservik disapproves. Instead, herecommends‘‘sympathetic satires’’that eliminate the distance between authors and audiences. Such plays, usually called ‘‘sentimental comedies,’’have been the subject of critical scrutinyatleast since Goldsmith, but Mr. Kinservik rejects the term. He argues that Goldsmith and modern critics have inappropriately disjoined ‘‘sentiment’’ and ‘‘satire.’’ Such is Mr. Kinservik’s customary method of dealing with opponents: he cites and then dismisses them, ‘‘modern criticism’’ being his bane. Nora F. Crow Smith College DANIEL DEFOE. An Essay Upon Projects, ed. Joyce D. Kennedy, Michael Seidel, and Maximillian E. Novak. The Stoke Newington Daniel Defoe Edition. NY: AMS, 1999. $96.75. . The Consolidator, ed. Michael Seidel, Maximillian E. Novak, and Joyce D. Kennedy . The Stoke Newington Daniel Defoe Edition. NY: AMS, 2001. $96.75. . Political and Economic Writings of Daniel Defoe. General Editors: W. R. Owens and P. N. Furbank. 8 vols. Vol. 1: Constitutional Theory, ed. P. N. Furbank. Vol. 2: Party Politics, ed. J. A. Downie. Vol. 3: Dissent, ed. W. R. Owens. Vol. 4: Union with Scotland, ed. D. W. Hayton. Vol. 5: International Relations, ed. P. N. Furbank. Vol. 6: Finance, ed. John McVeagh. Vol. 7: Trade, ed. John McVeagh. Vol. 8: Social Reform, ed. W. R. Owens. London: Pickering & Chatto, 2000. $950. There has never been an adequate edition of the collected (much less the complete) works of Defoe, the man once described by Maximillian Novak as ‘‘the English 53 Voltaire.’’No other writer has contributed significant works to as many different genres of literary expression, and few writers have played so important a part in the formation of modern political, social, and economic thought. So it seems unaccountable that, for the better part of three centuries, his works were reprinted, if at all, only in fragmentary editions that reflected the idiosyncratic interests of his editors rather than the full range and measure of his accomplishment. This neglect may be due to the anonymity of most of his works, the depth of his engagement in the controversies of his own time, and the slowness of theacademy to recognizeDefoeasamajorfigurewhohasmadeyounger scholars reluctant to devote their professional lives to unscrambling the mysteries of Defoe’s life and the meanings of his works. Though the attribution wars continue, there is now general agreement, even among the skeptics, that at least half of the items listed in J. R. Moore’s 1971 Checklist are indeed by Defoe, a consensus that provides the basis for a substantial edition of his works. The emergence of cultural criticism has encouraged the study of literary texts in terms of the ‘‘sub-literary’’ works that are their context, a development that brings all of Defoe’s minor writings into play. And poststructuralism...