Tim Guman

Digital Humanities Project:

Analytical Response

            In this essay, Thomas Marriott responds to two critics who wrote a negative review of his book Female Conduct, Marriott speaks about himself in third person throughout the essay, referring to himself as “The Author of Female Conduct” (3) and then simply as “the Author.” The book that has been judged by the critic is a female conduct book, “being an essay on the art of pleasing. To be practised by the fair sex, before, and after marriage. A poem, in two books” (Open Library). It seems like none of the remarks made by the critics that Marriott defends himself against have anything to do with his philosophy on female conduct but are rather strictly attacks on his skill and style as a writer. His essay is titled as a modernized version of Horace’s 20th epistle, in which Horace defends himself against critics. This modernization only encompasses roughly the final third of the text. He spends the first two thirds of his essay directly responding to the attacks made by his critics and disparaging the entire field of literary criticism.

            The first critic he responds to “deals in all the small ware of criticism” (2) according to Marriott. He argues that rather than being critically productive, literary critics are simply talentless and petty leeches who intentionally deceive the public and try to show off their pretended wit. Marriott says of this critic, “the principal Aim of his Critical Review is, to mislead and deceive the Judgment of his Readers, by Misrepresentations, and false glosses, and to disparage, and depreciate every New Book, that has not some Recommendation to his Partiality, or some Connection of Interest with him, or his Confederates” (5). This is a huge accusation that seeks to portray his critics as talentless hacks. He even goes so far as to compare the critic to Death itself. This metaphor makes the critic seem like some sort of supernatural evil power: “it may be reckoned a Wonder, that any Thing should escape his petulant censure, for, like Death itself, these small Critics spare nothing” (3).

            He compares his own talent and originality to the critic’s lack of these attributes. The critic accuses Marriott of being too subtle. Marriott responds to this by claiming that “to conceal Art is the Master-piece of Art” (8). The critic, on the other hand, he groups in with people who value “A pert Vivacity, Wit’s Counterfeit” which “Is oft mistaken, for true genuine Wit” (10). Superficially he insults the critics skill and intelligence as he does many times throughout the essay, although he also subliminally challenges the critics manhood by describing him with two feminine words, “pert” and “vivacity.” In Millenium Hall the narrator describes his friend Lamont with the exact same words in regards to his wit: “Thus that vivacity, which, properly qualified, might have become true wit, degenerated into pertness and impertinence” (55). This reveals the author’s attitude that silliness, vanity, and frivolity are all distinctly female attributes and reinforces the binary developing during the 18th century that to be male is to be strictly and distinctly not effeminate.

            Later in the essay, he uses a Greek fable to describe the work of literary criticism. In this particular fable, a critic seeks a reward from Jupiter for diligently finding every flaw in a book. Jupiter tells him to separate the chaff from a large quantity of wheat and he will receive him a reward. The critic spends many hours completing the task. When he is finished Jupiter tells him for his reward he can keep the useless chaff. The moral of this fable is that critical review is a fruitless labor that produces no real value: “he had so diligently sifted and cleared the Grain from the Dross, in hopes of getting Bread for his Pains” (20).

            This essay by Marriott is an interesting look into the intense animosity between authors and critics in 18th century English literature. Clearly, some authors had a very low opinion of literary critics, whereas today critics are held in higher esteem—at least within the field of academia. In the modernization itself of Horace’s epistle, written in verse form, Marriott compares his female conduct book to a female herself. In this case, he likens the book to his own daughter, “bred in private, like a rural Maid” (23). He both celebrates and laments her departure from himself:

You languish […] to roam

And will no longer be confin’d at Home;

Seen by a Few, you now repining Sigh,

Fond to be gaz’d on by the public Eye […]

Go, bold advent’rer! fly away with Speed,

Go, where your giddy Inclinations lead.

