Abstract
This chapter analyses how the category of the affections is fundamentally in tension with a series of principles that underpin dominant eighteenth-century concepts of the literary. By examining a range of treatises that discuss the role of emotions in the fine arts, it shows that the aspiration for calmness, order and stasis that drives the idealization of the affections in theological and moral philosophical writing is at odds with the premium that literary theories place on vividness, immediacy, particularity and verisimilitude. It argues that the supremacy of the belief in early and mid-eighteenth-century criticism of the fine arts that literature is essentially mimetic makes the utopian category of the affections redundant as a means of organizing the emotions that literary texts are thought to represent.
The province of poetry is to describe nature and passion, which are always the same.
(Johnson 1995, I. 40)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
‘Non satis est pulchra esse poemata; dulcia sunto / et, quocumque volent, animum auditoris agunto.’ Horace. 1991. Ars Poetica, in Satires, Epistles and Ars Poetica, rev. edn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, ll. 99–100. The above translation is provided by James Beattie. 1779. Essays: on Poetry and Music, as they Affect the Mind; on Laughter, and Ludicrous Composition; on the Usefulness of Classical Learning, 3rd edn. London, p. 52.
- 2.
For a lucid account of Dennis’s theories concerning religion and emotion, see J.W.H. Atkins. 1951. English Literary Criticism: 17th and 18th Centuries. London: Methuen, p. 152.
- 3.
For useful further commentary on the importance of passion in poetic theories of the period, see Adela Pinch. 1996. Strange Fits of Passion: Epistemologies of Emotion, Hume to Austen. Stanford: Stanford University Press and John Morillo. 2001. Uneasy Feelings: Literature, The Passions, and Class from Neoclassicism to Romanticism. New York: AMS Press.
- 4.
Jon Mee has provided a comprehensive study of enthusiastic passions during the period. See Jon Mee. 2003. Romanticism, Enthusiasm and Regulation: Poetics and the Policing of Culture in the Romantic Period. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- 5.
Karl Morrison provides an elucidating discussion that contextualizes this distinction. See Karl Morrison. 1982. The Mimetic Tradition of Reform in the West. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. x–xi.
- 6.
The notion of movement occurs at the climax of definitions of poetry throughout this body of critical writing. For example, the anonymous author of The Art of Poetry on a New Plan asserts that ‘the poet’s design is principally to please, to move the passions, and to inspire the soul with noble and sublime sentiments’. See Anon, The Art of Poetry on a New Plan (above), I, 41. Edward Gibbon claims that ‘to charm, to move, to elevate the soul, are the great objects of poetry’. Edward Gibbon. 1764. An Essay on the Study of Literature. London, 65. Similarly, Hugh Blair affirms that ‘the primary aim of a poet is to please, and to move’. Blair, Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres (above), II, 85. And William Duff writes that ‘an author possessed of […] original genius […] move[s] the passions of others’. See William Duff. 1767. An Essay on Original Genius; and its Various Modes of Exertion in Philosophy and the Fine Arts, Particularly in Poetry. London, 152. Variants of the verb ‘moves’, including ‘excites’, ‘arouses’, ‘raises’ and ‘stimulates’, also occur with frequency in eighteenth-century critical discussions of poetic passions.
- 7.
As the theologian and moral philosopher, Abraham Tucker, explains, ‘violence and turbulence constitute the essence of passion: the same emotions of the soul when too gentle to deserve that name, are styled affections’. Abraham Tucker. 1768. The Light of Nature Pursued, 5 vols. London, II, p. 90.
- 8.
As is well known, eighteenth-century literary criticism holds that poetry should be subject to strict measures of control. For further discussion of this, see Wellek, 13–14.
- 9.
For an authoritative account of the extensive influence of Aristotle on eighteenth-century theories of poetry, see Patrick Parrinder, 1977. Authors and Authority: A Study of English Literary Criticism and its Relation to Culture, 1750–1900. London, Henley and Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
- 10.
For two useful discussions of the status of the universal in criticism and philosophy of the period, see Walter Jackson Bate. 1946. From Classic to Romantic: Premises of Taste in Eighteenth-Century England. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, and Blakey Vermeule. 2000. The Party of Humanity: Writing Moral Psychology in Eighteenth-Century Britain. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins Press.
- 11.
In the context of this discussion, it is interesting to bear in mind the vogue during the period for ut pictura poesis. See David Marshall. 1997. ‘Literature and the Other Arts: Ut pictura poesis’, in The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, IV: The Eighteenth Century, ed. H.B. Nisbet and Claude Rawson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 681–89 (682).
- 12.
