<<

. 35
( 41 .)



>>

µ ˜T HE W O R ST O F S IN N I NG ™: DO N J U AN , M O R AL
EN GLA N D AND FE M I N I NE C APR I C E
± Claude Rawson suggests that Byron™s use of ˜“Gazette” carries reverber-
ations of Scriblerian scorn of journalists™ (Rawson, Satire and Sentiment,
p. ±±).
 Garber discovers a ˜play of semblance™ in the harem cantos ˜with the nature
of language™ which continues in the preface to cantos ©, ©© and ©©© (Self,
Text, and Romantic Irony, pp. “·±).
 This source is noted, but not discussed in Carl Woodring, Politics in English
Romantic Poetry (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, ±·°), p. °.
 BLJ, ©, p. ·. For ironic references to the paper™s ˜impartiality™, see BLJ, ©,
pp. ±±·; ±·°.
µ For Byron™s frustration at ˜irregularities™ in the delivery of the paper, see BLJ,
©©©, p. µ.
 McGann supposes that ˜Byron seems to have read the account in Cobbett™s
Register™ (CPW, , p. ·±), but the quotation he supplies is not as close to
Byron™s preface as the Galignani report.
· That Byron is out of date is the view in, for example, E.D.H. Johnson™s dis-
sertation, ˜Lord Byron in Don Juan™ (especially Chapter Five) and Graham™s
study, Don Juan and Regency England. See also, Leslie A. Marchand, ˜Narrator
and Narration in Don Juan™, Keats-Shelley Journal µ (±·), “; pp. ; .
 Elizabeth French Boyd, Byron™s ˜Don Juan™, (London and New York:
Routledge, ±µ), p. ±µ.
 The British Critic chose to depict Byron™s topicality as a sign that he was out
of touch with English taste. The reviewer sought to warn him ˜that “in the
Notes to pages ±°“±µ± ±·
lowest deep there is a lower deep,” and that certain allusions still pass for
very scurvy jests in England, to say the least of them. We do not choose to
quote, but shall only remark that the note to the preface is repeated in the
th canto™ (RR, B: ©, p. ). Byron™s ˜allusion™ was to the Bishop of Clogher.
Appeals by Byron for more news than he could ¬nd in Galignani™s may be
found in his letters, see BLJ, ©, p.  and BLJ, ©©, p. ±±.
±° Kelsall, Byron™s Politics, p. ±·.
±± These matters are raised in a sequence of issues of GM, see, for example,
nos. ±·, ±·, ±, °·, °, ±, “·· (March ±± “June ±).
± The Letters of Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, (ed.) Betty T. Bennett,  vols. (Baltimore
and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, ±°“), ©, p. ±.
± Boyd, Byron™s ˜Don Juan™, pp. ±“µ.
± See, for example, GM, nos. ±·, ±·°, ±±µ.
±µ For Byron™s use of slang, see William St Clair, ˜Bamming and Humming™,
Byron Journal · (±·), “·.
± Graham argues that ˜the imported word “Or Molu” (especially when spelled
as Byron chooses to spell it) suggests, as Ennui and the many other French
words in the English cantos do, two contradictory truths about the Great
World and the culture it epitomises . . . The weakness of the Great World™s
argot is its shallow cosmopolitanism, but one strength of English is its being
a truly cosmopolitan tongue. So although the Great World™s frivolous babble
mocks a unity lost, it also suggests . . . an integration gained™ (Don Juan and
Regency England, pp. ±·“·).
±· For a recent discussion of these lines in relation to Byron™s Napoleonism,
see Diego Saglia, ˜Matrimonial Politics: Two references to Marie Louise of
Austria in Byron™s Poetry™, Byron Journal  (±), ±±“±µ.
± McGann suggests that Byron viewed her as an analogue to his own wife
(CPW, ©©, p. ±°).
± For a list of actual responses by individual female readers, see Haslett, Byron™s
Don Juan, pp. °“±.
° Quoted in Theodore Redpath, The Young Romantics and Critical Opinion ±°·“
± (London: Harrap, ±·) p. ; RR, B: ©©©, p. ±·.
± See, for example, George M. Ridenour, The Style of ˜Don Juan™, Yale Stud-
ies in English, vol. ± (New Haven and London: Yale University Press,
±°); Robert F. Gleckner, Byron and the Ruins of Paradise (Baltimore and
London: Johns Hopkins University Press, ±·); McGann, Don Juan in Con-
text, pp. “± and pp. ±“; Newlyn, ˜Paradise Lost™ and the Romantic Reader,
pp. ±“±.
 Peter Conrad, Shandyism: The Character of Romantic Irony (Oxford: Basil Black-
well, ±·), p. µ·.
 Ibid., p. °.
 Bernard Beatty, Byron™s Don Juan (Totowa: Barnes and Noble, ±µ), pp. ±±µ;
±±.
µ See Barton™s argument that Don Juan ˜is itself a type of “mobility” in that
the narrator™s mercurial involvement with the emotions and events of the
± Notes to pages ±µ± “±µ
moment never allows him to lose touch with the poem™s past, and this is also
the way it should be read™ (Byron: Don Juan, p. °).
 See Barton™s account of the ˜outrageous delaying tactics™ in the narrative
before Lambro™s return. Ibid., pp. ·“°.
· For a psychoanalytic reading of Byron™s treatment of and identi¬cation with
abandoned women, see Lawrence Lipking, Abandoned Women and Poetic Tra-
dition (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, ±), pp. “µ.
 Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice, (ed. and introd.) Tony Tanner (Harmonds-
worth: Penguin, ±·; repr. ±·), p. ·µ.
 CPW, , p. ·°.
° In Galignani™s Literary Gazette, nos. ·“ (September ±±), an article on ˜The
Most Important Inventions and Discoveries of our Times™ included Sir H.
Davy™s miners™ safety lamp and discussed the way that men of science were
˜endeavouring to discover a perpetuum mobile™. In GM, no. ±· ( January
±), an extract from the Yorkshire Gazette described a piece of mechanism
which almost produced perpetual motion.
± See Peter Cochran, ˜Mary Shelley™s Fair Copying of Don Juan™, The Keats “
Shelley Review ±° (±), ± “±.
 Caroline Franklin, ˜Juan™s Sea Changes: Class, Race and Gender in
Byron™s Don Juan™, in Nigel Wood (ed.), Don Juan, Theory in Practice Series
(Buckingham: Open University Press, ±), p. ·µ. See also Beatty ˜Byron
and the Paradoxes of Nationalism™, pp. ±µ“.
 Compare with Byron™s letter to Augusta of  July ±±:
“ the time passes “ I am very fond of riding and always was out of England “ but I
hate your Hyde Park “ and your turnpike roads “ & must have forests “ downs “
or deserts to expatiate in “ I detest knowing the road “ one is to go, and being
interrupted by your damned ¬ngerposts, or a blackguard roaring for twopence at a
turnpike. (BLJ, ©, p. ±)
The word ˜expatiate™ relates the pleasures of movement and the pleasure
of expansive conversation, but it also suggests that English travel is fraught
with interruption.
 The Poems and Fables of John Dryden, (ed.) James Kinsley (Oxford University
Press, ±µ; repr, ±).
µ Maria Edgeworth, Letters for Literary Ladies to which is added an Essay on the Noble
Science of Self-Justi¬cation, (ed.) Claire Connolly (London: J.M. Dent, ±),
pp. µ± “. For a helpful discussion of Byron™s satirising of Edgeworth in Don
Juan canto ©, see Franklin, Byron™s Heroines, p. ±.
 The same effect can be experienced in the prose notes and satirical inter-
ruptions to Childe Harold™s Pilgrimage cantos © and ©© where Byron questions
the morality of, for example, the treatment of ˜our Irish Helots™ (CPW, ©©,
p. ±±).
· Poems of Alexander Pope, The Rape of the Lock, ©©, ll. ±°µ“.
 Madame de Sta«l-Holstein, The In¬‚uence of Literature Upon Society, Translated
from the French of Madame de Sta¨l-Holstein, nd edn,  vols. (London: Henry
e
Colburn, ±±), ©©, p. ±·.
Notes to pages ±µ“±· ±
 It is also the image Byron used in letters to describe the separation scandal
of ±±, see BLJ, ©©, p. .
° For Byron™s use of French to make a moral point about English spiritual
apathy, see Manning, Byron and His Fictions, pp. “.
± Franklin, Byron™s Heroines, p. ±±·.
 Galperin provides an interesting Kristevan reading of this episode in canto ©
in The Return of the Visible, pp. “·°.
 The allusive links between the marriage of the Amundevilles and the med-
itations of the narrator in Childe Harold™s Pilgrimage canto ©©© are anticipated
in the description of the Norman abbey (©©©. µ·“) where the outlet from
the lake ˜dash™d into a steep cascade, . . . /until again subsiding /Its shriller
echoes “ like an infant made / Quiet™.
 For Byron™s creation of himself as ˜the driven outsider™, see Vincent Newey,
˜Authoring the Self: Childe Harold ©©© and ©™, in Beatty and Newey, Byron and
the Limits of Fiction, pp. ±“°; p. ±µ·.
µ The unsignalled echo of Hamlet juxtaposes the moment which ˜[gives] us
pause™ in Hamlet™s ˜To be, or not to be™ soliloquy with the reckless hopeless-
ness of ˜their she condition™.
 William A. Stephenson, ˜A Scott Echo in “Don Juan”, ©©©, ·“™, Notes
and Queries ° (±·µ), ; CPW, , p. ·µ; Amanda Gilroy, ˜Lord Byron
Borrows a Figure™, Byron Journal ° (±), “±. For a different contextu-
alisation of the image, see Gerald C. Wood, ˜The Metaphor of the Climates
and Don Juan™, Byron Journal  (±·), ±“µ.
· GM, no. ± (· April ±±), for example, carried a report of Hobhouse™s
speech on parliamentary reform and an attack on his ˜piebald patchwork of
rhetoric™.
 RR, B: , pp. °“µµ; p. °µ°.
 We can be almost certain that Byron read the Galignani™s account because
Hobhouse was staying with him in Pisa at the time and Hobhouse™s journal
for ± September ± records: ˜read a speech of Canning™s in Galignani™s
Messenger “ he cried at taking leave of his Liverpool friends “ we shall see if
he has taken leave “ wrote journal “ went out riding with Byron™ (BL. Add.
Ms. µµ, ±±v).
µ° Stephenson, ˜A Scott Echo™, p. .
µ± The Letters of Sir Walter Scott, (ed.) H.J.C. Grierson, ± vols. (London: Constable,
±“·), ©©, p. .
µ Bloom, The Visionary Company, p. ·°.

 ˜ BE TW EE N CARE LE S S N ES S AN D TR OU BL E™:
B Y R ON ™ S L AS T D I GR E S SI O NS
± CPW, ©©, pp. ±±·; ±°.
 For the relationship between this drama and Don Juan, see Anne Barton,
˜Don Juan Transformed™, pp. ±“°.
 Warton summarised Pope™s achievement as follows: ˜He is never above or
below his subject. Whatever poetical enthusiasm he actually possessed, he
° Notes to pages ±·“±··
with-held and suppressed . . . Hence he is a writer ¬t for universal perusal,
and of general utility; adapted to all ages and stations™ (The Works of Alexander
Pope, (ed. ) Joseph Warton ,  vols. (London, ±··), ©, p. lxix.
 Beaty, Byron the Satirist, p. ±·.
µ Letter of ±± November ±; Luther A. Brewer, My Leigh Hunt Library: The
Holograph Letters (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, ±), p. ±.
 BLJ, , p. ±.
· Wordsworth, Poetical Works, (ed.) Ernest De Selincourt (Oxford and New
York: Oxford University Press, ±; repr. ±µ), p. ·µ.
 Leigh Hunt, The Autobiography of Leigh Hunt; with Reminiscences of Friends and
Contemporaries,  vols. (London: Smith, Elder and Co., ±µ°), ©©, p. ±·±.
 BLJ, ©©©, p. ±.
±° Byron, Complete Miscellaneous Prose, p. ±µ. See also BLJ, ©, p. .
±± Hunt, Autobiography, ©©, p. ±·°.
± Ibid., ©©, p. ±·±; BLJ, ©, p. .
± See Chandler, ˜The Pope Controversy™, pp. ± “µ°.
± Examiner, ° August ±±µ, p. µ.
±µ Amarasinghe, Dryden and Pope in the Early Nineteenth Century, p. ±; Hunt,
Autobiography, ©©, p. ±.
± Rollins (ed.), The Letters of John Keats, ©©, p. ·; ©, p. ±. After Keats™s early
fashionable criticism of Pope he later showed a more creative response to
Pope™s images for being ˜in a mist™: see, for example, ©©, p. ± where Keats
borrows ˜What is this absorbs me quite™ from ˜The Dying Christian to His
Soul™.
±· See Examiner, ± June and ± July ±±·.
± For a detailed discussion of Pope™s Whig allegiance, see J.A. Downie, ˜±:
Pope and the Rhetoric of Jacobitism™, in David Fairer (ed.), Pope. New Contexts
(Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, ±°), pp. “.
± Corrected on  March ±±µ.
° Byron [with P.B. Shelley and Leigh Hunt], The Liberal: Prose and Verse form the
South,  vols. (London: John Hunt, ±“), ©, p. viii.
± Ibid., ©©, pp. v; ±µ“.
 Byron, Complete Miscellaneous Prose, p. ±.
 Ibid., pp. ±; ±; ±µ±; ±·.
 BLJ, , p. µ; ©©, p. ; Byron, Complete Miscellaneous Prose, p. ±µ.
µ For Pope™s efforts to associate the style of his writing with masculinity, see
Weinbrot, Alexander Pope, pp. ±“µ and Christa Knellwolf, A Contradiction Still:
Representations of Women in the Poetry of Alexander Pope (Manchester University
Press, ±), pp. “µ.
 BLJ, , pp. ; .
· Ibid., p. .
 Ibid., p. °.
 Brewer, My Leigh Hunt Library, p. ±·.
° Letter of ± April ±: MS., John Murray Archive.
± Letter of ± March ±: MS., John Murray Archive.
Notes to pages ±··“±° ±
 William Keach, ˜Cockney Couplets: Keats and the Politics of Style™, Studies
in Romanticism µ (±), ±“; p. ±.
 Woodring, Politics in English Romantic Poetry, pp. ±µ; ±“µ.
 BLJ, ©©, p. ±±.
µ See Byron™s earlier praise for Matthew Prior™s independence: ˜never trust
entirely to Authorship . . . a truly constituted mind will ever be independent™
(BLJ, ©©, p. ±·). See also Tom Moore™s exhortation to Byron regarding
The Liberal, ˜you must stand alone™ (The Letters of Thomas Moore, (ed.) Wilfred S.
Dowden,  vols. (Oxford Clarendon Press, ±), ©©, p. µ°).
 Malcolm Kelsall, ˜Totemism and Totalitarianism: Pope, Byron and the
Hanoverian Monarchy™, Forum ° (±), “°; p. .
· BLJ, , p. °. The preface dedicated this poem to Moore in ±±, celebrating
the ˜good old and now neglected heroic couplet™ (CPW, ©©©, p. ±). Byron
used a quotation from Pope in a letter to Moore of  April ± as an oblique
rebuke to Moore for his conciliatory attitude to orthodox ˜bigots™ (BLJ, ,
p. ±·).
 Manning, Reading Romantics, pp. ±µ“°·.
 Wolfson, Formal Charges, pp. ±; ·; ±±.
° Cronin, In Search of the Pure Commonwealth, pp. ±°“.
± Byron, Complete Miscellaneous Prose, pp. ±µ“°.
 BLJ, ©, p. ±·.
 The poem is in couplets, ending, ˜A cut that will conclude his capers / Good
honest Murray, give us up the papers™: MS., John Murray Archive.
 MS., John Murray Archive.
µ When Hobhouse visited Byron in Pisa in ± he recorded in his journal:
˜Lord Byron considered Leigh Hunt as a legacy left to him. L.H. induced
Lord B. to agree to set up a journal with him but I endeavoured to persuade
Lrd B. that he had better not engage in any such partnership and it appears
that Lord B. has managed to give up the scheme™ (BL Add. Ms. µµ,
±°v).
 Letter of  November ±: MS., John Murray Archive.
· Elizabeth, Lady Holland to her Son ±± “±µ, (ed.) The Earl of Ilchester
(London: John Murray, ±), p. °. Her lack of enthusiasm follows her
reading of Byron™s Memoirs (courtesy of Tom Moore): Byron thought the fact
that Moore had shown them to her ˜somewhat perilous™ (BLJ, ©©©, p. ±).
Hobhouse had also suggested to Byron in ±± that he should publish less:
˜Take Doctor™s advice “ let your readers get up from you with an appetite “
This is right with the best works and of course more right where there is any
doubt as to the nature of the performance™ (Graham, Byron™s Bulldog, p. ±).
 Leslie Mitchell, Holland House (London: Duckworth, ±°), p. ±±. The
Holland House preference for these writers was one reason why Byron™s
early satiric portrait of a quasi Grub-street assembling under their roof was
such an embarrassment to both parties.
 Beaty suggests that The Age of Bronze is produced as though ˜to recapture
some of the lost popularity of Childe Harold™s Pilgrimage™ (Byron the Satirist,
 Notes to pages ±°“±
p. ±·). Rather than an attempt to restore the years of fame, I think the
poem is a conscious testing of changed audience relations.
µ° Kelsall, Byron™s Politics, p. ±.
µ± BLJ, , pp. ; µ·.
µ Byron maintained that there was a crucial difference in manners between
those who inherited their titles and those who were ˜promoted™. See BLJ,
©©, p. °°.
µ BLJ, , p. ··.
µ Mary Shelley referred to the scandal in a letter to Byron of · November
±, see Shelley, Letters, ©, p. .
µµ See Marchand™s note in BLJ, , p. ±±.
µ BLJ, , pp. ±µ; ±.
µ· See William H. Marshall, Byron, Shelley, Hunt and The Liberal (Philadelphia:

<<

. 35
( 41 .)



>>