I'm finding the same dismissal with Samuel Daniel, admittedly a less
influential poet than Spenser but still one who punches at least at his
weight.
Ian Lipke
-----Original Message-----
From: Sidney-Spenser Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, 6 February 2009 12:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: recent literary references to Spenser
Kevin,
Your point is certainly a serious one, and while it is hard to gauge actual
reading habits, course offerings, common syllabi, comprehensive exam text
lists, etc. suggest that Spenser is not read as much as he might be or
should be (I got through a literature B.A. in '89 with only the
Epithalamion and a few Amoretti in my 200 literary survey, and yet with a
whole year of Shakespeare!). In fact, I have sometimes been surprised and
shocked at the level of dismissal that Spenser receives even from
Renaissance specialists and enthusiasts. I have been taken aback at how
scholarly colleagues are willing (too willing) to tell me that they "don't
like" or "don't read" Spenser, a complaint that usually follows my
self-description as a Spensersian or working on Edmund Spenser. I listen
at times, and wonder, "Would anyone be willing to say: 'I don't read
Shakespeare/Milton/Donne/Sidney/More/Marlowe, etc.' without feeling simply
ashamed at his/her lack of curiosity and depth of learning?" Spenserians
have poked their fair share of fun at dear ole' Barnabe Googe, but hey, we
do read Googe (a little). Perhaps this is one individual's anecdotal
experiences, but I would love to have these episodes countered by "Oh, I
would love to learn more about Spenser..." What gives?
Bruce Danner
> [Original Message]
> From: Kevin Farnham <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 2/5/2009 7:42:19 PM
> Subject: Re: recent literary references to Spenser
>
> Well, I'm glad I asked the question. The sources of my opinion that
> Spenser is largely unread today were: 1) my own experience (BA in
> English, in 1977, without ever reading Spenser; then it took me decades
> before I finally started reading, and I'm relatively well read for
> someone whose profession isn't academia); 2) something I read in a
> Harold Bloom book that said Spenser is perhaps the greatest poet whose
> works are not much read today; 3) I don't know anyone aside from people
> on this list who have read Spenser.
>
> One block to my reading Spenser was a gloss I saw a long time ago that
> said FQ was a book about "manners". Look at the titles of each book, and
> that indeed seems plausible.
>
> The turning point for me came when I read the opening lines of the
> Shepheard's Calender, "To His Booke" -- and I immediately recognized
> that a "great" idea of mine (I was going to write a book titled
> "Apostles" in which each story is intended to go into the world, like a
> missionary, etc.) had already been done by Spenser. At which point I
> asked the list about the origins of "Goe little booke" and found that
> Spenser wasn't the first to do that.
>
> One reason I asked the question is that I plan to "use" Spenser in some
> of the works I intend to write (not much in the first book that's
> currently under way -- but a lot in the much bigger second book --
> should I get to write it). So, I was wondering if significantly
> referencing Spenser might be somewhat unique in modern literature.
> Apparently the answer to that question is "no."
>
> Another difficulty behind my question is that I've read very little that
> was written after the early 20th Century, though I'm trying to correct
> that. Wallace Stevens is on my "high-priority" bookshelf above my work
> desk, as is Paul Celan. John Hollander, mentioned several times in this
> conversation, sounds interesting.
>
> Anyway, I'm glad so many people found the question interesting!
>
> Kevin
>
> -----------------------
>
>
> Anne Prescott wrote:
> > I just get vexed by the bit that Kevin cites (I was irritated when I
first
> > read it too) and go into the hunting gathering mode.
|