The political identity of Andrew Marvell (review)

154 Reviews persons (human and supernatural), groups, places, animals, and objects are listed with references to the chapters in which they appear. Byock's work wdl be of value to those both within and outside thefieldof medieval Norse studies because of both the quality of his translation and the wide-ranging erudition of his introduction. In this regard, it is unfortunate that it was considered outside the scope of the book to include references to scholarship on the saga and on the many interesting matters Byock raises in his introduction. Judy Quinn Department of EngUsh University of Sydney Condren, Conal and A. D. Cousins, eds, The political identity of Andrew Marvell, Aldershot, Scolar Press, 1990; cloth; pp. ix, 221; R. R. P. AUS$79.50 [distributed in Australia by Gower publishing]. Identity, 'sameness' etymologicaUy, is an unexpected term for the elusive and contradictory MarveU. Not surprisingly the seven contributors to this valuable book do not write about the 'same' Marvell. The editors engage in some expert dialectics to unify the coUection, eventually constituting the identity of Marvell as a Wittgensteinian family of texts. Although the book as a whole shows a many-faced Marvell, some essays treat single faces. William Lamont skilfully reconstructs the controversial milieu of two of his lesser-known pamphlets of the 1670s in order to identify his religious position and then reads this position back into Marvell's earlier writings. Though he manages this procedure moderately and plausibly, it inevitably remains questionable. Lamont surprisingly perpetuates the canard that the revival of Marvell's poetic reputation was effected single-handed by T. S. Eliot in 1921. See the contrary evidence collected by E. S. Donno in Andrew Marvell: the critical heritage, and her summary, pp. 9-18. Conal Condren elucidates with authority the historical and theoretical impUcations of MarveU's Growth of Popery and arbitrary government, employing a bracing epigrammatism along with grammatical habits of startling idiosyncrasy. A. D. Cousins and Stephen Zwicker trace unifying ethical themes in 'Upon Appleton House' and the satires of the 1660s. These writers bring to bear on their texts, with depth and assurance, Calvin's doctrine of moderation (Cousins) and the Restoration nexus of sexual and political discourses (Zwicker). However, Zwicker's comments on sexuality in Marvell's lyrics are tendentiously brief. Moreover, I do not see textual warrant for his claim that the conclusion of Dryden's Astraea Redux exemplifies the 'twinning of . . . sexual abundance and commercial triumph.' Other writers address more directiy Marvell's variability. N. H. Keeble surveys his studiously neutral constituency letters, showing impressive though Reviews 155 unobtrusive learning on Restoration matters, from the pervasive political anxieties of the period to the times when the mails left London for provincial towns. Keeble concludes with pregnant suggestions about Marvell the letterwriting M . P. as another Marvellian persona. Christopher Wortham foUows the evolution of Marvell's attitudes in the major Cromwell poems, relating them to his generic practice. Wortham writes interestingly on the 'Horatian Ode' as a Hobbesian text, but not persuasively on its Pindaric character. Pindar's strophe and antistrophe rarely serve the thematic function Wortham attributes to them. MarveU's admission of the 'contrary view' in his treatment of Charles is less Pindaric than Horatian. Compare Horace's admiring treatment of Cleopatra at the end of an ode celebrating her death (Carm. i.37). Annabel Patterson expands, with admirable curiosity and resourcefulness, an earlier discussion of the arrangement of Marvell's Miscellaneous Poems of 1681. Her scrutiny uncovers layer upon layer of significance in the volume, though her new 'compromise hypothesis' about the problematic 'Tom May's Death' is too cursory to be fuUy understandable, much less convincing. The book is noteworthy overall, perhaps, for the alertness with which the contributors attend to MarveU's generic virtuosity and for the complexity of the continuities and discontinuities they discern between the Commonwealth and the Restoration Marvell. The longer essays, however, would have benefitted from more stringent editing and the book's twenty or so misprints or miseditings are, regrettably, not excessive by current standards. Anthony Mdler Department of EngUsh University of Sydney Englander, David, D. Norman, R. O'Day and W. R. Owens, eds, Culture and belief in...