“Forging New Paths”: A Report on “Irish Modernisms: Gaps, Conjectures, Possibilities,” University of Vienna, 29 September-1 October 2016

It is difficult to begin this report without a mention of the beautiful Viennese weather that accompanied the 2016 event at the University of Vienna. The dappling of rich autumnal shades coupled with very pleasant temperatures offered a welcome respite from a relatively grey Irish September. Appropriately titled “Irish Modernism: Gaps, Conjectures, Possibilities,” the conference, which was hosted by the Vienna Centre for Irish Studies and the University of Vienna’s Department of English and American Studies, offered attendees an enticing foray into the limits of the field of Irish modernism.

The objective of the conference was not only to challenge and extend the canonical parameters of Irish modernism but also to unveil neglected forms, writers, and influences. Over the course of the three days, one of the more interesting critical approaches that cropped up was the insistence not merely on finding ways to subsume marginalized writers and artists into the grand narrative of Irish modernism but to question the limits of the canon that led to their exclusion and marginalization.

To begin, a word on the keynote addresses: the conference organizers must be applauded for the quality of these talks. Both Patricia Coughlan and Lucy Collins delivered papers that brilliantly encapsulated the spirit of the conference. Coughlan’s lecture discussed the reception of Elizabeth Bowen within the critical field of Irish modernism. Challenging and resisting various critical formulations of Bowen’s work, Coughlan offered a wealth of interpretative insight, which not only called for a reassessment of Bowen’s place in the canon but also the parameters of critical discourse on Irish modernism more generally. Rather than reading Bowen as a writer on the verge of being welcomed into the canon, Coughlan argued that it is now time to consider her as a staple of Irish modernism.

Collins’s address was equally impressive and, in this author’s opinion, best embodied the objectives of the conference. Shedding light on previously neglected Irish women poets, such as Sheila Wingfield and Blanaid Salkeld, Collins was impressive in her insistence on close readings of these writers outside of any critical lens or pretense. In doing so, she gave a platform to an entire generation of forgotten Irish women poets, arguing that, rather than attempting to shoehorn these writers into the accepted canon, a more rewarding venture would be to question and study the various processes by which they have been excluded for so long. The patience and care with which Collins framed the poetry of these writers was marvelous as their work was allowed to dazzle the audience with some particularly outstanding verse.

The canon of Irish modernism was also included in the program although in surprising and rewarding ways. Samuel Beckett, for example, was afforded an entire panel that probed the borders of his philosophical and poetic forebears. Einat Adar traced the influence of George Berkeley on Irish modernism, specifically on Beckett’s theory of art. Resisting the dominant Schopenhauerian reading of Beckett’s works, Matthew Fogarty argued that Beckett’s ever-evolving dramatic aesthetic in the 1950s and beyond could be read as a dialogue with the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. Finally, Edward Lee-Six discussed the often-neglected influence of the English Romantics on Beckett’s poetics. While these papers dealt with the now canonical Beckett, they each in their own way explored often marginalized perspectives on his work yielding a very rewarding discussions and forging new paths in the study of such a monumental figure.

Joyce too was variously represented at the conference. James Fraser spoke on Joyce’s challenge to discourses on Irish heroism. He argued that Joyce’s refusal of Yeatsian heroism was indelibly linked to an exploration of a “heroic” national identity that was doomed to self-annihilating martyrdom. Joseph Brooker explored the impact close reading has on canonical Joycean criticism. Discussing critics such as Hugh Kenner, Fritz Senn, and Andrew Gibson, Brooker looked at the way in which close readings of Joyce’s works force a multiplicity of critical responses. Finally, Michelle Witten delivered a paper on Joyce’s engagement...