But go forewarn’d, from me this Lesson learn, ‘When gone from me, you can never return’

            In this way Mariott takes advantage of the image of the inexperienced, artless female and uses it as a metaphor for his own work. It reinforces the idea that females are meant to be sheltered and protected–that they possess a virtuous innocence that should be fostered. In this metaphor, also, the female is dependent on and a product of the intellectual male.

Works Cited

Marriott, Thomas. “The Twentieth Epistle of Horace to His Book, Modernized by the Author of Female Conduct, and Applied to His Own Book. And Intended as an Answer to the Remarks on His Book, Made by the Writer of the Critical Review, and by the Writer of the Monthly Review.”  (Open Library). N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2016.

Scott, Sarah, and Gary Kelly. A Description of Millenium Hall. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview, 1995. Print.

To edit “The Twentith epistle of Horace to his book, modernized by the author of Female conduct, and applied to his own book,” the need for focus and diligence took place. There were several pages with errors and not a single page required a lack of work. Errors ranged from spelling mistakes to wrong punctuation marks. Most of the pages were aligned correctly, but sometimes the lines were close to one another altering the ability to effectively read each line. This was fixed by using Type Wright. Another common change was switching a fancy looking “f” to an “s” (10, 11, 12). This was an easy fix yet quite infuriating when words could potentially be spelt with either an “f” or an “s”. Luckily, overall the pages had little smudges and could were legible in its original state, although fixing the errors will inevitably continue to make the document easier to read. Although the work was relatively easy-going, it is an important task that needed to be done so its content doesn’t get lost through time and technological advances.

While reading the pages for content rather than for clarity and errors, the elements of a conduct book occur. This book does what most conduct books aim to do. Present a good quality and explain the importance and how to lose it. In this conduct book, the speaker states, “Ne’er to the character of Wit pretend. This often loses, seldom gains a friend;”(11). The element desired in this case is the “Wit” and without Wit or rather feigned Wit, it appears the ability to have friends and maintain the relationship is lost. This is similar to other conduct books where Women are told to be chaste in order to be fulfilled by marriage. Women must remain a certain condition if they are to continue relationships such as marriage.   

On page twenty-three, the author iterates, “Go, where your giddy Inclinations lead. / But go forewarn’d, from me this Lesson learn, / ‘When gone from me, you can never return.” He is speaking on the subject of women and diminishing the value of their dreams and goals (inclinations) by describing them as merely giddy wants. To fortify this, the author says that they may never return if they follow their inclinations which now not only devalues the goals of women, but punishes them for following such an inclination. This is relevant to the prior example of women’s supposed need to remain chaste. As women may develop a want to have sex for pleasure rather than duty to a man, there seems to be an inclination in her life. It doesn’t necessarily have to be reduced to giddy, but can still be giddy to her. And by indulging in such sexual nature, women are often shamed by men and society and are never meant to gain a husband because of it. They can never return to the men in society. While this is untrue, conduct books reiterate this concept of shame and chastity and “The Twentith epistle of Horace to his book, modernized by the author of Female conduct, and applied to his own book,” definitely pushes this agenda.

He sells this truth by claiming he is authentic. He promotes his fame and poetic nature heavily throughout. He even refers to himself in third-person as “the Author of Female Conduct.” This builds credit as readers will see that the author of Female Conduct would be the most knowledgable and thus trust much of what he states. While claiming this he also bashes his critics. On page six, he describes his critic’s “Ignorance of the Classic Poets.” So not only does he build up his credibility, he diminishes the credibility of those against him so that readers are less inclined to trust his critics, who may have valid critics to his conduct book. Thus readers are to believe all of his inclinations of how women and men should behave.

Works Cited:

Marriott, T.  “The Twentieth Epistle of Horace to His Book, Modernized by the Author of Female Conduct, and Applied to His Own Book. And Intended as an Answer to the Remarks on His Book, Made by the Writer of the Critical Review, and by the Writer of the Monthly Review.” (35) Published by W. Owen, at Homer’s Head, near Temple-Bar, 1759.

While editing our team’s document, “The Twentieth epistle of Horace to his book, modernized by the author of Female conduct, and applied to his own book,” I was expecting to read mostly about how females should behave. Instead, I was shocked to find that the author spent the whole article defending his writing against critics. His defense of his own writing and unusual style of the preface helped me gain a deeper understanding of how important reputation and masculinity were for male writers in the eighteenth century. 

Reputation was everything in the eighteenth century. If someone did not have a good reputation, they were seen as less than other men, and could even be viewed as having undesirable female characteristics, “As a result of these caveats and observations, changing notions of honor and civility have added several layers of complexity to the story of an incredibly sharply defined set of masculine identities” (English Masculinities, 15). To criticize a man’s reputation was to question how masculine he was, a cruel insult in an era of strict gender roles. This is captured in action in Lady Mary Wortley Montagu’s poem, “The Reasons that Induced Dr. S to write a Poem call’d the Lady’s Dressing room,” Lady Montagu destroyed Jonathan Swift by discrediting his reputation as an honorable man. She knew that insinuating that Swift went to a prostitute and had sexual troubles was the best revenge there could be.

As we’ve learned in class, the title and preface often reveal a lot about how the author wants his audience to read the text. In “The Twentieth epistle of Horace,” the preface captures how delicate male reputations were in the eighteenth century. Under the title are the words “Intended as an Answer to the Remarks on his Book, made by the Writer of the Critical Review, and by the Writer of the Monthly Review” (1). Instead of using this introduction to focus on the idea of a conduct book, the author chooses to let the audience know that he’s focusing instead on the criticism he’s received and to protect his reputation from further insult. While the insults his critics use against him are never directly stated, this aggressive defense of his reputation could likely stem from his masculinity being questioned after writing a female conduct novel (Female Conduct, .the third edition). As Hitchcock points out in English Masculinities 1660-1800, women were viewed as both physically and mentally weaker than men, so being compared to one would be the ultimate insult to an author, “The implications of this transition are usually taken to mean that ‘woman’ was constructed in difference from ‘man’, not only sexually passive but physically weaker than men and because of the presumed homology between body and mind, mentally weaker as well” (8). Accusing a man of acting in a feminine manner is to insult his mind, his body, and his sexual history, three things eighteenth century men value highly.

The structure of the piece is very different from what we’ve seen in previous eighteenth-century texts. Instead of the traditional linear form we’ve seen in novels and essays, the author continues to go back to what he states in the introduction. There is very little content that relates to the actual topic of the piece, which are instructions for how women should behave. Each time it seems as if he is going to begin talking about proper etiquette for ladies, he returns to what he says in the introduction. In other texts, the preface is used by the author as a disclaimer to mold the way the readers read the book. For example, the preface in Roxana tells the readers that if they see anything improper in the text, it’s the dirty mind of the reader and not the fault of the writer, “And all without raising a single idea throughout the whole, that shall shock the exacts purity, even in the warmest of those instances where Purity would be most apprehensible” (31). This way, the writer frees himself from any criticism by assuring the audience that it was written with good intentions. He then continues with the novel without restating the thesis as obviously. The author of The Twentieth epistle takes a different route, and instead spends the entire text referring back to his preface. Even halfway through the novel, he continues to refer back to his preface, “By this we see, how detestable and contemptible these two Roman Scriblers had rendered themselves to all Men of Candor and Genius, by their arrogance” (17). This intense focus on the preface shows how desperate the author is to restore his reputation and reclaim his masculinity.

Editing “The Twentieth epistle of Horace to his book, modernized by the author of Female conduct, and applied to his own book” helped me understand how different the writing style and structure was in the eighteenth century compared to today, but the most important thing I took from this document was an understanding of how a man’s masculinity depended heavily on his reputation, and that honor was so important that they would rather defend their honor than write about the subject of their book.

Bibliography

Hitchcock, T. “English Masculinities.” (n.d.): n. pag. Web. 26 Apr. 2016.

Marriott, T.  “The Twentieth Epistle of Horace to His Book, Modernized by the Author of Female Conduct, and Applied to His Own Book. And Intended as an Answer to the Remarks on His Book, Made by the Writer of the Critical Review, and by the Writer of the Monthly Review.” (35) Published by W. Owen, at Homer’s Head, near Temple-Bar, 1759.

Editing  The Twentieth epistle of Horace to his book, modernized by the author of Female conduct, and applied to his own book, by Thomas Marriott on TypeWright was surprisingly interesting. Once I found a rhythm, I spotted common errors easily. The author repeated  words like “truth,” “virtue” and “morals” over and over again. Though they were not the words that needed fixing, these words provided context clues. This helped me determine the meaning of other words in the sentence and understand the author’s perspective. Though the title indicated that Marriott got his inspiration from a conduct book, I did not know that there would be a lot of similarities between his book and the conduct books we read in class.

Marriott’s book reflects the methods used by authors of conduct books during the eighteenth century. The first thing that drew my attention was the title. The author used an epistle to create a conduct book. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, an epistle is a literary work in the form of a letter and usually written in verse. While conduct books like Pamela and Evelina were not written in verse, the protagonists communicated their situations and thoughts through letters. Authors of conduct books used the epistle form to add a sense of reality to their writing. For example, the editor of Pamela stated “if these be laudable or worthy recommendations, the Editor of the following Letters, which have their foundation both in Truth and Nature, ventures to assert, that all these ends are obtained here, together.” (31). By emphasizing that the letters are founded in truth and nature, Richardson reveals that the readers during the eighteenth century wanted a level of truth in their writing in order to connect with it. Marriott applied this logic to his book as he stated “and from what Source, religious Frenzy flows; That marks the Bounds of Virtue, and of Wit, And shows the real, from the Counterfeit; That, from primeval Time, the Truth displays” (30). This highlights that religion and virtue go hand in hand in order to reveal the truth about a person. Also, Marriott upholds and celebrates virtue just as Richardson and Burney highlight in their books. He says “for virtue only can give true renown,” (30) reinforcing the importance of virtue in the eighteenth century.

Furthermore, in the later part of the document, the author focuses on telling the reader his purpose and what he hopes the reader will get from reading it. Though this is unusual since we usually read this in the preface of the conduct book. This structure indicates that the author tried to ensure that no one misunderstood the reasoning behind his book. He states “that I ne’er thirsted, for poetic Fame, That to instruct the Fair, is all my Aim, Fond of your moral, and religious Theme” (29). In disregarding poetic Fame, the author tries to highlight his authenticity. As a conduct book, it becomes important for him to establish his credibility. He therefore tries to establish himself as reliable by first describing himself as a teacher (31) and says that his purpose is “To give Instruction, only to the Fair” (33).  He ascribes his conduct book to women highlighting that virtue and morals were gendered in eighteenth century society.

Overall, the writers during the eighteenth century used the letter writing form to structure conduct books. This emphasized the importance of virtue and morals for women. In the conduct books read this semester, women must uphold these attributes, but men fight against it without any consequence. In all, the gendered nature of conduct books speaks to the fact that the eighteenth-century society limited the ways in which women could view themselves. 

Works Cited

“Epistle.” Home : Oxford English Dictionary. Web. 30 Apr. 2016.

Marriott, T. (1759) “Marriott, T.  “The Twentieth Epistle of Horace to His Book, Modernized by the Author of Female Conduct, and Applied to His Own Book. And Intended as an Answer to the Remarks on His Book, Made by the Writer of the Critical Review, and by the Writer of the Monthly Review.” Published by W. Owen, at Homer’s Head, near Temple-Bar, 1759

Richardson, Samuel. “Preface by the Editor.” Preface. Pamela: Or, Virtue Rewarded. New York:   Penguin Group, 1985. 31. Print.