This article argues that a closer examination of the unpublished manuscripts of Thomas Wedgwood reveals a higher level of similarity between his writings and those of Wordsworth than previously acknowledged by scholars. These manuscripts suggest that Wedgwood's ideas about learning were a significant influence on Wordsworth's career. However, it is important to note that the surviving materials can only provide circumstantial evidence and do not offer conclusive proof of influence.
I argue here that a more detailed survey of the unpublished manuscripts of the philosopher, psychologist, and experimentalist Thomas Wedgwood than Wordsworth scholars have hitherto undertaken is suggestive of greater coincidence than has been noted between his and Wordsworth's writings. David Erdman observed, in a comment that later critics have not pursued very far, that before meeting Wedgwood, [Wordsworth, in 1797] had not articulated a single thought upon the subject of the influ-ence of natural objects on the growth of genius-nor had he made the slightest attempt at a biographical study of his own or anyone else's mental growth (Erdman 487-88; see Chandler 96-97). Wedgwood's ideas about learning, Erdman suggested, were the most fruitful stimulus in Wordsworth's entire career. With the benefit of greater access to Wedgwood's manuscripts than Erdman enjoyed, we can suggest some specific points of stimulation in 1797 and 1798 concerning childhood learning, natural objects, memory, and selfhood. A caveat: the surviving letters, manuscripts, and notes of a writer who published little and died early constitute circumstantial, not conclusive, evidence of influence. The case I make here on their basis is not susceptible of proof; it is suggestive-a way of opening possibilities for rereading poems in their historical context rather than a cast-iron demonstration of Wedgwood's effect on Wordsworth (and/or vice versa).
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据