xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 007 cr-bnu---uuuuu
008 s2011 flu ob 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E14-SFE0004863
"show me the money!" :
h [electronic resource] /
b a pecuniary explication of william makepeace thackeray's critical journalism
by Gary Simons.
[Tampa, Fla] :
University of South Florida,
Title from PDF of title page.
Document formatted into pages; contains 306 pages.
(Ph.D.)--University of South Florida, 2011.
Includes bibliographical references.
Text (Electronic dissertation) in PDF format.
ABSTRACT: Scholars have heretofore under-examined William Makepeace Thackeray's early critical essays despite their potential for illuminating Victorian manners and life. Further, these essays' treatments of aesthetics, class, society, history, and politics are all influenced by the pecuniary aspects of periodical journalism and frequently expose socio-economic attitudes and realities. This study explicates the circumstances, contents, and cultural implications of Thackeray's critical essays. Compensatory payments Thackeray received are reconciled with his bibliographic record, questions regarding Thackeray's interactions with periodicals such as Punch and Fraser's Magazine answered, and a database of the payment practices of early Victorian periodicals established. Thackeray's contributions to leading London newspapers, the Times and the Morning Chronicle, address history, travel, art, literature, religion, and international affairs. Based upon biblio-economic payment records, cross-references, and other information, Thackeray's previously skeletal newspaper bibliographic record is fleshed out with twenty-eight new attributions. With this new information in hand, Thackeray's views on colonial emigration and imperialism, international affairs, religion, medievalism, Ireland, the East, and English middle-class identity are clarified. Further, Thackeray wrote a series of social and political "London" letters for an Indian newspaper, the Calcutta Star. This dissertation establishes that Thackeray's letters were answered in print by "colonial" letters written by James Hume, editor of the Calcutta Star; their mutual correspondence thus constitutes a revealing cosmopolitan colonial discourse. The particulars of Thackeray's Calcutta Star writings are established, insights into the personalities and viewpoints of both men provided, and societal aspects of their correspondence analyzed. In his many newspaper art exhibition reviews Thackeray popularized serious painting and shaped middle-class taste. The nature and timing of Thackeray's art essays are assessed, espoused values characterized and earlier analyses critiqued, and Thackeray's role introducing middle-class readers to contemporary Victorian art explored. Other Thackeray newspaper reviews addressed literature; indeed, Thackeray's grounding of literature in economic realities demonstrably carried over from his critical articles to his subsequent work as a novelist, creating a unity of theme, style, and subject between his early and late writings. Literary pathways originating in Thackeray's critical reviews are shown to offer new insights into Thackeray novels Catherine, Vanity Fair, Henry Esmond, and Pendennis.
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
Rogers, Pat .
W. M. Thackeray
x British & Irish Literature Art History Journalism
t USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
Critical Journalism by Gary Simons A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of English College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Pat Rogers, Ph.D., Litt. D. Marty Gould, Ph.D. Regina Hewitt, Ph.D. Laura Runge, Ph. D. Date of Approval March 24, 2011 Keywords: W. M. Thackeray, British Literature, Literary Criticism, Periodicals, Art Criticism Copyright 2011, Gary Simons
Dedication To my wife Jeannie, my love, my companion and partner in life and in learning, who encouraged me to take early retirement and enter graduate school, shared with me the pleasures of the study of English literature and thereby intensified them, patiently listened to my enthusiasms, and urged me onward at every stage of this work,
Acknowledgments I would like to thank Dr. Pat Rogers for his general guidance of the work reported in this dissertation and for his personal example of the essence of academic scholarship. I would also like to thank the other members of my dissertation committee, Dr. Marty Gould, Dr. Regina Hewitt, and Dr. Laura Runge for their counsel and support both in and outside of the classroom. The embryonic idea behind this study was developed in a course taught by Dr. Gould, and I particularly thank him for that early encouragement and for an early detailed review of a portion of this dissertation. Dr. William Scheuerle provided guidance and support and introduced me to the study of Victorian periodicals. Dr. Peter Shillingsburg encouraged my early interest in the writings of William Makepeace Thackeray and generously sent me back copies of an invaluable resource, The Thackeray Newsletter I also want to acknowledge the information regarding the British periodical Punch kindly provided by Dr. Patrick Leary and the assistance of Michael St. John McAlister of the British Library. Throughout this effort my wife Jean Simons has been a constant source of support, contributing ideas of substance, editorially improving the manuscript, and offering encouragement. This dissertation could not have been written without her.
i Table of Contents List of Tables .................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures .................................................................................................................... iv Abstract ......................................................................................................................v Introduction ......................................................................................................................1 Reconciling the Accounts of a Victorian Journalist ..............................................................................................................8 1.1 The Account Book for 1838 ............................................................................12 1.1.1 Reconciling Accounts .......................................................................12 1.1.2 Against ............................... 15 1.2 The Virtual Account Book from 1838 to 1843 ................................................18 1.2.1 The Quarterly Reviews .....................................................................20 1.2.2 Biblio-Economic Reconciliations .....................................................27 1.2.3 Punch in 1842 ...................................................................................30 1.3 The Account Book for 1844 ............................................................................32 1.4 The Virtual Account Book 1844-1848 ............................................................37 1.4.1 Punch 1844-1848 ..............................................................................40 1.4.2 Biblio-Economic Answers and Questions ........................................43 1.5 Payment Practices and Rates ...........................................................................45 Notes ....................................................................................................................48 Chapter 2 he Victorian World in the Times .............54 2.1 Thackeray and the Times ................................................................................. 55 2.2 Bibliographic Background ...............................................................................57 2.3 Following the Biblio-Economic Money Trail..................................................62 2.3.1 New Attributions ...............................................................................64 2.3.2 A Thackeray Times Bibliography .....................................................75 2.4 What the Large Loose Baggy Monsters Left Out ............................................80 2.4.1 Colonial Emigration and Imperialism ...............................................83 2.4.2 International Affairs ..........................................................................87 2.4.3 Attitudes Toward Religion ................................................................93 2.4.4 .................................................................98 Notes ..................................................................................................................102 Chapter 3 The Victorian World in the Morning Chronicle...........................................................................................................108 3.1 Thackeray and the Morning Chronicle .......................................................... 109 3.2 Bibliographic Background .............................................................................114
