Ë öË‚Sept. 22, 1993 Addison and Steele, 1982-1993: Bibliography and Summary of Scholarship In their own time, Joseph Addison and Richard Steele were respected writers in their own right; they are known to us as "Addison and Steele" because of their collaberation between 1709 and 1713 on three journals, the Tatler, the Spectator and the Guardian. All three were wildly popular, and Addison and Steele quickly assumed a central place in English intellectual life: Addison in particular is recognized for his innovations in prose style and his perfection of the periodical essay, and for his contributions to aesthetic and critical theory. They were considered literary giants for the next two centuries: Thackeray in 1853 says of Addison that "...we owe as much pleasure to him as to any human being that ever wrote..." (Bloom [1980] 444), and his praise for Steele, though less effusive, is still warm. Even as late as 1971, F. W. Bateson gives Addison a more qualified but still superlative review: his "one supreme talent," his prose style, was "more consistently excellent even than Shakespeare's, Dryden's, Sterne's, Matthew Arnold's, Bernard Shaw's, or George Orwell's" (146). Most of the criticism of Addison and Steele published before 1970 falls into one of two categories: biographical and bibliographical studies or source and analogue studies. The former is represented by editors like Bond and Rae Blanchard and by scholars like Calhoun Winton, who published a major biography of Steele between 1964 and 1970. The latter group was dominated by Edward and Lillian Bloom, who published a number of studies of Addison's thought and its relationship to traditional moral and aesthetic theory.(1) These critics, as McCrea points out, But sometime just after the middle of this century, as Brian McCrea says, Addison and Steele "died": Dryden, Swift, Pope, and Defoe, formerly their literary peers, have attracted most of the critical attention in the last few decades, while Addison and Steele have been relegated to the periphery of critical debate. McCrea announced the "death" of Addison and Steele in 1988 (and it had been formally noted as early as 1975), but over the last decade, however, Addison and Steele have in fact enjoyed a limited renaissance: they command the exclusive attention of, or significant portions of, some fifteen articles and four books (not counting editions and notes in NQ, etc.). Obviously, this does not approach the amount of attention given to Dryden or Swift, but critics have begun to reevaluate their role in the development of eighteenth-century culture. The reasons for the "renaissance" are themselves part of the current debate; suffice to say for now that with the development of new theoretical and contextual paradigms, the rough distinction between biographical and source/analogue criticism has evolved into a more complex group of relatively discrete critical conversations. In terms of bibliographic work, the last decade has seen the publication of excellent editions of the texts central to the study of Addison and Steele's collaberations, the culmination of decades of work on the part of the editors. Donald Bond's 1965 edition of the Spectator set a new standard in editorial practice, and his 1987 edition of the Tatler was comparable in quality. John Calhoun Stephens's edition of the Guardian, released in 1982, is likewise an exemplary text. All three include reliable texts with variants and outstanding introductory material, indexing and explanatory notes. It is perhaps a sign of the renewed interest in Addison and Steele that an historical scholar like J. D. Alsop found an outlet in a major journal (MP) for his review of newly available manuscript material relating to Addison. Œ There is room, then, for bibliographic work--Alsop even tries to excite interest in the idea of a new edition of Addison's letters. But we will not need new editions of the central texts for at least the next century, if ever. Similarly, most if not all of the biographical work to be done on Addison and Steele has been done: Winton's biography of Steele and Smithers's biography of Addison are both careful and thorough studies, leaving little in the way of ambiguity about "life and times". Most of the new work in criticism is being done in the area of formal or contextual analysis. McCrea's study Addison and Steele are Dead deserves mention at some point, if only because he mentions them in the title--however, his study is not concerned with Addison and Steele per se, but with the history of Addison and Steele criticism and what it suggests about the nature of criticism as a profession. He suggests that the reason for the death of Addison and Steele in literature departments is simply that they are unambiguous--and therefore do not support the kinds of debates about interpretation upon which literature as a profession effectively depends. The largest portion of Addison and Steele studies focus on formal or contextual analysis. Whereas earlier critics like the Blooms focused mainly on source and analogue studies of Addison's or Steele's ideas, the more recent critics bring a host of specialized methodologies to their work, notably Marxist, feminist and formalist. Despite this diversity, however, these studies have something in common: the fact that they all to some extent relate Addison and Steele not to traditional philosophy or theology but to the moral, social and epistemological crises of the early eighteenth century.(2) McCrea has justly pointed out that ambiguity and uncertainty is attractive to critics, and regardless of methodology, Addison and Steele seem to have become attractive not primarily by virtue of the of the formal qualities of their work but because of the way that work is situated in a time of profound social turmoil. It is against this background that the simplicity of Addison and Steele's prose has taken on fresh appeal to critics. So Eagleton, working from a Marxist perspective, sees the journals as conscious and deliberate efforts to consolidate and legitimize a new social class, a "new ruling bloc" (11) in the face of the collapse of the old order; while Van Tassel, working from a less specialized (but essentially formalist) perspective, sees them as articulations of and responses to the anxiety created by the moral and epistemological crises which attended the rapid social changes of the eighteenth century. Even Ketcham, who concentrates mainly on a formalist close analysis of the stylistic and metaphorical structures of the Spectator, is implicitly interested in the role of the journals in the formation of cultural norms in an ambiguous environment. He is not concerned only with explaining formal structures in themselves but also insofar as they are part of what he calls "a cohesive image of society" (9), an "intimate group, secure against the self-interest and disorder of the outside world" (171). Finally, Kathryn Shevelow has usefully applied a feminist perspective to analysis of the rhetoric of the Tatler and Spectator as it relates to the formation of social roles for women; in her studies she locates the journals within the context of contemporary advice literature and tries to illustrate how Addison and Steele's reaction to the crisis of social roles was in part to create a rather restrictive definition of social roles for women, one which gradually became institutionalized in the next century. I would suggest that the differences in methodology in these critics are largely superficial from the point of view of understanding contemporary criticism of Addison and Steele: in essence, these studies reflect various ways of analyzing Addison and Steele's journals as a rhetoric of cultural formation, and in this sense they are closely interrelated. The renewal of interest in Addison and Steele has created room for those critics who are still interested in the older conversations relating to the "history of ideas" in the tradition of the Blooms, albeit in journals like English Studies and the Journal of Newspaper and Periodical History, which are somewhat distanced from the main currents of contemporary eighteenth-century criticism. Dwyer's study, though he gestures towards cultural context, is essentially an explication of Addison's doctrine of "cheerfulness," and Zeitz is concerned exclusively with explaining the relationship between Addison's aesthetic theory and the so-called "design argument" for the existence of God. Though this sort of criticism has been thoroughly explored, Zeitz at least points out that there is still room to make new and interesting connections between the various strains of thought in the early part of the century. A branch of the historical criticism which has attracted some scholars in the last few years is the sort of genre criticism exemplified by Bateson's essay. Addison in particular was central in the development of the "periodical essay" and its characteristic prose style. Bony's study, though not heavily informed by North American criticism, is a useful and interesting contrast of the prose styles and formal devices (such as the persona) of Dryden, Swift, Defoe and Addison. Given the reputation of the first three, it is especially interesting that Bony claims that Addison's mature use of persona was in fact the most effective of the four, given that he hoped to create with it a form of rational discourse that could accomodate the violent disagreements of the Whig and Tory sympathizers.(3) Nablow's study also provides a useful analysis of the main characteristics of Addison's style, though he is interested primarily in Addison's role in the evolution of French literature in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Closely related to genre criticism is the hotly-debated topic of persona theory, a problem in interpretation which McCrea argues is one of the main pillars which sustains eighteenth-century criticism. Addison and Steele, of course, did not speak to the reading public as Addison and Steele but as Isaac Bickerstaff, Mr. Spectator, and Nestor Ironside--social fictions, who did not exist but who nevertheless excercised considerable influence on eighteenth-century reading public. It was a common trope in eighteenth-century literature, and it issues in a number of formal theoretical problems, especially in the interpretation of those writers who self-consciously played with the "mask" as Addison and Steele did not: who is writing the essay? Does the author mean what he says? What context or contexts do we take as authoritative in interpreting problematic essays such as those of Swift? It is a tantalizing theoretical problem, mainly because there is no readily accessible solution, and in recent years, it has occupied the attention of some of the most eminent eighteenth-century scholars, most notably Weinbrot (who attempts to place the argument in an historical context). Addison and Steele are at the periphery of this debate, not because their use of persona is unsophisticated but because it is not amenable to formal problematizing. Yet as Bony and Ketcham point out, it is impossible to completely understand the use of persona in the eighteenth century without understanding its function in the hands of Addison and Steele. Ketcham in particular points out the rhetorical sophistication of the voice of Mr. Spectator in Addison's hands, and illustrates how central the device is in the creation of the "rhetoric of assimilation." ŒIn the face of the outstanding texts which have been made available to scholars in the last few years, more work on Addison and Steele is virtually a moral imperative. The field is so open it is difficult to suggest specific lines of development: Shevelow, Eagleton, Van Tassel, and especially Ketcham have shown the value and interest of formal analysis of the style and rhetorical devices of the Tatler and Spectator, especially against the background of the cultural crises of the eighteenth century. Yet there is no book-length study of this kind of the Tatler, the Guardian, or of any of the later journals which Addison and Steele edited separately. In terms of methodological perspectives, again the field is wide open: feminism, Marxism, formalism, genre criticism (especially in the area of persona), all are potentially useful in illustrating aspects of Addison and Steele's social rhetoric, of the performance aspect of their language as opposed to the history of their ideas. Addison and Steele are dead, or have been, but critics in the last few years have shown us useful paradigms for analyzing their role in the production of culture in the early eighteenth century. Bibliography of Addison and Steele, 1982-1993 Editions: Blanchard, Rae. The Correspondence of Richard Steele. London: Oxford University Press, 1941. A useful collection which records Steele's extensive network of social and political contacts, including Swift, Pope, Lord Halifax, and many others. Also includes a collection of Steele's dedications. Indexed, with a preface and some explanatory notes. -----. Tracts and Pamphlets by Richard Steele. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1944. A valuable collection of Steele's publication activity outside of his various periodicals. Indexed (though not extensively), with good bibliographic notes but no explanatory material. -----. Steele's The Englishman. Oxford: Clarendon, 1955. Currently the definitive edition of Steele's later political periodical. Contains a brief but fairly useful introduction, explanatory notes and a relatively short index. -----. Steele's Periodical Journalism, 1714-16. Oxford: Clarendon, 1959. Collects some of Steele's lesser-known periodicals--The Lover, The Reader, Town-Talk, and Chit-Chat. Indexed, with an informative introduction and useful explanatory notes. Bond, Donald F. The Spectator. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. The definitive edition. Widely praised by critics for its meticulous scholarship. Indexed, variants and explanatory notes included. -----. The Tatler. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987.Œ Again a definitive work, replacing Aitken's edition of 1898-99. Good introduction, extensively indexed, variants, good explanatory notes. Graham, Walter. The Letters of Joseph Addison. London: Oxford, 1941. Alsop suggests that this selection of the available material is insufficient and illustrates a number of serious transcription errors in Graham's text. Leheny, James. The Freeholder. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979. The only twentieth-century edition of one of Addison's later periodicals. Contains a useful introduction, some explanatory notes, variants and an index. Stephens, John C. The Guardian. Lexington: UP of Kentucky, 1982. A definitive edition, with an informative introduction, textual variants, extensive explanatory notes and a very comprehensive index. A valuable resource; the last edition of The Guardian was edited in 1789 and last reprinted in 1856. Recent Criticism: Alsop, James D. "New Light on Joseph Addison." Modern Philology 80 (1982), 13-34. A survey of manuscript letters recently purchased by the British Library, and a scathing critique of the most recent edition of Addison's letters. Bloom, Edward A. and Lillian D., eds. Addison and Steele: The Critical Heritage. London: Routledge, 1980. A valuable sampling of critical opinion on Addison and Steele from the inception of the Tatler in 1709 to the mid-1850's. Especially important considering the recent arguments involving the changing nature of criticism and of Addison and Steele's relation to the academy. -----. Joseph Addison's Sociable Animal: in the Market-Place, on the Hustings, in the Pulpit. Providence: Brown UP, 1971. Summarizes the Blooms' considerable contribution to source and analogue studies of Addison's thought. Bloom, Lillian. "Joseph Addison." British Prose Writers 1660-1800. Ed. Donald T. Siebert. DLB vol. 101. Detroit: Gale Research, 1991. A valuable summary of Addison's life and times. Includes a comprehensive list of works, major editions, and important criticism. Œ Bond, Donald. The Tatler: The Making of a Literary Journal. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1971. A very useful general study of the development of the Tatler under Steele, with chapters on management, literary forms, style and content. Bony, Alain. "L'Elaboration de l'auteur suppose dans l'essai periodique: Swift, Defoe, Steele, et Addison." Le journalisme d'Ancien Regime: questions et propositions. Ed. Pierre Retat. Lyon: PU de Lyon, 1982. An interesting counterpoint to McCrea and to North American critical traditions in general. Bony argues that the periodical essay and in particular the persona actually reached the pinnacle of its development as a fictional mode in Addison. Dammers, Richard H. Richard Steele. TEAS 351. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982. Some biographical information, and Monarch-note readings of Steele's plays and the Tatler. Good for an overview, but nothing too illuminating. Dwyer, John. "Addison and Steele's Spectator: Towards a Reappraisal." Journal of Newspaper and Periodical History 4.1 (1987-88), 2-11. An analysis of the doctrine of "cheerfulness" in the Spectator and an attempt to relate it to the cultural context. The explication of the doctrine is interesting, but the analysis of context is very weak. Eagleton, Terry. The Function of Criticism: From the Spectator to Post-Structuralism. London: Verso, 1984. Analyzes the role of the newly liberated press, especially the Tatler and Spectator, in the formation of a "new ruling bloc in English society" and a new set of ethical categories. Contrasts the Addisonian idea of criticism as social reform with the modern idea of criticism as being removed from society. Ketcham, Michael G. Transparent Designs: Reading, Performance, and Form in the Spectator Papers. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1985. Analyzes both formal and rhetorical characteristics of the work, producing an in-depth analysis of a "social structure being created out of a literary structure." Conventions of dress, diction, and other modes of performance are analyzed as modes of communication, used to stabilize the chaotic social sphere. A close analysis of the way the Spectator accomplishes what Eagleton and others say it does. Leites, Edmund. "Good Humour at Home, Good Humour Abroad: The Intimacies of Marriage and the Civilities of Social Life in the Ethic of Richard Steele." Educating the Audience: Addison, Steele, and Eighteenth-Century Culture. Ed. Edward Bloom et al. Los Angeles: Willam Andrews Clark Memorial Library, 1984. McCrea, Brian. "The Canon and the Eighteenth Century: A Modest Proposal and a Tale of Two Tubs." Modern Language Studies 18.1 (1988), 58-73. Suggests that Addison and Steele have been dropped from the canon because their use of persona does not lend itself to the theoretical problematics that fuel academic careers. An interesting (though rather jaded) premise. -----. Addison and Steele are Dead: The English Department, Its Canon, and the Professionalization of Literary Criticism. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1990. Extends and develops the thesis of "The Canon and the Eighteenth Century." Argues that early "professional" criticism as defined by Frye, Wimsatt, Brooks and others, effectively "canonized" formal explication and (by implication) formally complex literature--all with the goal of justifying or "professionalizing" the role of the critic. McKeon, Michael. "Generic Transformation and Social Change: Rethinking the Rise of the Novel." Cultural Critique 1 (1985), 159-81. Suggests that the novel developed in the context of the epistemological and moral crises of the eighteenth century--problems which are not entirely reducible to the "rise of the middle class," as has previously been assumed. McKeon lays out an important new paradigm for understanding the cultural context of the period. Nablow, Ralph A. The Addisonian Tradition in France: Passion and Objectivity in Social Observation. Rutherford: Farleigh Dickinson UP, 1990. An interesting study of the Continental imitators of the Spectator. Nablow identifies a tradition of romantic individualism in late seventeenth-century French writers, and identifies Addison as the catalyst of a reaction to the tradition which he calls "reportorial" literature. The terms he lays out follow McKean's model of the development of English prose very closely (though he does not cite McKean). Otten, Robert M. Joseph Addison. TEAS 338. Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1982. Patey, Douglas Lane. "The Eighteenth Century Invents the Canon." Modern Language Studies 18.1 (1988), 17-37. A very useful summary of the cultural context of eighteenth-century canon formation, relating it again to the anxiety about ethical categories. A good background for the understanding of modern debates about the canon. Shevelow, Kathryn. "Fathers and Daughters: Women as Readers of the Tatler." Gender and Reading: Essays on Readers, Texts, Contexts. Ed. Elizabeth A. Flynn and Patrocino P. Schweickart. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1986. Locates the Tatler within the context of advice literature, and distinguishes "overt" rhetoric from "covert" (subliminal) rhetoric in order to suggest that Steele was not as liberal about women's issues as he may at first seem. Interesting premise, but in places not articulated very clearly. -----. Women and Print Culture: The Construction of Femininity in the Early Periodical. London: Routledge, 1989. An analysis of the role of the Spectator, the Tatler, and other periodicals in the evolution of the domestic ideal of womanhood, what she calls a "trajectory of containment." An interesting and important thesis, though the book received mixed reviews. Smithers, Peter. The Life of Joseph Addison. 2nd ed. rev. Oxford: Clarendon, 1968. The standard biography of Addison. Van Tassel, Mary M. "Spears and Petticoats: The Tatler and the Instability of Language." JEGP 90.3 (1991), 327-341. An analysis of the ethical positions articulated in the Tatler, drawing on McKeon's model and on Locke to situate them in a cultural context--one informed by a pervasive anxiety about ethical categories. A reductive reading of Locke, but a useful analysis. Weinbrot, Howard D. "Masked Men and Satire and Pope: Toward a Historical Basis for the Eighteenth-Century Persona." ECS 16.3 (1983), 265-289. A detailed contextualization of the problem of persona which has (according to McCrea) fueled so many academic careers. Weinbrot presents a broad range of classical precedents as well as analyzing the use of persona in relation to political exigence. Winton, Calhoun. Captain Steele: The Early Career of Sir Richard Steele. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1964. -----. Sir Richard Steele, M.P.: The Later Career. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1970 Winton's two volumes are the standard biography of Steele. -----. "Richard Steele." British Prose Writers 1660-1800. Ed. Donald T. Siebert. DLB vol. 101. Detroit: Gale Research, 1991. Another valuable summary, written by a well-respected biographer of Steele. Includes works, editions and criticism. Zeitz, Lisa M. "Addison's 'Imagination' Papers and the Design Argument." English Studies 73.6 (1992), 493-502. Reads Addison's aesthetic theory against a popular contemporary proof for the existence of God, the "design argument." Thorough and interesting historical research.