David Hume makes a similar point in David Hume. 1757. ‘Of the Passions’, in Four Dissertations. I. The Natural History of Religion. II. Of the Passions. III. Of Tragedy. IV. Of the Standard of Taste. London, 177–80.
- 13.
Two helpful accounts of the presumed common reader in eighteenth-century critical theories are James Engell. 1989. Forming the Critical Mind: Dryden to Coleridge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 160–62 and René Wellek. 1955. A History of Modern Criticism, 1750–1950, 4 vols. London: Jonathan Cape, 23.
- 14.
Defining “common sense”, Thomas Reid writes, ‘There are principles common to [philosophers and the vulgar] which need no proof, and which do not admit of direct proof, and these common principles are the foundation of all reasoning and of all science’. Thomas Reid. 1973. Lectures on the Fine Arts, ed. Peter Kivy. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 230. For a lucid discussion of this faculty, see Alexander Broadie. 2000. ‘George Campbell, Thomas Reid, and Universals of Language’, in The Scottish Enlightenment: Essays in Reinterpretation, ed. Paul Wood. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 351–71.
- 15.
It is important to note that the comparisons conducted in eighteenth-century criticism are historically contingent. These comparisons would be thrown into confusion by, for example, a twentieth-century abstract painting.
- 16.
For a fuller account of this, see George Buelow. 2001. ‘Theory of the Affects’, in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell, 20 vols. New York: Macmillan. Volume One.
- 17.
There is a detailed discussion of this phenomenon in George Buelow. 1983. ‘Johann Mattheson and the Invention of the Affektenlehre’, in New Mattheson Studies, ed. George Buelow and H.J. Marx. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 393–407.
- 18.
For further discussion of the peculiar obscurity of musical emotions, see Susanne K. Langer, 3rd edn. 1976. Philosophy in a New Key. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press; Roger Scruton. 1997. The Aesthetics of Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press; Richard Sorabji. 2000. Emotion and Peace of Mind: From Stoic Agitation to Christian Temptation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; and Martha Nussbaum. 2001. Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- 19.
This view calls into question the extent to which musical emotions are indeed emotions. Controversially, in the nineteenth century, Eduard Hanslick denied that musical emotions are emotions at all. See Eduard Hanslick. 1891. The Beautiful in Music, trans. Gustav Cohen. London: Novello. This view is corroborated by Peter Kivy. 1980. ‘What was Hanslick Denying?’, Journal of Musicology, 8 (1990), 3–18 and later in Peter Kivy. 1980. The Corded Shell. Princeton: Princeton University Press. For a fuller discussion of this debate, see Geoffrey Madell. 2002. Philosophy, Music and Emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
- 20.
Thomas Reid insists that there are signs that ‘are known without any experience and in a manner we cannot account for’ (Reid 1973, 30). In this way, an affiliation is presumed between the general (non-specific) and the natural (universally applicable).
- 21.
A general sign need not necessarily be indeterminate, but determinacy of musical objects, which are general, is not possible. References to the generality of musical objects are often used metonymically to denote the indeterminacy of musical emotions (and vice versa) in the eighteenth-century accounts discussed here.
- 22.
This theory concerning the visual expression of emotions relies heavily on Cartesian mind and body dualism. The French painter and theorist Charles Le Brun was instrumental in popularizing the notion that internal affections can be made visible through the representation of external passions. See Charles Le Brun. 1702. Méthode pour Apprendre à Dessiner les Passions: Proposée dans une Conference sur l’Expression Générale et Particuliere. Amsterdam.
- 23.
See Dean Mace. 1997. ‘Literature and the Other Arts: Parallels Between the Arts’, in The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, IV: The Eighteenth Century, 730–41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 720–31.
- 24.
This makes an interesting point of comparison with the way in which poetry tends to be treated during the period. As has often been observed, eighteenth-century criticism persistently draws on the work of Homer, Virgil and Shakespeare, and it is a commonplace belief that the great ages of poetry are now confined to the past. The period has been characterized as an age of nostalgia, as the case of Ossian is often invoked to evidence. The prevalence during the period of wistfulness for the great literature of the past is epitomized by Joseph Warton’s pronouncement that ‘in no polished nation, after criticism has been much studied, and the rules of writing established, has any very extraordinary work ever appeared’. Joseph Warton. 1756. An Essay on the Genius and Writings of Pope. London, 203.
- 25.
Marin Mersenne attempts to account for the appeal of this phenomenon. See Marin Mersenne. 1636–37. Harmonie Universelle: Contenant la Théorie et la Pratique de la Musique où il est Traité des Consonances, des Dissonances, des Genres, des Modes, de la Composition, de la Voix, des Chants, & Toutes Sortes d’Instruments Harmoniques, 3 vols. Paris, IV, Prop. XVII, 374–75.