ii 3.3 Bibliographic Analyses: Contents, Circumstances, and Cash .......................116 3.3.1 New Attributions .............................................................................119 3.3.2 A Thackeray Morning Chronicle Bibliography ..............................134 3.4 National Identity: Foreigners and Englishmen ..............................................140 3.4.1 The Irish Question...........................................................................141 3.4.2 ...................................................................145 3.4.3 English Middle-Class Identity ........................................................149 Notes ..................................................................................................................154 Idler Newspaper Correspondence................................................................................................................159 4.1 James Hume and the Calcutta Star ................................................................ 161 Calcutta Star ....................................................... 166 4.3 Personalities and Personal Commentari es .....................................................172 Game With the World ...................................................................179 Notes ..................................................................................................................191 The Chronicler of the Paris and London Art Exhibitions .................................................................................................................196 5.1 The Journalist Art Critic ................................................................................199 5.1.1 A Narrative Chronology .................................................................201 5.1.2 A New Attribution ..........................................................................206 5.2 Characterizi .....................................................208 5.3 The Early Victorian Conversation on Art ......................................................223 Notes ..................................................................................................................241 erature from Critic to Novelist .....................................................................................................246 6.1 The Economics of Literature .........................................................................249 6.2 Unity of Theme, Subject, and Style ...............................................................253 6.3 Literary Pathways ..........................................................................................265 6.3.1 From Critic to the Narrator of Catherine ........................................266 6.3.2 From Critic to the Showman of Vanity Fair ...................................270 6.3.3 From Critic to Portrayer of Jesuits in Henry Esmond ..................... 272 6.3.4 From Critic to Advocate of Sexual Realism in Pendennis ............. 277 Notes ..................................................................................................................279 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................284 About the Author ....................................................................................................End Page
iii List of Tables Table 1.1: Timelines of s known periodical contributions ..............................11 Table 1.2: Extracts from partial account book for 1838 ....................................................12 Table 1.3: Virtual account book records for 1838 1843 .................................................19 Table 1.4: Extracts from partial account book for 1844 ....................................................32 Table 1.5: Virtual account book records for 1844 1848 .................................................37 Table 1.6: Biblio-economic reconciliation for the second quarter of 1844 .......................43 Table 1.7: Thacke ay from periodicals ........................................................46 Table 2.1: Literary reviews in the December 1837 Times ................................................. 65 Table 2.2 ontributions to the Times ............................................................ 76 Table 3.1 ontributions to the Morning Chronicle ....................................135 Table 4.1: Idler (Hume) letters to Squab (Thackeray) .....................................................166 Table 4.2: Squab letters recovered by Summerfield ........................................................167 Table 4.3: Chronology of Squab (Thackeray) Calcutta Star letters ................................172 Table 5.1 xhibitions..............................199 Table 5.2 rt reviews by year and exhibition .............................................205
iv List of Figures Figure 1.1: Extract of Punch editor's ledger for January 6, 1844 ......................................41 Figure 5.1: Joseph Mallord William Turner The Whale Ship 1845 ...........................215 Figure 5.2: Charles Leslie The Principal Figures in the Merry Wives of Windsor 1838............................................................................................................230 Figure 5.3 : Thomas Creswick Summer's Afternoon 1844 ..........................................232 Figure 5.4: Richard Redgrave The Governess 1845 ...................................................238
v Abstract Scholars have heretofore under-examined William Makepeace Thackeray critical essays despite their potential for illuminating Victorian manners and life. Further, and politics are all influenced by the pecuniary aspects of periodical journalism and frequently expose socioeconomic attitudes and realities. This study explicates the circumstances, contents, and payments Thackeray interactions with periodicals such as Punch and answered, and a database of the payment practices of early Victorian periodicals established. Times and the Morning Chronicle, address history, travel, art, literature, religion, and international affairs. Based upon biblio-economic payment records, cross-references, and other i out with twentyviews on colonial emigration and imperialism, international affairs, religion, medievalism, Ireland, the East, and English middle-class identity are clarified. Further, The Calcutta Star answered in Calcutta Star ; their
vi mutual correspondence thus constitutes a revealing cosmopolitan colonial discourse. Calcutta Star writings are established, insights into the personalities and viewpoints of both men provided, and societal aspects of their correspondence analyzed. In his many newspaper art exhibition reviews Thackeray popularized serious painting and shaped middle-class taste. The nature and tim are assessed, espoused values characterized and earlier analyses critiqued, and -class readers to contemporary Victorian art explored. Other Thackeray newspaper reviews addressed literature; grounding of literature in economic realities demonstrably carried over from his critical articles to his subsequent work as a novelist, creating a unity of theme, style, and subject between his early and late writings. Literary pathway reviews are shown to offer new insights into Thackeray novels Catherine Vanity Fair Henry Esmond and Pendennis
1 Introduction During the first decade of the Victorian era the major novelistto -be, William Makepeace Thackeray, earned his living as a journalist. Although some of periodical writings most notably the early novels serialized in agazine and the major satiric articles published in Punch ha ve received considerable scholarly attention, his many critical essays and reviews remain under-examined. Surprisingly little attention has been paid to the journalistic and cultural drivers informing these writings. he bibliographical and even biographical records of his journalistic endeavors are substantively incomplete. This study explicates and assess es the circumstances, contexts, contents, and cultural implications of these periodical writings. The broad extent and great are themselves daunting. Thackeray contributed to periodicals on essentially a week ly basis from the summer of 1837 through the summer of 1847; during that decade he wrote over 600 separately published articles for over 20 different periodicals. For many of those years his living heavily depended on regular employment as a leading literary critic for major daily newspapers, the Times and the Morning Chronicle. During the same time period Thackeray also wrote for a variety of weekly periodicals including the satiric magazine Punch the illustrated newspaper the Pictorial Times and the literary magazine Britannia Moreover, Thackeray regularly contributed both fiction and
2 criticism to monthly literary magazines such as the New Monthly Magazine and Further, financial need and literary ambition drove him to write both scholarly and humorous articles for prestigious quarterly reviews such as the Westminster Review, the Foreign Quarterly Review and the Edinburgh Review Additionally, Thackeray penned revealing political and social opinion pieces for overseas periodicals, such as the American Republic and the Corsair and the Indian Calcutta Star The range of subjects Thackeray addressed in his writings is no less extraordinary than his breadth of publication venues. Within his periodical articles one can find much of the manners and life of the early Victorian world: assessments of the world of art; reviews of the works of leading English and American authors and the literary trends of the day; ruminations on the aesthetics of poets and poetry; remarks on leading thinkers and politicians of the era ; examinations France, Ireland, and Russia; sentiments regarding Evangelism and Catholicism; thoughts on the roles of commoners, aristocrats, and royalty, and on the essential nature of republics and totalitarian regimes; considerations regarding travel to and the cultures of countries of Europe, Africa, and Asia; observations on medieval and modern history; and comments on commerce and colonialism. s early Victorian journalism must, de facto also be a study of early Victorian journalism itself. Thackeray interacted with all the literary and journalistic movers and shakers of his era; he contributed to all the major classes and categories of periodicals; he wrote many different kinds of articles on many different topics; and he variously worked as an editor (the National Standard) a subeditor (the Examiner and enger) a staff member ( Punch) a regular contributor
3 ( Magazine, the Times, and the Mo rning Chronicle) an irregular freelance contributor (many periodicals), a columnist ( Calcutta Star and others) and an illustrator ( Punch, and others ). As a professional journalist dependent on his pen for his living, Thackeray was subject to economic and social pressures. In short, Thackeray serves as a stand-in for journalists of his era, and analytical techniques and insights appropriate to his journalism are likely to be broadly applicable to early Victorian journalism at large. Further, as in the 1996 movie Jerry Maguire where all lines of conversation and persuasion invariably led to the catch-phrase this dissertation demonstrates that money understood in the larger sense as a matrix of financial factors, forces, rewards, and consequences played a central mediating role in Thackeray wrote from economic necessity during an era when journalism was notoriously poorly paid. His journalistic opportunities, commitments, and decisions were financially driven. This dissertation demonstrates that financial factors not only influenced where and when he wrote and what he wrote about, but also, perhaps indirectly, the attitudes and positions he took in his writings. Th of aesthetics, class and society, and the world at large all have subtle, or sometimes not so subtle, financial subtexts. And his writings often implicitly serv e class-related financial goals and advance particular socio-economic interests. Thus, as in the above mentioned be traced backward to their origination or forward to their conclusion by examining their pecuniary motivations or consequences. In chapter 1 of this dissertation, entit Make up my account now directly : Reconciling the Accounts of a Victorian Journalist I establish and trace the direct
4 associations between periodical contributions and the compensatory financial payments he received. Although many Victorian writers depended on journalism for their income, little is known regarding their rates of payment. There do not appear to be any systematic studies of the financial terms under which periodical authors were paid and how that payment influenced their work. Accordingly, although this chapter it further serves as a test case for early Victorian journalism in general. Specifically, in chapter 1 I (1) analyze various records to illuminate the interactions between author and editor and the associated payment rates and practices of a broad spectrum of early Victorian periodicals; (2) utilize these financial records to provide new insights into the circumstances and financial drivers behind ; and (3) resolve (and sometimes raise) pecuniary, biographical, bibliographic and contextual Indeed, studied periodical relationships, those with and Punch Chapters 2 and 3, respectively entitled : The Victorian World in the Times Getting good pay always thinking : The Victorian World in the Morning Chronicle focus on T a critic for two Because of attribution difficulties I contend that the scholarly community has not appreciated that many of newspaper reviews are not simply on-point reviews but rather constitute mini-Roundabout Papers, i.e., essays on a broad range of topics including history, travel, government, the arts, religion, international affairs, and society. Consequently, these essays undeservedly have received little prior critical attention. In each chapter I (1) document the current state of knowledge
5 ; (2) clarify and extend the bibliographic record to provide a more nearly complete newspaper journalism; (3) explicate the financial underpinnings and consequent patterns and ) analyze various aspects of the Victorian world implicitly characterized by and through these essays. Chapter 4, Squab Idler Newspaper Correspondence examines through a pecuniary lens a unique journalistic dialogue. In the mid -1840s Thackeray wrote a series of London letters for the Calcutta Star An incomplete file of the Calcutta Star has yielded six surviving Thackeray letters of overt political, social and economic commentary To date, however, Thackeray scholars have not recognized that response letters from back to the Calcutta Star (and were subsequently re published in book form ). the Calcutta Star scion of a prominent Radical political family, a man deeply involved in colonial economic and cultural life and a one-time Thackeray intimate. In this chapter I examine the Squab Idler correspondence Calcutta Star writings and reveal their financial underpinnings, to provide new insights into the personalities and viewpoints of both men, and to illuminate a cosmopolitan colonial social and economic discourse on events of the day. Chapter 5, I could turn an honest penny : The Chronicler of the London and Paris Art Exhibitions and journalistic influences behind, and the socio-economic consequences of, During the early Victorian era Thackeray popularized serious painting and shaped middle-class taste through articles
6 on art in mass consumption periodicals. often studied magazine-based art reviews were written in the guise of Michael Angelo Titmarsh, a flamboyant and boastful failed artist; however, Thackeray also wrote anonymous non-Titmarsh art reviews for Some of these latter reviews have not been previously attributed, nor have their contents or cultural significance been analyzed. In this chapter I anonymous and Titmarsh essays on art as acts of financially driven working journalism; (2) characterize the values espoused in th criticism; and (3 ) discuss the socio-economic implications of these reviews and how they contributed to the early Victorian conversation on art. Lastly, Thackeray is best known, of co urse, as a novelist, and in chapter 6, The proceeds of that last masterpiece : The Tradesman of Literature from Critic to Novelist Thackeray considered literature as a trade, a way of earning a living, rather than as a romantically elevated pursuit. This grounding of literature in the economic realities of life carried over from his writings as a critic to his work as a novelist and is central to Thackeray In this last chapter I explore the role of pecuniary literary criticism and his mature writings; in particular, writings. I further argue that a unity of theme, style, and subject connects and lat e writings, and the embellishment of personality of both narrator and subject that made for an interesting review became a central characterization skill of
7 the novelist. Lastly, I describe some pathways between the ideas and expressions of -known aspects of his novels. I have frequently supported my arguments with extended quotations from reviews. I have included these quotations partly because these original texts are not as readily accessible as a novel such as Vanity Fair ; partly because Thackeray is often entertainingly expressive and it is a joy to read his writings; and partly because it is s own words. In order to maintain the original sometimes archaic word choices usually without the intervention of disfiguring sic notations.
8 Chapter 1 the Accounts of a Victorian Journalist significant uncertainty exists regarding the context and content of his periodical journalism. The culture of his time was to publish most articles anonymously, and Thackeray wrote so many articles for so many different periodicals that enumerative Thackeray bibliography 1 is demonstrably materially incomplete. 2 Moreover, m ce regarding the circumstances of his journalism has been lost. Many open questions remain to be addressed : what, for example, of periodical venue and article subject? What were his business agreements and relationships with various periodicals and their editors? How much did various periodicals pay their contributing authors, and how did that influence Thackeray ? What did he earn? How did Thackeray juggle the competing priorities of everyday journalism ? What concealed specifics and details of exist that, if unveiled, could shed new light on his opinions and beliefs, his development as a writer, or early Victorian journalism as a whole? Although born into a wealthy family, Thackeray lost most of his money in his youth and for many years earn ed his living through his writing. He was certainly conscious of the financial side of journalism his letters are replete with complaints regarding the low rates of periodical pay and e up my
9 and pay him what he was owed. 3 Surely, in at least some cases, financial records are tell-tale tracings of long-ago journalistic transactions, arrangements, and writings. Yet, while scholars have retrieve d and anecdotall y comment references, no one has yet performed a systematic bibl io -economic reconciliation and comparative analysis journalistic writings and financial receipts. 4 In this chapter I report on such an analysis. Unfortunately a full set of his financial records has not survived. Nevertheless, some -party accounts of his financial dealings have been preserved. As we shall see, surviving editors ledgers, personal account book fragments, diary entries, and letters can be used in conjunction with bibliographic information to reconstruct a projected ledger of financial receipts as a journalist and to expose previously obscured transactions and events. 5 Any reconciliation of bibliographic and financial records should be both iterative and interactive. Accordingly, I have (1) s and papers and relevant third-party materials to identify, retrieve and organize information regarding his financial transactions with periodicals; (2) analyzed this surviving financial data for direct insights regarding specific interactions and to rates of pay from various periodicals; (3) applied these rates of pay to known Thackeray periodical publications to generate a trial receipt ledger, (4 ) compared this ledger with information contained in issues and to develop insights into relationship with various periodicals; and, as new attributions came out of these examinations, (5) added to the receipt ledger and repeated the process.
10 Although the immediate goal of this analysis is to shed light on the circumstances and specifics of Thackeray Thackeray wrote so broadly that this is tantamount to a study of the financial underpinnings of early Victorian periodical journalism itself. Unfortunately, contemporary accounts of the pay rates and practices offered by periodicals of the 1830s and 1840s are inaccurate to the point of uselessness. 6 Scholarly literature on Victorian journalism does not include comparative assessments of pay scales and practices across a range of Victorian periodicals. The products of my study, however, include a vetted reference base of payments and rates of pay to a prominent contributor from a variety of early Victorian periodicals, a composite multiyear financial profile for a prolific early Victorian journalist, and a series of narrative descriptions of various (and often financially driven) author periodical relationships. Although this approach is apparently new, I have less systematically applied some of these techniques in an earlier examination of Thackeray -1840 contributions to the Times 7 As table 1.1 shows, the financially straitened Thackeray wrote for almost anyone who would pay him. He contributed to major daily and weekly newspapers ( Times Morning Chronicle Pictorial Times etc.); overseas periodicals (such as the Corsair th e Republic the Calcutta Star, etc. New Monthly Magazine azine, and others); quarterly reviews ( British & Foreign Westminster Foreign Quarterly Edinburgh ); and, of course, weekly publications, most notably Punch. Sometimes Thackeray held salaried staff positions, but he, like most journalists of the time, was usually paid by the column or by the sheet (a sheet consisted of sixteen pages).
11 Table 1 .1 Timelines of s k nown periodic al contributions National Standard: 1833 1834 Cruikshank Omnibus : 1841 Paris Literary Gazette: 1835 Britannia: 1841 Constitutional: 1836 1837 Foreign Quarterly Rev .: 1842 1844 The Times: 1837 1840 any: 1837 Punch: 1842 1854 1847 Calcutta Star: 1843 1845 New Monthly Magazine: 1838 1845 Pictorial Times: 1843 1844 The Republic: 1844 1844 British & Foreign Rev.: 1839 Morning Chronicle: 1842 ? 1844 1848 London / Westmin. Rev.: 1839 1840 Examiner: 1845 The Corsair: 1839 1840 Edinburgh Review: 1845 Cruikshank lmanac: 1838 1839 1845 1845 essor to his bank was itself merged into Coutts and Co. in 1914. 8 However, Thackeray did maintain for his own purposes informal and partial records of receipts and disbursements. An early Thackeray account book extract of this type 9 was sold in to private hands in 1924 and published description of that account book specifies 1836-7 salary from the Constitutional as 8 guineas per week. 10 partial account books for 1838 and 1844 have survived. 11 In addition, diary entries, letters, and third-party sources collectively serve as supplementary virtual account books. In the following I present and analyze the 1838 account book extract, virtual account book information from 1838 through 1843, the 1844 account book extract, and virtual account book information from 1844 through 1847. Financially-based narrative explorations of periodicals, including prominent publications such as an d Punch are integrated into the text. These narratives range from the definitive to the openly
12 speculative based upon the varying nature of biblio-economic information. Detailed comments regarding the Times the Morning Chronicle, and the Calcutta Star are reserved for chapters two, three, and four of this dissertation. 1.1 The Account Book for 1838 Table 1.2 months of 1838 as published by Gordon Ray. 12 The format is straightforward: each line shows a date, an identifying source, and an amount in pounds / shillings / pence format. Table 1. 2 Extracts from partial account b ook for 1838 Date Reference Amount Date Reference Amount Dec 24 Addison 2. 0. 0 Mar 25 Daly 11 0 0 Jan 1 Delane 22 1 0 Mar 28 Galignani 8 0 0 Jan 3 Colburn 9 0 0 Swinney 9 9 0 Jan 4 Fraser 20 0 0 Isabella 13 0 0 Feb 2 Delane 13 0 6 Apr 10 Colburn 4 0 0 Feb 15 Colburn 7 0 0 Apr 16 Fraser 25 0 0 Mar 1 Fraser 20 0 0 May 5 Fraser 20 0 0 Times 14 0 0 1.1.1 Reconciling Accounts Some references in table 1.2 are unequivocally interpretable and some are not; for instance, the December 24 payment from Addison is certainly for the eighteen colored Journey to Damascus and Palmyra which was published at the end of 1837. Thackeray was very active as an illustrator early in his
13 career. Similarly, the payment from Galignani is for the two weeks in March of 1838 during which Thackeray worked as a subeditor assembling articles in Paris for Messenger On the other hand, of that transaction remain unknown. Nevertheless, much of the data in this table can be reconciled with Thac As shown subsequently in this chapter, a surviving monthly invoice proves that Thackeray was paid at a rate of 2 guineas per column by the Times Since the above account book references to Delane apparently refer to W. F. A. Delane (the father of the future Times editor J. T. Delane), who was paymaster for the Times in 1838, 13 there are three indicated payments from the Times the payment of 22.1.0 on Jan 1 from Delane, the payment of .0.6 on Feb 2 from Delane, and the late May payment marked Times. In chapter 2 of this dissertation these payments are used to illuminate the Tim es Whereas a surviving invoice establishes the contributions to the Times such information has heretofore been lacking extensive contributions to the New Monthly Magazine However, one can work backward from the three payments Thackeray received from the publisher Henry Colburn shown in table 1.2 to establish that rate. The payment of .0.0 from Colburn on January 3 is presumably for the twelve Men of Character, a volume Colburn published in January of 1838. Th e payments on February 15 (.0.0) and Apr il 10 ( occupying nine pages in the February 1838 New Monthly Magazine (five pages in the Mar ch
14 1838 issue). Comparing article lengths to payment values, it is clear that Colburn paid Thackeray 12 guineas per sheet. I have used that rate revenues for the many articles he published in the New Monthly Magazine in 1838-1844. The 1838 account book to his receipt of .0.0 from is somewhat mysterious. As a starting point for speculation about this payment, I note that people he dealt with. The only reference to a contemporary published writing is the favorable mention of a publisher or book seller, Leicester Square, Cruikshank; 14 the subsequently published book version of this essay deletes this reference. Indeed, an edition of Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres was published in 15 thus establishing that at a date near that of both the Cruikshank essay and the account book reference the publisher Charles Daly was located at Leicester Square, and thus, presumably, is the same Daly mentioned by Thackeray. The ings include eleven books from the 1830s 1850s listing Charles Daly as a publisher, but lists no holdings for any Further, the Wellesley index of If the recorded account refers to the publisher Charles Daly. Charles Daly has no known connection with periodicals; however, in 1838 he published many books, including editions with limited illustrations of well-known works. Examples identified through online searches include: (1) The Vicar of
15 Wakefield ; (2) Pocket Lacon: A Manual of the Best Words by the Best Authors ; (3) The Koran ; (4) Marmion ; (5) Gregory, Chapone and Pennington on the Improvement of the Mind Poetical and Prose Works of Robert Burns The Lady of the Lake ; (8) Sacred Harmony (an edition of religious poetry) and (9) Dryd Fables from Boccaccio and Chaucer 16 Speculatively, likely is the publisher and apparently the only contemporary Daly who was a publisher, and that the unidentified receipt may consequently refer to a payment for illustrations provided by Thackeray for 1.1.2 Against The four early 1838 payments from James Fraser of to Thackeray are all simple multiples of 5 pounds (January 4 ; Mar ch 4 ; Apr il 16 ; May 5 ). Whereas the Times and the New Monthly Magazine paid exact amounts based on article length, in 1838 apparently maintained an account for Thackeray and paid him either a standard monthly draw or a rounded amount each month. Thus, these payments may not be precisely associated with specific article lengths, but they do shed light on a series of interesting events and possibilities. There is an unconfirmed third-party report that Thackeray was initially paid per sheet for his contributions to 17 and there is a surviving letter dated March 5, 1838 in which Thackeray announces he is on strike and demands an increase to 12 guineas per sheet one wonders if the suggested original rate is supported by the payment record, and if
16 Thackeray received his increase. 18 This serves as an interesting test case of the negotiating power of a journalist heavily dependent on a particular editor and periodical. As a further complication, that same letter includes the demand that Thackeray be paid two guineas for each of the full-page drawings which accompanied some of his Yellowplush episodes, but there is no information as to what (if anything) he had previously been paid for these drawings. Lastly, Thackeray was owed money by the erstwhile editor of William Maginn, and the March 5 letter also states that Maginn had committed to give the proceeds of his writings to Thackeray. The letter further directs To date there has been no confirmation as to whether Thackeray actually received these funds. single known contribution to the April 1838 issue of azine is only five pages long, and one wonders if the comparatively large payment he received on April 16, 1838 indicates that other articles in that issue were written by Thackeray. Indeed, a scenario which answers all the above questions can be constructed based on a reasonable, although admittedly not certain, interpretation of the observed payment stream from Thackeray contributed a 6.5-page article to the December 1837 issue of Magazine and articles of 10.8 pages (with one illustration) and 13.25 pages to the January 1838 issue of that periodical. At per sheet this comes to 19.01.11 if the illustration were reimbursed at the rate of, say, this would bring this total owed to almost exactly the actually received by Thackeray on January 4. In the February and March issues of
17 an Half-a-Crown's Worth of Cheap Knowledge collectively total 25.9 pages and one illustration. Again employing the tentative rates of per sheet and per illustration, this comes to a little over 17 pounds close to the presumably rounded value of Thackeray received on March 1. Th us, the observed payments are at least consistent with the reported rate of per sheet and the presumption that Thackeray received something additional for each of his full page illustrations. Indeed, if Thackeray were receiving much less or much more say if he were getting nothing for illustrations, or if he received either the rate for zine 19 or the 12 guineas per sheet which we now know the New Monthly Magazine paid Thackeray the reconciliation between contributions made and payment received would be much weaker. After his March 5 on April 16 and on May 5. Evidence to be subsequently provided in this chapter indicates that Thackeray did get a raise to (but perhaps not 12 guineas) per sheet, and I have assumed that he received perhaps per illustration. Under these assumptions for April and May come to only and respectively Apparently Thackeray either did write other articles or he did page rate, but assuming he was paid the standard rate of per sheet, and using the attributions shown in the Wellesley Index, Maginn s per-page earnings were approximately for February, for March, 3 in April, and in May. Note that (1) the observed April payment to Thackeray of is perilously close to the sum of February and March writings of Maginn
18 ( earnings of presumed April earnings of ; and (3) Magi suggested April earnings of is exactly the amount that Isabella deposited in sometime between March 28th and April 10. This agreement, of course, is only suggestive; yet it is noteworthy that are demonstrably consistent with a reasonable course of events that (1) explains and reconciles all payments, (2) tentative before-and-after per-sheet pay rates, (3) suggests that the contemplated Thackeray did in fact occur, (4) explains the previously unexplained deposit made by Isabella, and (5) requires no previously unrecognized Thackeray contributions to In this manner, financial records can suggest or support an interpretation of events. 1.2 The Virtual Account Book from 1838 to 1843 Whatever account book records Thackeray maintained from mid-1838 through 1843 have been lost; however, table 1.3 incorporates financial data taken from multiple These data establish or support several of rates of pay note the entries in table 1.3 for the British and Foreign Review ( per Sheet), (13 1/3 guineas per sheet), Magazine (originally 10 pounds per sheet, subsequently 12 pounds per sheet), the Pictorial Times (one guinea per column), Punch (non-staff rate, one guinea per column), and the Times (two guineas per column). These records can be used to support the identification of articles written by Thackeray, project his journalistic income, assess the
19 pay practices of different periodicals and editors, and actions and preferences as a journalist. Table 1.3 Virtual account book r ecords for 1838 1843 Periodical Reference Com ment / Analysis British & Foreign Rev Ray, Letters 1: 383 for the 50 page in the Ap ril B&F Review]. The Corsair Ray, Letters 1: 406 From N. P. Willis, Thackeray would write for T he Corsair Almanack Ray, Letters 1: 365 Magazine Edwards, 37 Thackeray starting rate [1837, early 1838 ] from was "Twelve and six pence a page" [10 pounds a sheet]. Magazine Ray, Lett ers 1: 447; 2: 29 6/1/1840 [25 pages = 18.15 at 12 per sheet]; 7/24/1841 or 1 8 = 18 at 12 per sheet]. 20 Pictorial Times Vizitelly, Glances Back 1: 251 . . for a couple of columns Mess e nger Ray, Letters 2: 475 s newspaper for 10 francs a day Punch (non staff) Harden, Lett ers Supp lement 1: 122 Letter dated 9/19/1842 states that agreement with the wo [ or presumably one guinea a column]. Times Ray, Lett er s 1: 375 Invoice of 21 from Thackeray to The Times for five November 1838 arti cles totaling 10.0 columns General Ray, Letters 1: 458 In a letter dated 7/30/1840 Thackeray wrote I could get 300 for three months work [for a book] in stead of the 120 which the Magazines would pay me" Times Ray, Lett er s 1: 469 20 worth of work . .this Foreign Quarterly Rev iew Ray, Lett er s 2: 51 Letter dated 6/4/ 1842 acknowledges receipt of 20 in partial advan ce payment but complains of inadequacy FQR /Punch Ray, Lett er s 2: 51 55 Letter dated 6/11/1842, Thackeray claims he has [ Punch and Foreign Quarterly Review ] Foreign Ray, Letters I hope you ll like my
20 Quarterly Review 2: 70. articles the German and the last 15 years of the Bourbons in the Review. they pay well near 1 a Punch Harden, Lett er s Supp lement 1: 122; Ray, Lett ers 2: 84 L etters dated Sep 19 and 27 1842 : Thackeray acknowledges he has been paid for one article, asserts he has been writing for Punc h for 3 months, and ack nowledges receipt of another 25. General Ray, Lett er s 2: 100 A March 1843 Thackeray letter asserts 200 coming i n from the book and unpaid articles I have earned the book call it 300 and 110 elsewhere the prestigious and scholarly quarterly reviews which were in full flower in the early Victorian era, and with the emerging iconic comic periodical, Punch 1.2.1 The Quarterly Reviews The first half of the nineteenth century saw the ascendance and zenith of the influential quarterly reviews: the whiggish Edinburgh Review the conservative Quarterly Review the Benthamite Westminster Review the anti-Russian British & Foreign Review the internationally oriented Foreign and Quarterly Review and the pro-Catholic Dublin Review As a young journalist in the late 1830s and early 1840s Thackeray sought to 21 Yet pecuniary factors were central to his interactions with all of them. 22 from Jacky Kemble not only marks a financial milestone journalism it does not appear that he ever again received as much for a single critical
21 review article but also highlights the frustrations faced by early Victorian journalists anxious to develop continuing good-paying relationships with editors of periodicals. The British & Foreign Review started in 1835, was more a political than a literary organ. fortunate nations and to emphasize the close relations between social and intellectual progress at home and abroad. 23 John Kemble, the editor and prominent Anglo-Saxon scholar and archeologist, had been a Cambridge school friend of Thackeray As early as December of 1836 24 At some point Kemble must have encouraged Thackeray, for by November of 1838 Thackeray was hard at work on an article, 25 which was published in the British & Foreign Review in January 1839. 50-page dull-sounding an article which is actually a delightfully satiric commentary on a political figure who, according to Thackeray, had 26 was published in the next issue, in April 1839, and it is for this article that Thackeray received his 34 pounds. A simple calculation shows that Kemble paid Thackeray at the rate of per sheet; however, this rate by itself is insufficiently informative. A single page of the British & Foreign Review had only 40 lines, each containing approximately 62 characters; consequently, Thackeray received about 5.5 shillings for every thousand characters. Examining the master rate table presented in section 1.5 of this chapter, this rate is 2/3 greater than the 3.2 shillings per thousand characters Thackeray was receiving
22 at that time from or 1/3 greater than the 4.25 shillings per thousand characters Thackeray was receiving from The Times The opportunity to write long articles at a relatively high rate of pay must have been very attractive to Thackeray. Perhaps this explains both the zeal with which Thackeray unsuccessfully pursued Kemble over the next year in July of 1839 offering to write an article on Marlborough and / October proposing to write a long article on the history of Napoleon from the viewpoint say on French fashionable novelists Horace de Vielin January of 1840 suggesting both an article on the American writer N. P. Willis and a study of Socialist and Chartist Publications as well as the disappointment evident in February Jacky 27 financial relationship with the British & Foreign Review may be contrasted with his very different relationship with the Westminster Review. Although we do not know the specific rate of pay Thackeray received from the latter periodical, it must have been low: after submitting a lengthy essay on George Cruikshank, Thackeray wrote the Westminster Review as speedily as you possibly can to transmit to its author that trifling remuneration for which in a moment of weakness -of imbecile delirium he engaged to supply you with his composition." 28 In a subsequent letter he declared that 29 Indeed, apparently the editor of the Westminster Review later wrote Thackeray soliciting contributions, but Thackeray, stating that he wished to make at least 20 guineas for an article on dramatists of the
23 Victorian age, declined a specific offer. 30 With the British & Foreign Review Thackeray was the pursuer; with the Westminster Review he was the pursued. most productive and extended relationship with a quarterly was with the Foreign Quarterly Review ( FQR ). The lengthy gaps between article submission and publication inherent with a quarterly publication raised special problems for Victorian authors could they afford to wait until after article publication to be paid? Further, FQR ar e strangely clustered with as many as three or four articles in a single issue, and no articles in other issues. Thackeray 1842 and 1843 letters shed light on these concerns, and suggest a new Thackeray attribution, but also pose a puzzling contradiction. To understand the situation relationship with that periodical. The Foreign Quarterly Review founded in 1827, offered review articles comparable to those in the Edinburgh Review and the Quarterly Review but devoted itself exclusively to foreign literature. Thackeray established a connection with the FQR in late 1841 and agreed to furnish articles around the beginning of March of 1842 for the April 1 issue 31 His first project was a scholarly article on France during the Bourbon Restoration and the subsequent reign of Louis Philippe. Thackeray spent several weeks 32 To keep his commitment, on February 25, 1842 he sent to Chapman and Hall a lengthy Philippe] for another number. 33 In that same letter he also offered to write a review of Rhine which he could submit by March 10. Chapman and Hall must have Rhine was, in fact,
24 submitted on March 12, 1842 and published in the April issue. The review of the Bourbon restoration was, however, held back from that issue perhaps because it was overlong for the April page budget, or perhaps because other articles were judged to be timelier. Mirroring his earlier pattern, in May of 1842, while preparing his submittals for the July FQR e their article ready by the 30 th further offering submit by June 10. 34 Unfortunately this letter does not identify but the Bourbon restoration article had been submitted months earlier; thus, th e article to be submitted by May 30 might well have be en a second article. Further, the offer to submit an additional must have been accepted, because on June 11, 1842 Thackeray wrote his mother that he had written nearly in the last few days for Punch and for the Foreign Quarterly Review 35 Under this interpretation of the correspondence, there were three unpublished Thackeray articles submitted and available for the July 1842 issue of Foreign Quarterly Review Another Thackeray letter offers direct financial support for this reading and addresses the financial impact of delayed publication. request, the FQR agreed to make a partial payment in advance of publication and accordingly sent Thackeray Thackeray acknowledged this advance confidence in your sense of justice to suppose that you would think of paying 4 sheets of shuperb [sic] writing with 40 36 plea not only indicates that Chapman &
25 Hall proposed to pay him per sheet, it also suggests that in June of 1842 Thackeray had 4 sheets (64 pages) of articles in progress with FQR -page February submission, st Fifteen Years of in fact, published in July, as was another article that can be definitively attributed to Thackeray, the 14. 37 However, these two articles come to only 50 pages -yet, Thackeray apparently had three articles in and had received partial payment for 64 pages of work. There appears to be an unaccounted for article of approximately 14 pages. Edgar Harden has taken an undated Thackeray submission letter for his essay which was published in the November 1842 issue of the Foreign Quarterly Review and effectively assuming that this article is suggested that the letter and the essay were written in June. 38 I regard this interpretation and dating as unlikely, because Thackeray took several days in September of 1842 39 to write a Foreign Quarterly Review article, and the October the only realistic match for this period of September writing. Indeed, undated letter contains a plea for assistance from the editor, the kind of assistance that an author away from home might need Thackeray was in Ireland in the fall of 1842 doing spade work for his Irish Sketch Book There is a more likely interpretation of the surviving records. There is one (and only one) unattributed major article in the July 1842 Foreign Quarterly Review and that Mathilde and the financial data. Thackeray was an expert on Sue, he subsequently wrote an FQR Mysteres of Paris and he commented in his letters and elsewhere on
26 Mathilde 40 Indeed, his expressed opinions regarding Mathilde incidents and char are effectively portrayed with a ring of truth that inspires interest are central to the unattributed July 1842 article. Moreover, th is review of Mathilde is exactly 14 pages, thereb Lastly, in 1907 Robert Garnett, lacking the financial information and supporting letters cited in this chapter, argued based on content and style 41 The essay as to how the writings of Sue, Sand, and Bernard reflect contemporary social trends in France. I hope youll like my articles the German and the last 15 years of the Bourbons in the Review puts all of the above into question. 42 If Thackeray indeed wrote the review of Mathilde also reference that article in his letter to his mother? Had Thackeray, now in Ireland, not seen the July 1, 1842 issue of FQR ? Did he not know that the Mathilde essay had been published? There is a second discrepant letter to his mother regarding the FQR a letter dated March 28, 1843 in which he comments on having two articles appear in the next issue of FQR when other evidence strongly suggests he instead had three or four. 43 Perhaps he really did not know when his FQR articles would be published, for on August 3, 1843 he wrote a letter to Chapman and Hill expressing his displeasure that an article he thought would be published in July had not, in fact, appeared in that issue. 44 Foreign Quarterly Review continued through 1842 and into 1843. In July of 1842 Thackeray, already in Ireland to develop material for
27 his Irish Sketch Book wrote back to Chapman & Hall: "If you light upon any pleasant German or French book that may be reviewed without trouble or consultation of other works, please keep it for me -travelling is expensive and I shall be glad to help my purse along. Mind also that the article (to come) on Louis Philippe belongs to me . Though the Louis Philippe article will take much time, & bring no profit, I want to do it, for reputation's sake. I don't think at all small beer of the Restoration -to which you gave a good title." 45 Later in July he again wrote to Chapman & Hall, apparently responding to their request that he finish the Louis Philippe article, explaining that he could do nothing with regard to the Louis Philippe article without books to consult, and offered instead to write an article on Miss Pardoe. 46 ( instead, the final part of that project was given History of October 1843 issue of FQR .) On September 1 Thackeray wrote his mother "I shall be detained here [in Ireland] some days with an article for Chapman & Hall 47 As I indicated earlier, the undated submission letter and the attendan which is, in fact, [mostly] and which Harden tentatively placed in June is, instead, more properly a product of this September time period. 1.2.2 Biblio-Economic Reconciliations In late March of 1843 Thackeray wrote to his mother that, with all the time spent
28 [since last July]. This serves as a reference point for a biblio-economic analysis: can it explain the associated level of activity, or, perhaps, even replicate this sum? Indeed, it can do both. Thackeray had already received half-payment (in June) for his July Foreign Quarterly Review submissions, leaving outstanding from Chapman & Hill. The Punch from July to October of 1842 occupy 26.75 columns of text space and, according to our analysis, Thackeray should have re ceived payment from Bradley and Evans at a rate of 1 guinea per column or The in the October 1842 Foreign Quarterly Review occupies 20 pages for which Thackeray should have received approximately .5. Fitz-Boodle articles were published in in July, October, January, February, and March; these articles total 61 pages for a projected remuneration of The Pictorial Times was published on March 18, 1843 with an anticipated payment, based on its 2.5-column size, of These monies total as follows: + + .5 + + 4 = .5! This near exact the ability of the biblioeconomic method of analysis to associate literary activity with realized remuneration and to s careful tracking of his own revenues. Further, it strongly suggests that there are no major 1842 March 1843 time frame. In particular, the assertions by one biographers that Thackeray performed a significant amount of work for the Examiner and / or The Morning Chronicle during this time period must be incorrect. 48
29 In that same March 1843 coming in from the book I have earned the book call it 300 Hall called for Thackeray to receive a advance (which he had received in 1840) and an additional upon delivery of the manuscript. Further payments were predicated on the sale of various numbers of copies. 49 Although there is no confirmation that Thackeray had received his manuscript delivery payment, Thackeray delivered the manuscript in February, and it would have been unlike him not to have insisted upon immediate payment. Assuming that Thackeray had, in fact, already received his manuscript fee, he would have received 0 of his estimated for the book, so that perhaps 130 of the as book-related. This analysis then projects that perhaps of the should be associated with unpaid articles. It is a simple matter to attempt to reco with this value. Thackeray was doing very little for Punch at the time; instead, he was mainly writing for the Calcutta Star the Pictorial Times , and the Foreign Quarterly Review In early March Thackeray sent a letter to the Calcutta Star that was worth, perhaps, -3. For the Pictorial Times he had one contribution in late March and three contributions awaiting publication in the April 1 issue that collectively ca me to about -8. The April 1 issue of contained a Fitz-Boodle article that should have been worth and it is probable that Thackera y still had not received payment of for his March article. These articles total at most 25 30 pounds, leaving 45 or more unaccounted for. The only known candidates to fill this gap are the four articles in the April 1 st issue of Foreign Quarterly
30 Review that have been at times attributed to Thackeray. Two of the attributions, one been worth leaving perhaps 24 unaccounted for. The two questionable Thus a biblio-economic reconciliation of regarding suggests that the uncertain Foreign Quarterly Review articles are by Thackeray. 1.2.3 Punch in 1842 1855 specify the writers and column lengths of most Punch articles; 50 however, some questions about Pun ch contributions remain unresolved. Athold Mayhew asserts that 51 while Marion Spielmann Punch article may have been of Jawbrahim Heraudee. 52 All sources agree, however, that Thackeray wrote the eleven published between July and October of 1842. Punch was a mixed-media periodical: text and illustration often played off one another to give a composite effect which neither could produce on its own. T ledger books do not address the source of drawings, which often remain a bibliographic puzzle. Thackeray, of course, was both a writer and an illustrator. Sometimes he supplied illustrations to support his own articles, sometimes he did not, and sometimes he
31 provided illustrations for articles written by As Edgar Harden has wri Punch . 53 In particular, the remains uncertain. account book establish that i Punch and the Foreign Quarterly Review ; that his non-staff pay rate for Punc h w guineas per page, that by September he had been writing for Punch for three months, and that after complaining about late payment he subsequently received from Punch. Consequently, these records demonstrate that Thackeray did not write the 1841 article or any other early Punch contributions prior to The Legend of Jawbrahim-Heraudee columns, presumably Thackeray was paid a little over 4 guineas for this story. The 11 Tickletoby articles collectively include approximately 26.75 columns of text; at one guinea per column, this comes to a little over 28 pounds, in excellent agreement with the 25 pounds Thackeray had received by September 27, 1842 (which may not have included payment for the last article which was not published until October 1). However, the Tickletoby articles also include 24 unsigned illustrations which themselves occupy an additional 6.7 columns. This analysis shows that Thackeray was not paid for these illustrations. It is unlikely that a non-staff writer would have done these
32 extensive illustrthey are, therefore, in all probabilit y not by Thackeray. 1.3 The Account Book for 1844 The following table presents ex for the first quarter of 1844 as published by Gordon Ray. 54 Tha been retained; however, three liberties have been taken in this presentation: (1) extracts that are from different pages have been placed sideby -side, (2) columns have been vertically aligned, and (3) a black line has been placed in the middle of each column in order to dramatize what I believe to be an important distinction. Table 1.4 Extracts from partial account b ook fo r 1844 January Cash Receipts February Cash Receipts March Cash Receipts 8 1 At Lubbocks 32.10 25 0 Drew from B&E 35 16 Cash at Lubbocks 20 Nickisson 12 2 From Stev ens 10 do from Nickisson 22.15/ Nickisson 20 B&E Paid to Lubbock 10 in pocket 1 40 Fraser 9 26 Drew on Lubbock for 23 leaving a balance of 20 Received from Giraldon 100f. C & H 40 Wrote 2 15 Punch 10 India & America Let 3 10 Wrote Preface 30 3 India Letter 3 3 Pun ch 25 Chronicle 8 8 11 Novels for Fraser 9 American Letter 4 1 0 Punch (say) 5 16 20 Barry Lyndon 12 Barry Lyndon &c. III 12 0 21 Mysteres 4 Barry Lyndon IV 15 25 Child of Godesberg 12 God esberg 5 India and America Letter 4 54 The items above the bold black line for each month document cash receipts. T and editors. establishes that in early January he borrowed
33 10 pounds from his friend Augustus Stevens, a debt that was repaid in March. Similarly, in early February Thackeray acknowledged and thanked George Nickisson, the editor of for a cash payment presumably the 22 pounds and 15 shillings listed under cash receipts for February. 55 But the items below the bold line, although they have previously and understandably been interpreted as cash payments, are, I submit, instead primarily and projected receipts. He simply could not have received all the funds shown on the dates indicated. Take, for example, the lowerle ft -hand box for January of 1844. As can be verified by a cross-check with surviving fragments of 15, 3, 8-11, and so on are the dates on which the indicated work was done. Specifically, on January 2 Thackeray wr Leaves from the Lives of the Lords of Literature January 14 for Punch; during the period January 16 for Fraser ; on January 25-28 and not even submitted to a publisher until early in February; there were two India letters (to the Calcutta Star ) written in January, one on the third and one near the end of the month and mailed to India in February, and so on. 56 The numbers associated with these items can not generally represent monies Thackeray received in January (few publishers paid in advance of publication), but rather, I argue, represent of the financial value associated with each entry. financial records were subjective and informal, designed for his personal use and purposes, and not intended to be formal ledgers. There are similar reasons for believing that the lower entries for February and March are predominantly work lists rather than
34 records of cash received. listed in February from Punch represents both work done and payment received in that month, but there is every indication that Thackeray received no money for his American letters in February, and his February submissions of parts of Barry Lyndon best tie s to monies Thackeray received from George Nickisson, then proprietor of Magazine in March. With this understanding a number of interesting reconciliations and conclusions can be drawn. For instance, Gordon Ray suggested that Thackeray abandoned his translation of Mystres de Paris because he was not promptly paid. 57 However, the January 21 work list reference regarding 4 pounds for Mysteres clearly ties to the February payment received from Giraldon of 100 francs; obviously, Thackeray was paid and our understanding as to why he abandoned this project is incomplete. In general the entries confirm the earlier stated 12-pounds-per-sheet pay rate for ; however, the repant until one realizes that this article contains 4.5 pages of extracts; this suggests that, under the editorship of Nickisson, paid only for the original text of review articles and not for the extended extracts then normally included in book reviews. This is a significant observation. Early Victorian book reviews often contained extended extracts, and our analysis shows that newspapers such as the Times and the Morning Chronicle paid Thackeray or fraction thereof comment or textual extract employed by the reviewer (although sometimes extracts were printed in a smaller font). In such cases it However,
35 if Frasers (and, potentially, other literary magazines) excluded extract space in computing their payments, then authors must have had non-monetary motives for including extended quotations from the works they were reviewing. W. C. Desmond Pacey has attributed to Thackeray a clever satiric essay on Louis Phillipe which appeared in the March 16, 1844 issue of a short-lived New York periodical, the Republic. 58 Edgar Harden that one American letter payment was received in January and two in February and accordingly questioned this attribution. 59 Now, appreciating the work-list nature of this account book and reviewing associated letters, a fuller understanding validates attribution Indeed, Thackeray wrote to Henry Wikoff, a co-proprietor of The Republic on January 28, 1844, rejecting earlier proposal that Thackeray write letters from Paris for his journal at a rate of per month, and adding that he [Thackeray] did not want to commit to staying in Paris. Instead, Tha followed by two more by the Havr if Wikoff would immediately forward payment to Thackeray and allow Thackeray greater freedom of movement. 60 The American Letter work-list reference at the end of January Letters suggest that, with or without Wi ahead with his part of this proposed agreement, and it further appears from the work list that Wikoff owed Thackeray approximately 9 pounds (an estimated for the January submission, perhaps .75 for the first February letter, and .5 for the second February letter).
