Results by title

Erickson examines the work of Marianne Moore in order to provide some consistently successful strategies for understanding her poetry

In 1935, T.S. Eliot wrote that Marianne Moore’s poems “form part of the small body of durable poetry written in our time.” In this comprehensive critical study of the American poet Marianne Moore (1887-1972) and her work, Erickson amply justifies Eliot’s praise, demonstrating the poet’s ability to combine close observation with a worldview presentation that is at once intuitive, kaleidoscopic, and optimistic. Unfortunately, over the years the excellence and originality of Moore’s work has been overshadowed by its apparent inscrutability. Erickson examines the work of Marianne Moore in order to provide some consistently successful strategies for understanding her poetry.

The thesis is centered in a line from Moore’s poem, “Armor’s Undermining Modesty”:” What is more precise than precision? Illusion.” Erickson argues that Moore came to see herself humorously as “Imagnifico, a Wizard in Words,” a magician who used her conjuries to express a truth beyond reason, a truth described by the philosopher Henri Bergson as intuition, the highest stage of the evolution of human understanding. Is Erickson’s contention that Moore’s sense of magic is inextricably bound up in her own uniquely feminine epistemology, the tendency to place great value on intuition, and to find one’s own voice among collections of many voices.

This study demonstrates that Moore’s voice is arguably the strongest female voice in twentieth century American literature and her poetic voice could hold its own in the company of the best of the other modernists. Unlike many current scholars, Erickson examines closely the texts of Moore’s poems themselves, allowing the poet’s own voice to speak clearly. The study also explores Moore’s obsession with time, her preoccupation with the visual, her interest in the forms of Hebrew verse and her “susceptibility to happiness,” an outlook at some odds with the twentieth century’s fascination with the “romance of failure.”

While the book is scholarly in its intent and carefully documented, it is eminently readable and will be of interest of anyone fascinated by the mind of a brilliant twentieth century woman.

Scholars no longer see Jonathan Edwards as the fire-and-brimstone preacher who deemed his parishioners “sinners in the hands of an angry god.” Edwards now figures as caring and socially conscious and exerts increased influence as a philosopher of the American school of Protestantism. In this study, he becomes the progenitor of an alternative tradition in American letters.

In Knowing, Seeing, Being, Jennifer L. Leader argues that Edwards, the nineteenth-century poet Emily Dickinson, and the twentieth-century poet Marianne Moore share a heretofore underrecognized set of religious and philosophical preoccupations. She contends that they represent an alternative tradition within American literature, one that differs from Transcendentalism and is grounded in Reformed Protestantism and its ways of reading and interpreting the King James Bible and the natural world. According to Leader, these three writers' most significant commonality is the Protestant tradition of typology, a rigorous mode of interpreting scripture and nature through which certain figures or phenomena are read as the fulfillment of prophecy and of God's work. Following from their similar ways of reading, they also share philosophical and spiritual questions about language, epistemology (knowing), perception (seeing), and physical and spiritual ontology (being). In connecting Edwards to these two poets, in exploring each writer's typological imagination, and through a series of insightful readings, this innovative book reevaluates three major figures in American intellectual and literary history and compels a reconsideration of these writers and their legacies.