MANY THANKS TO PIERRE MARTEAU http://pierre-marteau.com/novels/market/market-3.html
Conflicting terminologies
Novels dominated the market before Robinson Crusoe appeared in 1719 - this allowed critics to call for a "New Romance" to replace the scandalous productions of the 17th century.
In the course of the 17th century two European languages - Spanish and English - modified the terminologies employed for referring to prose fiction. The old word "romance" gave way to the new word "novel" which denoted short histories. At the end of the 18th century, in consequence of a new development, both languages needed new words for referring to short histories. It was not that works of epic length had been displaced by the short histories that had been fashionable in the 17th century. The mid-18th century had seen the old epic-length multi-volume fiction prosper again. In English this was referred to by the new word "novel"; French and German continued to use the old terms "romain" and "Roman" respectively (and Italian "romanzo") . Since the expected triumph of the short genre had failed to take place, a distinction between long and short performances became necessary again. The English began to speak of the "novella" in order to designate what the "novel" had once been. The "novel" itself had become a genre of epic dimensions in a process one might best describe with early 18th century terminology as the "rise of a new romance".
The French and German markets allowed the old terms "romain", "Roman" to live on. The developments were, however, much the same. The 17th century had seen a rise of "petites histoires", "Historien von curieusen Begebenheiten" in the field of the old "Roman". The 18th century saw a new production of full blown epic performances on the same field.
The battle between "novels" and "romances" was old. Chaucer's Pilgrims had fought it when they placed lofty performances in the tradition of classic and medieval epics against performances in the lower genres of stories told simply to make certain points - on the cleverness of students, the stupidity of jealous old husbands, the inhabitants of a certain city, the truth of women, and what not. Authors of full blown romances hardly cared about the lower production. Authors of the short genre following Boccaccio and Chaucer promoted their strand of writing more aggressively against the old type of prose fiction: the short exemplary stories defeated, they unanimously claimed, the longer "romantick" productions of tedious virtues and bombastic language.
The argument reached a new level with the arrival of the printing presses. Romances became accessible, so critical voices claimed, as a modern sort of escapism leading into a dream world of lost chivalry. The competition evolved into an open conflict with the publication of Cervantes' Don Quixote (1605/15) - the epic about the reader who had devoured all the volumes of the Amadis and ended up losing his reason over them. The alternative was openly stated with the publication of Cervantes' Novelas Exemplares in 1613: The old romance had to give way to the European tradition of the novella. But romances continued to be written - especially in the bucolic genre following Heliodor. In the mid-17th century, however, there was opposition to the romance even among French authors who supplied Europe with romances at the time.
"From Plays, they proceeded to talk of Romances. The Counsellor said, that nothing could be more diverting, than our modern Romances; that the French alone knew how to write good ones; however, that the Spaniards had had a peculiar Talent to compose little Stories, which they called Novelas, which are more useful and more probable Patterns for us to follow, than those imaginary Heroes of Antiquity, who grow oftentimes tedious and troublesome, by being over-civil, and over-virtuous. In short, that those Examples which may be imitated are at least as beneficial, as those that exceed all probability and belief: from all which he concluded that if a man could write as good Novels in French, as those of Miguel de Cervantes, they would soon be as much in Vogue, as ever heroick Romances have been. Roquebrune was not of the same Opinion: He affirm’d very positively, that there could be no Pleasure in reading Romances, unless they contained the Adventures of Princes, nay, and of great Princes too, and that for that reason Astrea only pleased him here and there. In what Histories can one find Kings and Emperors enough to make new Romances, said the Counsellor? We must feign ’em replied Roquebrune, as they usually do in fabulous Stories, which have no Foundation in History. I perceive then, return’d the Counsellor, that Don Quixot is very little in your Favour? ’Tis the silliest Book that ever I read replied Roquebrune; tho’ it be cried up by a great many Men of Wit."
The Whole Comical Works of Monsr. Scarron (London: S. & J. Sprint/ J. Nicholson/ R. Parker/ B. Tooke, 1700), p.101.
A generation later France had adopted the new taste.
The novels were shorter, they concentrated on single events, they did not teach by presenting over-virtuous heroes but by giving examples of how things could develop - whether good or bad. The incidents were not far fetched but mostly recent and plausible. The characters showed weaknesses, and the dangers they suffered moved the readers to indentify with them, which allowed the absence of a moralising narrator's voice. Compassion had to create the moral balance especially since the new stories did not necessarily end happily any longer. The author of a novel was in the new position of a historian:
"Every Historian ought to be extreamly uninterested; he ought neither to Praise nor Blame those he speaks of; he ought to be contented with Exposing the Actions, leaving an entire Liberty to the Reader to judge as he pleases, without taking any Care not to blame his Heroes, or make their Apology; he is no Judge of the Merit of his Heroes, his Business is to represent them in the same Form as they are, and describe their Sentiments, Manners and Conduct; it deviates in some manner from his Character, and that perfect uninterestedness, when he adds to the Names of those he introduces Epithets either to Blame or Praise them; there are but few Historians who exactly follow this Rule, and who maintain this Difference, from which they cannot deviate without rendring themselves guilty of Partiality."The Secret History, of Queen Zarah (Albigion, 1705), p.[xviii-ixx].
At the turn into the 18th century the novel took the next decisive step - it became a medium of private use. The great authors of European scandal had set the example by using fiction to modify their private reputations publicly.
The novel flourished as criticism had hardly touched it. It flourished as the genre anyone could enter - and that was an advantage in itself:
"Stop your Career Sir, interrupted a Lady, your Enthusiasm has transported you a little too far; if the Books you seem so inveterate against, chance not to please you, prithee don't read 'em, no one obliges you. All Men's Tastes are not so delicately Nice as yours; many read for pleasure only, and are less solicitous for the Useful than the Agreeable. Histories of Gallantry are very Proper to relax the Mind; and the very worst have something in 'em diverting. I think instead of railing thus at our Modern productions, you ought to give those Persons Thanks, who wear themselves out for our Entertainment: The very Number of Authors is agreeable, and advantageous; [...]. If some new Author has the ill Fortune to displease, be not however too hasty in condemning him; Time may produce, even for him something more accomplish'd. The first Flight is never a Masterpiece [...]. Never discourage a young Author by despising his first Works, nor make him despair, utterly throw away his Pen; but on the contrary animate him by small Commendations, which may in the end prove so many Spurs to Perfection."
Entertainments of Gallantry (London: J. Morphew, 1712), p.74-77.link
The group of story-tellers and listeners proved the point with the decision to become authors themselves. All it needed was someone to pen down their discourses and to publish them anonymously - they would all be authors the very next moment .
The cities which had the misfortune to have such young novelists finding the press felt pestered with an unprecedented production of urban scandal - a Leipzig merchant complained in an argument he had with some students boasting of the new production:
"[...] if only I think of these Books, which are most certainly not written by great scholars, whose dignity would not permit such trifles, but which can also not have been written by anyone without learning, which have hence to be written by students! I am not speaking of the Politische Bratenwender ["Political Roasting Spit"] the Der Politische Leyermann ["Political Organ-Grinder"], the Politische Feuermäuer-Kehrer ["Political Chimney-Sweeper"]link etc. but of those little things called romances which abound with nasty, ridiculous histories and speeches bragging of adventures and comedies of love. [...] Only recently a merchant related a bunch of little histories of such simplicity and grossness of certain women when he was interrupted by a student asking him who invented such stuff. The merchant, however, replied: "no one but you gentlemen create these curious histories; as only among you there exist heads idle and voluptuous enough to conceive such stories [...]. One has only to look at the imprints, though often enough there are no publishers mentioned there, to guess that a city with a famous university produces them. The stories reveal these cities even if they carefully avoid mentioning their names. Just as titles like the Student's Confectionery offer all kinds of frivolous speeches, jests, snide, and follies to be used in society; these novels teach the young with evil thoughts desires and wishes uncleanness, lust and whore-mongering. Some are so terrible that they can inflame a heart most chaste, all of them will throw a less stable reader into a turbulence. A certain monthly journal defended the poor romances as one might improve one's style by reading them [...]. Yet maybe Gratian's Criticalink or Barclay's Argenis served such purposes but not these things which are full of half true and half invented love stories [...] to be read out of curiosity and lust."
George Ernst Reinwalds Academien- und Studenten-Spiegel (Berlin: J. A. Rüdiger, 1720), p.424-27.link
The novel had by 1720 taken a long way from the acclaimed alternative to the romance to the low scandalous production the Dutch international market had brought about. A reform seemed necessary and those who called for it, looked back on models of the last century - Barclay and Gracian and the didactic political satires of the 1680s were in the Merchant's memory as productions of lost merits. Gundling had complained about the "half true and half fictitious production" which had swept the market.link The merchant repeated the complaint with his words spoken against the "half true and half invented love stories" the young student authors brought forward. A return to fundametally fictitous works seemed to be a remedy, yet the market hardly allowed a return into a presumably golden age to be found in the past.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento