{"id":256,"date":"2016-05-03T06:21:41","date_gmt":"2016-05-03T10:21:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/?p=256"},"modified":"2018-06-25T07:43:14","modified_gmt":"2018-06-25T11:43:14","slug":"digital-humanities-project-analytical-response","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/2016\/05\/03\/digital-humanities-project-analytical-response\/","title":{"rendered":"Digital Humanities Project- Analytical Response"},"content":{"rendered":"

Tim Guman<\/span><\/p>\n

Digital Humanities Project:<\/b><\/p>\n

Analytical Response<\/b><\/p>\n

           <\/span> In this essay, Thomas Marriott responds to two critics who wrote a negative review of his book <\/span>Female Conduct<\/em>, <\/span>Marriott speaks about himself in third person throughout the essay, referring to himself as \u201cThe Author of <\/span>Female Conduct<\/span><\/i>\u201d (3) and then simply as \u201cthe Author.\u201d The book that has been judged by the critic is a female conduct book, <\/span>\u201cbeing an essay on the art of pleasing. To be practised by the fair sex, before, and after marriage. A poem, in two books\u201d (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\u2019s 20<\/span>th<\/span> 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.<\/span><\/p>\n

           <\/span> The first critic he responds to \u201cdeals in all the small ware of criticism\u201d (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, <\/span>\u201cthe principal Aim of his <\/span>Critical Review<\/span><\/i> 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\u201d (5). This is a huge accusation that seeks to portray his critics as talentless hacks.<\/span> 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: <\/span>\u201cit may be reckoned a Wonder, that any Thing should escape his petulant censure, for, like Death itself, these small Critics spare nothing\u201d (3).<\/span><\/p>\n

           <\/span> He compares his own talent and originality to the critic\u2019s lack of these attributes. The critic accuses Marriott of being too subtle. Marriott responds to this by claiming that \u201cto conceal Art is the Master-piece of Art\u201d (8). The critic, on the other hand, he groups in with people who value \u201c<\/span>A pert Vivacity, Wit\u2019s Counterfeit<\/span><\/i>\u201d which \u201c<\/span>Is oft mistaken, for true genuine Wit<\/span><\/i>\u201d (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, \u201cpert\u201d and \u201cvivacity.\u201d In Millenium Hall the narrator describes his friend Lamont with the exact same words in regards to his wit: \u201cThus that vivacity, which, properly qualified, might have become true wit, degenerated into pertness and impertinence\u201d (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 <\/span>not<\/span><\/i> effeminate.<\/span><\/p>\n

           <\/span> 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: \u201che had so diligently sifted and cleared the Grain from the Dross, in hopes of getting Bread for his Pains\u201d (20).<\/span><\/p>\n

           <\/span> This essay by Marriott is an interesting look into the intense animosity between authors and critics in 18<\/span>th<\/span> century English literature. Clearly, some authors had a very low opinion of literary critics, whereas today critics are held in higher esteem\u2014at least within the field of academia. In the modernization itself of Horace\u2019s 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, \u201cbred in private, like a rural Maid\u201d (23). He both celebrates and laments her departure from himself:<\/span><\/p>\n

You languish [\u2026] to roam<\/span><\/p>\n

And will no longer be confin\u2019d at Home;<\/span><\/p>\n

Seen by a Few, you now repining Sigh,<\/span><\/p>\n

Fond to be gaz\u2019d on by the public Eye [\u2026]<\/span><\/p>\n

Go, bold advent\u2019rer! fly away with Speed,<\/span><\/p>\n

Go, where your giddy Inclinations lead.<\/span><\/p>\n

But go forewarn\u2019d, from me this Lesson learn, \u2018When gone from me, you can never return\u2019<\/span><\/p>\n

            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.<\/span><\/p>\n

           <\/span><\/p>\n

Works Cited<\/b><\/p>\n

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<\/a>.” <\/span> (Open Library)<\/span><\/i>. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2016.<\/span><\/p>\n

Scott, Sarah, and Gary Kelly. <\/span>A Description of Millenium Hall<\/span><\/i>. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview, 1995. Print.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

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 … Continue reading Digital Humanities Project- Analytical Response<\/span> →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":700,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[34567],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-256","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-female-conduct"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/700"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=256"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=256"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=256"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wordpress.clarku.edu\/eng260\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=256"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}