And (next day update) his response is also below:
Dear Dr. Callaway,
I noticed that you added me on Google+ after I visited your page on academia.edu. Thanks! I found you through the list of affiliates on the European Pragmatism Association blog, and noticed that we might have similar research interests.
Specifically, I'm currently working on a paper for my English major capstone class at Brigham Young University (I'm set to graduate in a few weeks). My professor, Gideon Burton, has been prompting us to seek "social proof" for our research through various media, which led me to online pragmatism communities and then to you. In my paper I hope to bring into conversation Wordsworth's quintessentially Romantic poetry and the pragmatism philosophies stemming from William James. I noticed that you study both pragmatism and transcendentalist literature, and wonder if you have ever dealt with the two subjects together (James and Emerson, for example).
Because our coursework this semester is centered on the literature of awe, my thesis is essentially that Wordsworth's earlier poetry, while clearly representative of Romantic conceptions of awe, portrays a more flowery sort of ungrounded awe than Wordsworth's later poetry; that later poetry carries a more pragmatic sense of awe in that it carries reference to Wordsworth's practical world rather than dwelling timelessly on sublime natural experience.
Obviously, the ideas need fleshing out, substantiation, etc., but I wondered your thoughts on even bringing pragmatism, with its chronologically later philosophical musings, to bear in a discussion of very un-pragmatic Romantic poetry. I could easily keep James and pragmatism as a philosophy out of my paper entirely. But I'm curious about viewing Wordsworth through the lens of William James, if only briefly.
Thank you for even enduring such a long email. Any feedback at all would, of course, be greatly appreciated. If it is at all interesting to you, we have a class blog where you can contextualize my class's musings on literature and awe. Any post with "pragmatism" in the title belongs to me.
Thanks again,
Jane Packard
Link to class blog: http://
Philadelphia, PA
Philadelphia, PA
April 2, 2014
Dear Miss Packard,
Thank you for your interest in my work on Emerson and pragmatism. I should say that literary theory has not been a central concern in my work and that I am skeptical of any "deconstruction" which does not serve a critical function in reconstruction. When my interests have turned toward romantic literature, beyond Emerson, I've been more interested in Coleridge than in Wordsworth, though Wordsworth is also an important influence on Emerson. As you may know, Emerson traveled to Wordsworth's home to meet him on one of his trips to Europe. Emerson did not get on as well in his meeting with Coleridge, on his first trip to Europe. By that early date in Emerson's career, Coleridge was already elderly and had turned quite conservative--reacting against Emerson's Unitarian background in particular. Still, Emerson can be understood as seeking a "romantic" revival of American "religious sentiment" in a way somewhat similar to Coleridge's efforts at moral and intellectual revival within the church of England.
I address the relationship between Emerson and William James in the Introduction to my edition of James' book, A Pluralistic Universe, and in general, the point might be taken that James was closer to Emerson than he is sometimes taken to be. I have been more concerned with Emerson's later work, The Conduct of Life (1860) and Society and Solitude (1870). My editions of both of these books are available (along with the James volume) from Amazon and other book sellers. (Go to Amazon and search for "H.G. Callaway") While I would insist that later Emerson cannot be understood in complete isolation from his more famous early work of the 1840's, Emerson's development is toward more practical concerns, and I address this issue in my Introductions to the Emerson volumes. There is an important change in Emerson's discussions of "transcendentalism" in particular. Late Emerson was definitely an important influence on the subsequent development of American pragmatism --James and Dewey in particular. I would say that American pragmatism has been sometimes more and sometimes less "romantic."
The text of my Introduction to the William James volume is available on line, and you might want to take a look at the discussion of the relation to Emerson in particular. See the text at the following link:
I do not know the basis of your choice of Brigham Young University, but notice has been taken here of the plans for a Mormon tabernacle here in Philadelphia. I have encountered Mormon missionaries on many occasions, both here in Philadelphia and in Europe. There is currently a production of the play, "The Book of Mormon" here in the city. So, the Mormon church has engaged some local interest. Regarding this, I would emphasize the great diversity of religion and the ethnic diversity of the city and of the eastern cities generally. This pluralism is quite important, both historically and in contemporary life. We like it. If I were a Mormon interested in Philadelphia, then I think I would first read up on William Penn and his "holy experiment" of religious pluralism in the foundation of Pennsylvania --the explicit absence of any official or established state religion. This contributed in important ways to the Ist Amendment to he U.S. constitution, and very similar material can be found in the earlier PA state constitution. I would say that Emerson's work is important in understanding central currents of liberal religion in American history. James' late work was also much concerned with religion --and inspired liberal religious thought.
Good luck with your work. If you have some more specific question, let me hear from you again. I hope that some of the above will be helpful.
Sincerely,
H.G. Callaway
No comments:
Post a Comment