- 26.
See also James Harris. 1772. Three Treatises: the First Concerning Art, the Second Concerning Music, Painting and Poetry, the Third Concerning Happiness, 3rd edn. London, 99–100.
- 27.
In the main, today’s philosophers of the emotions shy away from this clear-cut discussion. As Susan Feagin writes, ‘the temptation […] is to ask whether art emotions, and empathetic emotions in general, are emotions of the same type and in the same sense as real-life emotions. […] In point of fact, we don’t have anything even close to an understanding of emotions, that is, a systematic, testable theory of emotions, so it is premature to ask if art emotions, and empathetic emotions, meet the definitions.’ Susan Feagin. 1997. ‘Imagining Emotions and Appreciating Fiction’, in Emotion and the Arts, ed. Mette Hjort and Sue Laver. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 50–62 (54). Consequently, in contemporary discussions of the emotions, philosophers readily draw on literary material to demonstrate their arguments. For example, Martha Nussbaum uses Henry James and Samuel Beckett, among others, as both generative and illustrative of her philosophical arguments about the emotions. See Martha Nussbaum. 1990. Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- 28.
An edition of Aristotle’s Poetics that was widely read during the eighteenth century is Thomas Twining trans. 1789. Aristotle’s Treatise on Poetry. London. For a classic account of mimesis in literature of the period, see M.H. Abrams. 1971. The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition. London: Oxford University Press. Morrison claims that there was a ‘longue durée of mimesis at the heart of the Enlightenment’ (261). However, though its dominance is undoubted, mimesis is not the only model that exerts sway over critics in the period. According to James Sambrook, various eighteenth-century critics, among them Kames, view poetry essentially to be expressive, not imitative. James Sambrook. 1986. The Eighteenth Century: The Intellectual and Cultural Context of English Literature, 1700–1789. London and New York: Longman, 1986, 126.
- 29.
For an account of how literary passions play into debates about class, see John Morillo (2001), and for their relationship with gender, see Claudia Johnson. 1995. Equivocal Beings: Politics, Gender, and Sentimentality in the 1790s: Wollstonecraft, Radcliffe, Burney, Austen. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- 30.
For a more detailed enquiry into the semiotics of figuration and how figures are seen to produce passions in the period, see Douglas Patey. 1984. Probability and Literary Form: Philosophic Theory and Literary Practice in the Augustan Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 88–89, and Engell (1989, 203).
- 31.
In addition, see Joseph Priestley, who writes, ‘Since […] the literal impropriety of figurative expressions is excused only on account of their being considered as indications of those feelings and sentiments which no words, literally interpreted, could describe, they should never be used but when the function of the person who uses them is such as will render those feelings and sentiments natural. Otherwise, there being nothing left to excuse and cover the impropriety of the figure, the words present nothing but the naked absurdity, and the writer is detected, either in pretending to feelings that could have no existence, or in asserting what is apparently false and contradictory. This observation may be applied to every figure of speech’ (Priestley 1977, 77–78).
- 32.
Hugh Blair makes a similar point when he writes that ‘the operations of the mind and affections, in particular, are, in most languages, described by words taken from sensible objects. The reason is plain. The names of sensible objects were, in all languages, the words most early introduced; and were, by degrees, extended to those mental objects, of which men had more obscure conceptions, and to which they found it more difficult to assign distinct names’ (Blair 1787, 353).
- 33.
For a selection of recent perspectives on the discussion of the difference between so-called emotions in literature and other forms of emotion, see Hjort and Laver eds (1997) and Peter Goldie. 2000. The Emotions: A Philosophical Exploration. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- 34.
For a recent discussion of subjectivity and poetic composition in the later part of the period, see Timothy Clark. 1997. The Theory of Inspiration: Composition as a Crisis of Subjectivity in Romantic and Post-Romantic Writing. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press.
- 35.
See also John Ogilvie’s statement that ‘men of judgment (in the proper acceptation of that term) who have themselves very moderate passions are surely ill qualified to describe an excess which they never felt; or in other words, to do justice to a subject into which they are not qualified to enter’ (Ogilvie 1774, 216–17).
References
Abrams, M.H. 1971. The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition. London: Oxford University Press.
Alison, Archibald. 1790. Essays on the Nature and Principles of Taste. Dublin.
Anon. 1762. The Art of Poetry on a New Plan, Illustrated with a great Variety of Examples from the Best English Poets; and of Translations from the Ancients: Together with Such Reflections and Critical Remarks as May Tend to Form in our Youth an Elegant Taste, and Render the Study of this Part of the Belles Lettres More Rational and Pleasing, 2 vols. London.
Aristotle. 1789. Aristotle’s Treatise on Poetry, trans. Thomas Twining. London.
Atkins, J.W.H. 1951. English Literary Criticism: 17th and 18th Centuries. London: Methuen.
Bate, Walter Jackson. 1946. From Classic to Romantic: Premises of Taste in Eighteenth-Century England. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Beattie, James. 1779. Essays: on Poetry and Music, as they Affect the Mind; on Laughter, and Ludicrous Composition; on the Usefulness of Classical Learning, 3rd ed. London.
Blair, Hugh. 1787. Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, 3rd ed., 3 vols. London.
Broadie, Alexander. 2000. George Campbell, Thomas Reid, and Universals of Language. In The Scottish Enlightenment: Essays in Reinterpretation, ed. Paul Wood. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Brown, John. 1763. A Dissertation on the Rise, Union, and Power, the Progressions, Separations, and Corruptions, of Poetry and Music. London.
Buelow, George. 1983. Johann Mattheson and the Invention of the Affektenlehre. In New Mattheson Studies, ed. George Buelow and H.J. Marx, 393–407. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
———. 2001. Theory of the Affects. In The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Stanley Sadie and John Tyrrell, 20 vols. New York: Macmillan.
Burke, Edmund. 1757. A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful. London.
Clark, Timothy. 1997. The Theory of Inspiration: Composition as a Crisis of Subjectivity in Romantic and Post-Romantic Writing. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press.
Dennis, John. 1701. The Advancement and Reformation of Modern Poetry. A Critical Discourse. In Two Parts. London.
———. 1704. The Grounds of Criticism in Poetry, Contain’d in Some New Discoveries Never Made Before, Requisite for the Writing and Judging of Poems Surely. London.
Du Bos, Abbé Jean-Baptiste. 1748. Critical Reflections on Poetry, Painting and Music. With an Inquiry into the Rise and Progress of the Theatrical Entertainments of the Ancients, trans. Thomas Nugent, 5th ed., 3 vols. London.
Duff, William. 1767. An Essay on Original Genius; and its Various Modes of Exertion in Philosophy and the Fine Arts, Particularly in Poetry. London.
Eagleton, Terry. 1984. The Function of Criticism: From The Spectator to Post-Structuralism. London: Verso.
Engell, James. 1989. Forming the Critical Mind: Dryden to Coleridge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Feagin, Susan. 1997. Imagining Emotions and Appreciating Fiction. In Emotion and the Arts, ed. Mette Hjort and Sue Laver, 50–62. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gerard, Alexander. 1759. An Essay on Taste, with Three Dissertations on the Same Subject by Mr. de Voltaire, Mr. D’Alembert, Mr. De Montesquieu. London.
———. 1774. An Essay on Genius. London.
Gibbon, Edward. 1764. An Essay on the Study of Literature. London.
Goldie, Peter. 2000. The Emotions: A Philosophical Exploration. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Thomas Burger. Oxford: Polity Press.
Hanslick, Eduard. 1891. The Beautiful in Music, trans. Gustav Cohen. London: Novello.
Harris, James. 1772. Three Treatises: the First Concerning Art, the Second Concerning Music, Painting and Poetry, the Third Concerning Happiness, 3rd ed. London.
Hartley, David. 1791. Observations on Man, His Frame, His Duty, and his Expectations, 2nd ed., 2 vols. London.
Henry Home, Lord Kames. 1785. Elements of Criticism, 6th ed., 2 vols. Edinburgh.
Hjort, Mette, and Sue Laver, eds. 1997. Emotion and the Arts. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Horace. 1991. Ars Poetica. In Satires, Epistles and Ars Poetica, rev ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hume, David. 1757. Of the Passions. In Four Dissertations. I. The Natural History of Religion. II. Of the Passions. III. Of Tragedy. IV. Of the Standard of Taste. London.
Hutcheson, Francis. 1725. An Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue; in Two Treatises. In which the Principles of the late Earl of Shaftesbury are Explain’d and Defended, against the Author of the Fable of the Bees: And the Ideas of Moral Good and Evil are establish’d, according to the Sentiments of the Antient Moralists. With an Attempt to introduce a Mathematical Calculation in Subjects of Morality. London.
Johnson, Samuel. 1780–81. The Lives of the Poets: And a Criticism on their Works, 3 vols. Dublin.
———. 1795. The History of Rasselas, Prince of Abissinia. A Tale, 2 vols. London.
Johnson, Claudia. 1995. Equivocal Beings: Politics, Gender, and Sentimentality in the 1790s: Wollstonecraft, Radcliffe, Burney, Austen. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Joy, Louise. 2013. From Passion to Affection: The Art of the Philosophical in Eighteenth-Century Poetics. Philosophy and Literature 37 (1): 72–87.
———. 2014. Relative Obscurity: The Emotions of Words, Paint and Sound in Eighteenth-Century Literary Criticism. History of European Ideas 40 (5): 644–661.
Kivy, Peter. 1980. The Corded Shell. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
———. 1990. What was Hanslick Denying? Journal of Musicology 8: 3–18.
Langer, Susanne L. 1976. Philosophy in a New Key, 3rd ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Le Brun, Charles. 1702. Méthode pour Apprendre à Dessiner les Passions: Proposée dans une Conference sur l’Expression Générale et Particuliere. Amsterdam.
Mace, Dean. 1997. Literature and the Other Arts: Parallels Between the Arts. In The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, IV: The Eighteenth Century, 730–741. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Madell, Geoffrey. 2002. Philosophy, Music and Emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Manning, Susan. 1997. The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, IV: The Eighteenth Century, 587–613. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marshall, David. 1997. Literature and the Other Arts: Ut pictura poesis. In The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, IV: The Eighteenth Century, ed. H.B. Nisbet and Claude Rawson, 681–689. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mee, Jon. 2003. Romanticism, Enthusiasm and Regulation: Poetics and the Policing of Culture in the Romantic Period. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mersenne, Marin. 1636–37. Harmonie Universelle: Contenant la Théorie et la Pratique de la Musique où il est Traité des Consonances, des Dissonances, des Genres, des Modes, de la Composition, de la Voix, des Chants, & Toutes Sortes d’Instruments Harmoniques, 3 vols. Paris.
Morillo, John. 2001. Uneasy Feelings: Literature, The Passions, and Class from Neoclassicism to Romanticism. New York: AMS Press.
Morrison, Karl. 1982. The Mimetic Tradition of Reform in the West. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Nussbaum, Martha. 1990. Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———. 2001. Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ogilvie, John. 1774. Philosophical and Critical Observations on the Nature, Characters and Various Species of Composition, 2 vols. London.
Parrinder, Patrick. 1977. Authors and Authority: A Study of English Literary Criticism and its Relation to Culture, 1750–1900. London and Henley and Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Patey, Douglas. 1984. Probability and Literary Form: Philosophic Theory and Literary Practice in the Augustan Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pinch, Adela. 1996. Strange Fits of Passion: Epistemologies of Emotion, Hume to Austen. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Priestley, Joseph. 1777. A Course of Lectures on Oratory and Criticism. London.
Reid, Thomas. 1973. In Lectures on the Fine Arts, ed. Peter Kivy. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Reynolds, Joshua. 1797. Discourse XIII. In The Works of Sir Joshua Reynolds, 2 vols. London.
Robinson, Jenefer. 2005. Deeper than Reason: Emotion and its Role in Literature, Music, and Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sambrook, James. 1986. The Eighteenth Century: The Intellectual and Cultural Context of English Literature, 1700–1789. London and New York: Longman.
Scruton, Roger. 1997. The Aesthetics of Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sorabji, Richard. 2000. Emotion and Peace of Mind: From Stoic Agitation to Christian Temptation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trapp, Joseph. 1742. Lectures on Poetry Read in the Schools of Natural Philosophy at Oxford. London.
Tucker, Abraham. 1768. The Light of Nature Pursued, 5 vols. London.
Vermeule, Blakey. 2000. The Party of Humanity: Writing Moral Psychology in Eighteenth-Century Britain. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins Press.
Warton, Joseph. 1756. An Essay on the Genius and Writings of Pope. London.
Wellek, René. 1955. A History of Modern Criticism, 1750–1950, 4 vols. London: Jonathan Cape.
Wimsatt, W.K., and Monroe Beardsley. 1950. The Affective Fallacy. Sewanee Review 57: 31–55.
Woodmansee, Martha. 1994. The Author, Art, and the Market: Rereading the History of Aesthetics. New York: Columbia University Press.
Wordsworth, William. 1974. Preface to Lyrical Ballads, 1800. In The Prose Works, ed. W.J.B. Owen and Jane Smyser, 3 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Joy, L. (2020). Literary Passions. In: Eighteenth-Century Literary Affections. Palgrave Studies in Affect Theory and Literary Criticism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46008-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46008-2_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-46007-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-46008-2
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)