Abstract
The remarkable fact about Coleridge the critic, often regarded as the father of modern criticism, is not that many of his ideas are so highly derivative as sometimes to amount to plagiarism, nor that his most famous critical work, Biographia Literaria, is also one of the most disorderly books ever to be published in English, nor even that parts of it are written in a style almost unreadable. (Byron compared him in the Dedication to Don Juan to a hunting hawk released for flight with his hood still upon him, ‘Explaining Metaphysics to the nation — / I wish he would explain his Explanation.’ For Shelley in Letter to Maria Gisborne Coleridge was a ‘hooded eagle’, his mind ‘with its own internal lightning blind’ [ll. 208, 205].) No, the miracle of Coleridge’s critical theory lies in the small number of his seminal ideas, the internal consistency of those ideas, the remarkable flexibility with which they may be restated in numerous and quite different contexts, the extent to which the theory may be translated into practical criticism of such a poet as Wordsworth, and the firm philosophical and psychological base upon which all this rests.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
CCW, I, p. 392. For discussion of the scientific controversies out of which Coleridge’s ‘essay’ emerged, see Alice D. Snyder, Coleridge on Logic and Learning (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1929) pp. 16–23.
Valuable studies on Coleridge’s thought that take up several of the questions raised in this chapter include John H. Muirhead, Coleridge as Philosopher (1930);
Thomas McFarland, Coleridge and the Pantheist Tradition (1969);
and Owen Barfield, What Coleridge Thought (1971).
CCL, I, p. 396. To George Coleridge, c. 10 March 1798. On Coleridge’s religious beliefs, see Charles Richard Sanders, Coleridge and the Broad Church Movement (1942);
James D. Boulger, Coleridge as Religious Thinker (1961);
J. Robert Barth, S. J., Coleridge and Christian Doctrine (1969);
David Pym, The Religious Thought of Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1978);
and Stephen Prickett, Romanticism and Religion: The Tradition of Coleridge and Wordsworth in the Victorian Church (1976),
chs 1 and 2. E. S. Shaffer, ‘Kubla Khan’ and The Fall of Jerusalem: The Mythological School in Biblical Criticism and Secular Literature, 1770–1880 (1975) valuably supplements all of the above.
‘On Poesy and Art’, Biographia, II, p. 258. For discussion of this idea in the Romantics and afterwards, see M. H. Abrams, The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition (1953; New York: W. W. Norton, 1958) pp. 21–6.
The discussion here, as well as elsewhere in this chapter, is indebted to the brilliant tour de force that is Richard Harter Fogle’s The Idea of Coleridge’s Criticism (1962).
The Notebooks of Samuel Taylor Coleridge: 1794–1804, ed. Kathleen Coburn, 2 vols (New York: Pantheon, 1957) part I (text), no. 1618. Entry of 26 October 1803.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1983 John Clubbe and the Estate of Ernest J. Lovell, Jr
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Clubbe, J., Lovell, E.J. (1983). The Unity of Coleridge’s Critical Theory. In: English Romanticism. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-06726-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-06726-8_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-06728-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-06726-8
eBook Packages: Palgrave Literature & Performing Arts CollectionLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)