One place one could go with this line of inquiry is to emphasize the FQ's
connection to popular culture, since the Sternhold and Hopkins Psalms were,
if I remember correctly, possibly the most popular, certainly among the
most popular, books published around this period. A reader of the FQ would,
quite possibly, have recognized the 8 and 6 pattern as something familiar,
and possibly, comforting. In addition, the connection might have lent the
FQ some of the cultural authority of the S & H Psalms, not unimportant
given Spenser's evident anxiety about his epic project as manifested in the
proems as well as other places.
Peter C. Herman
At 07:28 AM 4/19/2005, you wrote:
>Re. the four-line arguments, Ken Borris made an intriguing suggestion some
>years ago at SCSC that these quatrains derive from or point to the
>Sternhold and Hopkins Psalms. They are, of course, in the same 8 and 6
>meter, and they have a similarly simple -- self-consciously I think --
>diction (quite different from the rest of the poem -- probably one reason
>it's been suggested they were stuck in by the printer). There are a number
>of reasons why this might be interesting or meaningful. For instance, it
>aligns FQ (lightly) with the plain style of 16th c. Protestantism, and it
>suggests a connection with metrical Psalms, the preeminent, and most
>popular, divine poetry (this works especially well for Book 1, of course,
>thinking both of the virtue of holiness and of St. George's "common"
>origins, but maybe it's an idea Spenser came up with primarily for this
>book?). In this context, it's also interesting (as KB pointed out), that
>in the original printing of FQ, "Canto" was abbreviated as "Cant.," which
>might also suggest "Canticle" (the non-Psalmic hymns, like the Magnificat,
>Venite, etc., also printed in Sternhold and Hopkins). I'm not sure how
>much further one can go with this, but it seems more interesting (and
>plausible) than the idea that Spenser had nothing to do with these little
>headings.
>
>
>Hannibal
>
>
>
>
>At 07:59 AM 4/19/05 +0000, you wrote:
>>All ---
>>
>>Now the focus has shifted from the sheer length of FQ to precise sums of
>>lines. The obvious next step is: do these sums carry meaning? I'm aware
>>that this question has been batted around, but I've lost touch with the
>>pros and cons, so far as the big sums are concerned.
>>
>>I'm convinced -- on the basis of some spot checking, nothing systematic --
>>that the number of stanzas in a canto is often significant, and cantos
>>often divide into two significant halves, or (if the total is an odd
>>number) contain a significant central stanza and a central line. And
>>there are significant midpoints in whole Books of the poem; etc.
>>
>>And it's been shown that Spenser was following precedents in his
>>architectonics -- others are more up to date on this scholarship than I am.
>>
>>Now, before I end: I'm aware of one oddity that will throw David's numbers
>>off a little. If you look in Hamilton's revised edition of FQ, including
>>the textual notes (p. 745), you'll see that III.vi.45.4 ("And dearest
>>loue,") is defective (a half-line), and also that that half-line is absent
>>from 1590 and 1596; it appears for the first time in 1609. How curious is
>>this? Are there other instances of lines missing or defective?
>>
>>I vaguely recall an observation somewhere that the Aeneid similarly
>>contains some defective lines. Is some significance attached to these
>>anomalies?
>>
>>Let me throw in a comment on the 4-line "arguments" preceding each
>>canto. As I recall, it's been suggested that these are not Spenser's but
>>the additions of someone in Ponsonby's shop. I doubt that. Still, I'm
>>not comfortable counting up those lines and lumping them into the totals:
>>they seem integral to FQ as a book but not essential to FQ as a poem.
>>
>>Cheers, Jon Quitslund
>>
>> -------------- Original message ----------------------
>>From: David Wilson-Okamura <[log in to unmask]>
>> > David L. Miller wrote:
>> > > Speaking of the list, a couple of queries: why no numbers for the
>> > > Odyssey? Do your number for the FQ include the Mutability Cantos? both
>> > > endings to Book 3?
>> >
>> > As of five minutes ago, there were 12,109 lines in the Greek text of the
>> > Odyssey.
>> >
>> > FQ numbers are more complicated. The total I gave came from a computer
>> > line-count that was posted here several years ago. However, digging
>> > around in my FQ notecards I find a canto-by-canto tabulation that I did
>> > a year or two ago (I don't remember why), and this produces some
>> > different totals, as follows.
>> >
>> > Stanza and line totals:
>> > -----------------------
>> > FQ I-III (1590) 1993 stanzas 17937 lines
>> > FQ I-VI (1596) 3732 33588
>> > Mut. (1609) 116 1044
>> > Total (1596+1609) 3848 34632
>> >
>> > Total number of Spenserian stanzas written for FQ (including 3 stanzas
>> > discarded from 1590 text of FQ 3.12) = 3851 (34659 lines).
>> >
>> > If one includes the 4-line legenda that preface every canto except 7.8,
>> > the line counts go up:
>> >
>> > FQ I-III (1590) 18081 lines
>> > FQ I-VI (1596) 33876
>> > Mut. (1609) 1052
>> > Total (1596+1609) 34928
>> >
>> > Total lines published including discarded stanzas from 1590: 34955. But
>> > when asked "How long is the FQ?" I will from this day forward answer
>> > "34,928 lines long."
>> >
>> > P.S. I put the stanza counts in a spreadsheet to do the math. If anyone
>> > wants it, email me privately at [log in to unmask] and I will send it as
>> > an attachment.
>> >
>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Dr. David Wilson-Okamura http://virgil.org [log in to unmask]
>> > English Department Virgil reception, discussion, documents, &c
>> > East Carolina University Sparsa et neglecta coegi. -- Claude Fauchet
>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Hannibal Hamlin
>Assistant Professor of English
>The Ohio State University
>1680 University Drive
>Mansfield, OH 44906
>419-755-4277
>[log in to unmask]
|
