|
|
TUGR HOME SHORT STORIES
|
Canonical
Expansion: The Case of Caroline Bowles Ben
P. Robertson, Doctoral Student, English Like other periods of British literature, the Romantic Period has long been dominated by a canon of male poetry writers—a sort of masculine social club that has strongly resisted the incorporation of female poets. Anyone who knows a little about Romantic verse will readily identify the most important members of this club: William Blake, William Wordsworth, Samuel Coleridge, Percy Shelley, John Keats, and Lord Byron. The female voice is significantly absent from this select list of names. In recent decades, however, Romanticists have waged an ongoing struggle to give that female voice the recognition it deserves—to inscribe the names of at least a few women on the canonical roster of the masculine social club. For example, a recent anthology of Romanticism, English Romantic Writers (2nd edition), edited by David Perkins, begins with a few selections of poetry from Anna Laetitia Barbauld and Charlotte Smith. While the Perkins anthology is commendable in its incorporation of the woman’s voice into the canon (assuming, of course, that anthologies of this type strongly influence canon formation), only eleven of the thirty-two authors are women. Of course, many logistic and legal factors undoubtedly influenced Perkins’ choices, but one poet who should have been included in this anthology—and who should be included in similar anthologies—is Caroline Bowles. Caroline Bowles has long been ignored—her membership in the canonical social club has been denied. Very little of her poetry has been reprinted beyond a 1996 edition of The Widow’s Tale. Her poems are rarely anthologized, rarely taught, and hardly known. Even her letters are printed merely as responses to the correspondence of Robert Southey, and only one biography of Bowles’ life (that of Virginia Blain) exists. Many critical works simply mention her as Robert Southey’s wife rather than recognizing her as a poet in her own right.
This canonical
proscription of Bowles' poetry must not continue. From Ellen Fitzarthur
to The Birth-day, the texts of Bowles' personal canon demonstrate a
vitality and beauty that place them on a level which rivals that of the texts
usually included in the traditional masculine canon of the Romantic Period.
Bowles is just as much a Romantic writer as Wordsworth or Byron, grappling with
difficult issues - from skeptical religion to disillusioned politics to the
mundane, quotidian existence of a woman of the early nineteenth century. Some of
her poetry even borders on the Gothic. Bowles, however, is not merely a Romantic
Poet; she is a good Romantic poet. The quality of her work rivals that of
her masculine contemporaries, and her poetry deserves recognition as a powerful
evocation of the issues that help define the Romantic Period. As the canon of
British Romantic poetry evolves, it should expand beyond its traditionally
masculine bounds even further than is already has, and Caroline Bowles should be
a part of that expansion - a part of that new, more balanced canonical social
club that includes more female poets. Send Comments and Questions to: ©Copyright 2001 The University of
Tulsa Graduate Review, All Rights Reserved. |
