Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma

University of Oklahoma

The Unmediated Vision: An Interpretation of Wordsworth, Hopkins, Rilke, and Valry by

Geoffrey H. Hartman
Review by: Stewart C. Wilcox
Books Abroad, Vol. 30, No. 4 (Autumn, 1956), p. 443
Published by: Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40099919 .
Accessed: 20/06/2014 22:53
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma and University of Oklahoma are collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Books Abroad.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.185 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 22:53:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Books

in

English

(For otherBoo\s in English,see "Head-Liners")

^ John V. Curry, S.J. Deception in ElizabethanComedy.Chicago.Loyola University Press. 1955.ix + 197 pages.$3.50.
In this book, publishedin the Loyola Press's
"JesuitStudies,"the authorhas consideredthe
device of deceptionin most of the majorand
many of the minor Elizabethanand Jacobean
comedies.The viperouscriticmight assertthat
everyoneknows deceptionin one form or anotheroccursin most comedieswrittenbetween
1560 and 1642, but here we have a detailed
analysisof the major modes and types. The
subjecthas been ratherrigorouslylimited, so
that self-deception,which is discussedin the
firstchapterbriefly,is not examined,as it does
not fall within the purviewof this book. The
exclusion of self-deception,however, means
that we do not get quite to the heartof comedy, and the implicationsof Macilente,Brainworm,Mosca,Volpone,Face as deceiverswho
comment are not followed out to their remarkablylogicalconclusions.The deceiverat
his best forces vice and folly to reveal themselvesin theirmost characteristic
forms.
C. G. Thayer
Universityof Oklahoma
^ AnnaLyonHaight.BannedBoo\s: Trends
in Censorshipfrom Homer to Hemingway. New York. Bowker.New ed., 1955.
xix + 172 pages.$0.75.
books nave been bannedirom time immemorial for heresy,treason,and obscenity.Many
have survived the ban, and become classics.
Harvardassigned as requiredreading books
whichwerebannedin Boston:"Veriteen dega
de la riviereCharles,erreurau dela."The banning of the Bible in the vernacular,and Hitler's burningof "un^German"
works, are the
most extreme examples in point. Here are
listed a numberof striking and amusing examples.It is a pity that a pieceof work so well
meantand so usefulshouldbe marredby carelessness.Mrs.Haight ascribesto VoltaireVoltaire's most quoted dictum, which happens
to belongto S. G. Tallentyre;butshe is in good
company.There is a differencebetween "Jacobean"and "Jacobine,"and the "Archbishop of Pompeii"who disapprovedof D'Annunzio's Saint Sebastianmust have been in partibus.But, in spiteof minorblemishes,the work
stands.

In reading these many ludicrous and lamentablecases of bigotry, I was struck with
the thought that the worst censorshipis that
of an uninformedand torpid public. If the
readers are alert, official thunder does little
harm. It may do some good: Jurgenbecamea
best seller, and Ulysseswas more avidly read
when it had to be smuggledat fifteen dollars
a copy. The importantpoint is not that Tartuffe and Le manage de Figaro could be suppressedfor a while, thatLes fleursdu mal and
Madame Bovary were prosecuted;it is that
they could be written at all, and find a responsiveaudience. Persecutionis a challenge
and an advertisement;but in a smugly "liberal" state, invincibly committed to its own
Way-of-Life,delicatebooks are smotheredby
dull indifference.
AlbertGuerard,Sr.
StanfordUniversity
^ GeoffreyH. Hartman. The Unmediated
Vision:An Interpretationof Wordsworth,
Hopkins, Ril\e, and Valery.New Haven,
Conn. Yale UniversityPress. 1954.xii +
206 pases. $5.
In this extraordinarilypenetratinganalysisof
"Tintern Abbey," "The Windhover," "Die
Erwachsene,"and "La Dormeuse,"Hartman
seeks to avoid any single "approach"in criticism. Insteadhe hopes to find "a methoduniversalin its appeal,a methodof interpretation
which could reaffirmthe radicalunity of human knowledge."He is remarkablysuccessful. "The four poets . . . ," says the author,
"areunitedby theircommonstrivingfor pure
representation. . . distinguished from that
of Jewish or medieval Christianthought in
that its motive and terminalobject is identified not with the God of the Testaments,but
with Nature, the body, or human consciousness."The qualityof Hartman'scriticismsis so
subtle, however, that a brief review cannot
fairlyillustratehis method.Any qualifications
one may have- that his subtletiesmayat times
be overly refined- are thereforebest subordinated to an overallestimate:that the volume
is a valuable addition to studies in modern
poetry.
StewartC. Wilcox
Universityof Oklahoma

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.185 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 22:53:40 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions