Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T19:32:20.414Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Discourse of Modernism in the Age of Jefferson

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2009

Frank Shuffelton
Get access

Extract

The 18th Century began with a debate between the ancients and the moderns in which the proponents of classicism seemed to enjoy a temporary advantage, but it ended with two revolutions whose victors loudly proclaimed a radical disjunction with the past. The age obviously contains more than one site on which we might locate a discourse of modernism, but the differences between a battle of the books and guillotining a king suggest that we should expect to find more than one kind of modernism. Or better, we might expect to find a discourse of modernism rich with an unrecognized and unresolved problematics that has become somewhat clearer, both to the original speakers and to us, only in the light of subsequent texts and events. In the summer of 1776, for example, many Americans thought that the Declaration of Independence had resolved an ambiguous situation by breaking with the political conventions of the past, but scarcely a decade later they required another text to clarify and constitute relationships among themselves. That Constitution immediately called into play discourse about the possible futures it made possible, and the advent of the French Revolution two years later called for a total reevaluation of the American revolutionary project. Some participants in the national discourse thought the events in France exposed the fallacy of any revolution that sought to go beyond the limits of replacing an unjust regime and aspired to transform human nature and human culture, while others thought the French experience made more explicit and extended the genuine meaning of the American Revolution as a radical transformation of history. The discourse of the Declaration, that of the Constitution, and that of the response to the French Revolution suggest that the origination and establishment of the young United States might be helpfully understood as an exemplary episode of the modernism that transformed the postmedieval world.

Type
Research Article
Information
Prospects , Volume 15 , October 1990 , pp. 23 - 37
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1. Peter Ackroyd, for example, locates the emergence of a “classical modernism” in Restoration England and describes its transformation into “the modernism of our own time” in his Notes for a New Culture: An Essay on Modernism (London: Vision Press, 1976), pp. 9–26Google Scholar. Reiss, Timothy J. in The Discourse of Modernism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1982), pp. 9–11Google Scholar, on the other hand, contends that “modern Western discourse … the ‘analytico-referential’,” became the dominant “discursive class” by the beginning of the 18th Century, “a kind of epistemic development” that is being echoed in our own time. Modern discourse is not the same thing as the discourse of modernism, but the present essay shares with studies as different as these at least the understanding that modernism is most usefully considered not as a specific event or set of events but as a strand of discourse (within the larger fabric of human discourse) concerned with the selfconscious transformation of historical consciousness.

2. Blumenberg, Hans, The Legitimacy of the Modern Age, trans. Wallace, Robert M. (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1983), p. 22.Google Scholar

3. de Crevecoeur, J. Hector St. John, Letters from an American Farmer (New York: Signet, 1963), pp. 61–62.Google Scholar

4. de Tocqueville, Alexis, Democracy in America, ed. Bradley, Phillips (New York: Vintage, 1954), vol. 2, p. 342Google Scholar. Note the context here-this isolation exposes man to despotism, but the press gives him a means of defense by enabling him to appeal to the nation. Crevecoeur's happy private man has yielded to the anxious citizen who uses the machinery of discourse to make public his private fears.

5. Bradbury, Malcolm and McFarlane, James, eds., Modernism: 1890–1930 (New York: Penguin, 1976), p. 29.Google Scholar

6. Singal, Daniel Joseph, “Towards a Definition of American Modernism,” American Quarterly 39 (Spring 1987): 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. Bradbury, and McFarlane, , Modernism, p. 26.Google Scholar

8. Thus the implications of the structure of the essays in American Quarterly. Note Signal's citation of Bradbury and McFarlane's “stages” of modernist development and the similar use of this figure in Quinones, Ricardo, Mapping Literary Modernism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985), pp. 8–11.Google Scholar

9. Nietzsche, Friedrich, The Use and Abuse of History, trans. Collins, Adrian (New York: Liberal Arts Press, 1949), p. 5Google Scholar. Paul de Man offers his own translation of Nietzsche in his citations, but it is useful, particularly for nonreaders of German, to consult additional translations in order to recognize the effect of de Man's own choice of diction for his version as well as to consider passages not quoted by de Man. Quotations from this translation cite it simply as Nietzsche; citations to de Man refer to his translations.

10. Nietzsche, quoted by de Man, Paul, “Literary History and Literary Modernity,” in Blindness and Insight (1971; rept. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983), pp. 146–47.Google Scholar

11. de Man, , “Literary History,” p. 148.Google Scholar

12. Nietzsche, , Use and Abuse, p. 21.Google Scholar

13. Franklin, Benjamin, Writings (New York: Library of America, 1987), pp. 334–35.Google Scholar

14. For their reading in history, see Colbourne, H. Trevor, The Lamp of Experience: Whig History and the Intellectual Origins of the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1965)Google Scholar. See also Bailyn, Bernard, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967).Google Scholar

15. Letter of December 21, 1819, in The Adams-Jefferson Letters, ed. Cappon, Lester J. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959), vol. 2, p. 551.Google Scholar

16. Letter of August 1, 1816, Adams-Jefferson Letters, vol. 2, p. 485.Google Scholar

17. Rush, Benjamin, “On the Defects of the Confederation.” in The Selected Writings of Benjamin Rush, ed. Runes, Dagobert D. (New York: Philosophical Library, 1947), p. 26.Google Scholar

18. The term revolutionary immortality is Lifton, Robert J.'s; see his discussion of Mao and the Red Guard movement, Revolutionary Immortality: Mao Tse-Tung and the Chinese Cultural Revolution (New York: Random House, 1968).Google Scholar

19. Barlow, Joel, Advice to the Privileged Orders (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1956), pp. 1, 2.Google Scholar

20. Barlow, , Advice, p. 10.Google Scholar

21. Barlow, , Advice, p. 10Google Scholar. Cf. Camfield, Gregg, “Joel Barlow's Dialectic of Progress,” Early American Literature 21 (1986): 131–43Google Scholar, who, discussing this treatise as a philosophic text, astutely notes Barlow's contradictions but says that he “willingly” allows them (p. 140). I would prefer to suggest that he is trapped in the necessary contradictions of the discourse of modernism that seeks both to explain history and dismiss it.

22. Manuel, Frank, Shapes of Philosophical History (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1965), p. 8.Google Scholar

23. Barlow, , Advice, p. 19Google Scholar. for other swipes at Aristotle, see pp. 14 and 39.

24. For Turgot, see Nisbet, Robert, History of the Idea of Progress (New York: Basic Books, 1980), pp. 179–86Google Scholar. This quotation is on p. 180.

25. de Man, , “Literary History,” pp. 150, 151.Google Scholar

26. de Man, , “Literary History,” pp. 162, 165Google Scholar; and Weiner, Jon, “Deconstructing de Man,” The Nation (01 9, 1988): 22Google Scholar. For a less flippant and more engaged critique of de Man's position, see Lentricchia, Frank, Criticism and Social Change (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), pp. 38–52Google Scholar. Lentricchia's charge that deconstruction avoids “a discourse of knowledge as action and power” in favor of “the necessarily endless demonstration that representations fail to do what they say they do” (p. 50) captures the difference between Barlow's (and potentially Bradbury and MacFarlane's) version of modernism and de Man's.

27. Barlow, , Advice, pp. 14–15, 2.Google Scholar

28. Barlow, , Advice, p. 103.Google Scholar

29. Barlow, Joel, Vision of Columbus: A Poem in Nine Books (Hartford: Hudson and Goodwin, 1787), pp. xxi, 25.Google Scholar

30. Nietzsche, , Use and Abuse, pp. 5, 7Google Scholar; for Barlow's sources, see Howard, Leon, The Connecticut Wits (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1943), pp. 145–51Google Scholar. For a more generous assessment of Barlow's radical poetics, see Mulford, Carla, “Radicalism in Joel Barlow's The Conspiracy of Kings (1792),” in Deism, Masonry, and the Enlightenment, ed. Lemay, J. A. Leo (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1987), pp. 137–57Google Scholar; for Barlow's influence on Blake, see Lemay, , pp. 148–50.Google Scholar

31. Barlow, , Advice, pp. 14–15, 105–6Google Scholar. The second part of the Advice was published in 1795, after the Terror had begun.

32. De Man, , “Literary History,” p. 151.Google Scholar

33. Nietzsche, , Use and Abuse, p. 48.Google Scholar

34. Rush, Benjamin, “Of the Mode of Education Proper in a Republic” and “Plan of a Federal University,” in Selected Writings, pp. 92, 104Google Scholar; and Barlow, Joel, Prospectus of a National Institution to be Established in the United States (Washington, D.C.: Samuel H. Smith, 1806), p. 5.Google Scholar

35. Jefferson, Thomas, “Declaration,” in Thomas Jefferson: Writings, ed. Peterson, Merrill (New York: Library of America, 1984), p. 19Google Scholar. Women and people of color have rightly protested the historic and pragmatic interpretation of “all men are created equal” to effectively reduce “all men” to “most white males,” but it is the semantically powerful alternative of “all men” equaling “all human beings” that ironically gives force to all attempts to break with racist, sexist hegemonies.

36. Daghistany, Ann and Johnson, J. J., “Romantic Irony, Spatial Form, and Joyce's Ulysses,” in Spatial Form in Narrative, ed. Smitten, Jeffrey R. and Daghistany, Ann (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981), p. 50.Google Scholar

37. Bryan, Susan, “Reauthorizing the Text: Jefferson's Scissors Edit of the Gospels,” Early American Literature 22 (Spring 1987): 19.Google Scholar

38. Jefferson, , Writings, pp. 902–4.Google Scholar

39. Jefferson, , Writings, pp. 963, 890, 1344–46.Google Scholar

40. Appleby, Joyce, Capitalism and a New Social Order (New York: New York University Press, 1984), pp. 4, 5, 81.Google Scholar