36 The letter from Paris published in the March 16, 1844, issue of The Republic and identified by Pacey as having been written by Thackeray carries the notation of being written in February. 61 the other two letters have not been recovered. However, Thackeray then seems to have terminated his relationship with Wikoff. ot include any American letters. This rupture is explained by a March 11, 1844 letter Thackeray, who had by then left Paris and returned to London, wrote to his friend Thomas Fraser, Paris correspondent of the Morning Chronicle (Thomas Fraser should not be confused with Hugh Fraser, the cofounder of or James Fraser, publisher of that same periodical.) In this letter Thackeray asked Fraser affairs of France and Europe in general and to send it addressed to H. Wi 62 Apparently Wikoff had never abandoned his original insistence that his foreign correspondent be located in Paris. Thackeray included with his letter to Fraser a letter to be forwarded to Wi and asked Fraser to extract payment for his own letter from any remittance and to forward the rest to Thackeray. And, apparently, something of this sort did happen from Fraser presumably a pass-through on funds received from Wikoff and there is also a small deduction under March Cash Paid to Fraser. 63 Similarly, although Thackeray scholars and biographers have previously noted that Thackeray wrote columns for the Calcutta Star in the mid-1840s, they have generally been vague as to the specifics of this engagement. As detail ed in chapter 4 of this dissertation, entries in this virtual account book help clarify and correct erroneous
37 misconceptions regarding this aspect Further, Thackeray wrote for the Morning Chronicle during the mid 1840s, and this account book establishes that periodical. Thackeray wrote two articles for the Chronicle in March of 1844 one of 1.9 columns and one of 1.15 columns and the projected pounds cited in his account book equates exactly to a pay rate of 2.5 guineas per column. This linkage of payment to length of contribution is in accord with the comment that the Morning Chronicle paid him [presumably on average] 5 guineas per article. 64 1.4 The Virtual Account Book 1844-1848 Table 1.5 summarizes book records for 1844-1848. Table 1.5 Virtual account book r ecords for 1844 1848 Periodical Reference Comment / Analysis Morning Chronicle Ray, Letters 2: 164 In 3/11/1844 letter Thackeray estimates that a position with Morning Chronicle would be th 300 per Morning Chronicle Ray, Letters 2: 172 In letter dated 6/1 1 /1844 Thackeray states that I do above 20 [monthly] for the Chronicle instead of 40 but it is my own fault politics and the literary part is badly paid Punch Punch Contributions Ledger 1844 Punch contributions monthly summary ledger credits Thackeray with making 4 columns worth of contributions to issue # 130, January 6, 1844. Punch Ray, Letters 4: 325 Three undated letters to Fr ederick Mullet Evans contain a quarter of Punch and the proceeds of the last 70 have 60 for the no. and 40 on the Punch acct. that will ease the payment at the end of June which would General Ray, Letters In letter dated 6/1/1844 Thacker a y states that
38 2: 170 and in Chronicle and the mighty Punch above all will tie me Calcutta Star Ray Letters 2: 147 with 10 Magazine Ray, Letters 2: 176 Letter to Nickisson asking for 25 sovereigns to cover two months work o n Barry Lyndon [typical monthly segments were 16 pages] Calcutta Star Ray, Letters 2: 842 Account Book entr y shows 3.0.0 under August for Hume letter New Monthly Magazine Ray, Letters 2: 198 terms are prodigiously good and if I can see the Examiner Ray, Lett er s 2: 203 Examiner a nd I have parted company . it took more Edinburgh Review Harden, Letters Supp lement, 1: 161 Letter dated 10/16/1845 ackno wledging receipt of 21 for Edinburgh Review article. General Ray, Letters 2: 225 Thackeray letter (January 1846?): on the latter beyond the year as I am a very weak & poor politici an only good for outside articles and Morning Chronicle Ray, Letters 2: 231 In letter dated 3/6/1846 Thackeray writes "The Chronicle and I must part or I must cut down half the salary. They are most provokingly friendly all the time, and insist that I should neither resign nor disgorge -but how can one but act honorably by people who are so good natured?" General Ray, Letters 2: 243 In a letter dated 8/6/1846 Thackeray estimates his t till the novel General Ray, Letters 2: 382 to have 1000 a year for my next story, and with Punch Morning Chronicl e Ray, Letters 2: 442 In a letter written in mid October of 1848 Thackeray again Miscellany Harden, Letters Supp lement 1: 566 In an 1853 letter Thacker a y re call ed Bentley offering to pay him 12 per sheet in trade books during the serialization of Vanity Fair Punch Harden, Letters In a letter to Mark Lemon complaining about his rate of
39 Supp lement 1: 667 con tains 85 lines of 56 letters = 4760 letters. A Page =9520; A Page of Blackwood contains 60 lines of 56 letters = 3360 3 pages of Blackwood at 5 guineas is 35/ per page or 28 General Harden, Lett er s Supp lement 2: 1414 In a diary entry for Sep tember of 1859 Thackeray lists the following estimates of money earned: Since 1840: N. M. Magazine (say) 200; Punch (say) 4000; Before 1840: Examiner 100, Fraser (say) 400, Morning Chronicle (say) 400 As described in chapter 3 of this dissertation, the derived rate of 2.5 guineas per column for the Morning Chronicle has immediate implications regarding the July 1845 reference to the Examiner serves to establish the duration and weekly pay rate editor for that periodical. The single October 1845 reference to Thackeray receiving 20 guineas for a ten-page article in the Edinburgh Review establishes the payment rate for that periodical as 32 guineas per sheet, or substantially more than Thackeray had earlier received from the British and Foreign Review ( per sheet) The Westminster Review ( per sheet or less), or the Foreign and Quarterly Review ( per sheet). This differential might be associated with the higher status of the Edinburgh Review reputation as an author. Even before Vanity Fair journalist was increasing On July 26, 1845 he wrote "The admirers of Mr. Titmarsh are a small clique but a good and increasing one if I may gather from the daily offers that are made for me: and the increased sums bid for my writings." It is evident, for example, that h the New Monthly Magazine which had been set at 12 guineas per sheet, was upgraded in 1845. Harrison Ainsworth had taken over that periodical and had extended an increased offer to Thackeray. Thackeray
40 responded on June 25, stating "Your terms are prodigiously good -and if I can see the material for a funny story you shall have it. Thackeray have not survived, we do know that Ainsworth offered the comic writer Thomas Hood 16 guineas per sheet to write for Ain 65 and presumably Thackeray received a similar boost. 1.4.1 Punch 1844-1848 Thackeray became a full-time staff member for Punch late in December of 1843 upon the resignation of Albert Smith. However, Thackeray was not individually listed in Punch issue # 131, published on January 13, 1844. 66 are incomplete; however, presumably to monitor levels of contribution (and possibly affect compensation), record book also included monthly summary totals for all staff contributors. which I have designated as a virtual account book record in table 1.5, asserts that Thackeray contributed 3 columns of material for Punch issue 130 (published on January 6, 1843). However, Thackeray bibliographers from Marion Spellmann to Edgar Harden have credited Thackeray with contributing only a single half-column article in that issue. 67 Did Thackeray ease into his Punch role or did he hit the ground running as a fully contributing staff member? The discrepancy may be resolved by examining a segment of the detailed ledger page for Punch issue 130 as shown below:
41 Figure 1.1 Extract of Punch editor's ledger for January 6, 1844 Here, u the editor or by free lance contributors. F s Day, was written by Thomas Hood and occupied half a column. The reference to a Thackeray contribution which has been referring to the halfBut the following words, Christmas Game (Ditto) Shirt Question (Ditto) Regarding the Royal Billiard Table (Ditto) 1 ., are also important in the context of the summary ledger the writer clearly believed that the three articles of Punch up to exactly 3 columns, were by Thackeray. replaced, in another color ink (not shown in the above black and white figure), with a reference to John Oxenford. But it appears were credited by Punch as being Tha should be added to the
42 Punch. -on to Punch in December; this sarcastically co mplains that it costs more to launder a shirt than the sempstress was paid to make it, and that consequently Philodicky is reduced to wearing a dirty garment. opposing the use of the timbers of a construct a billiard table for the Queen (see a December 21, 1843 Times article). 68 Mark Lemon, the Punch editor, preferred to pay staffers a salary and allocate them a specified number of columns to fill. 69 Undated surviving letters from Thackeray to also was ultimately salaried. 70 s the quarterly payment to be and Thacke t that he did in fact receive from Bradbury and Evans in the first quarter of 1844. An annual total of would be very much in line with the reported annual compensation levels for Shirley Brooks (about ), 71 Henry Silver (a little over ), 72 and Douglas Jerrold ( 73 Of course, this compensation was to cover a projected level of work; Marion allocation was 46 columns per volume or 92 columns per year. 74 An annual target of 92 columns and an annual salary of implies an effective rate of 3 guineas per column. Thackeray often fell well below his Punch column allocations, and there is no information as to whether his compensation was consequently reduced. Accordingly, for this analysis I have used the conservative 3-guineas-per-column rate.
43 When he first joined the Punch staff he exulted 75 Later, in 1854, after he had left the Punch staff and had become an occasional writer for that periodical, he complained that his per-column rate of pay was less than it used to be. 76 1.4.2 Biblio-Economic Answers and Questions  a month. This serves as another test of a biblio-economic analysis: will an April June projected receipt ledger support ? That reconciliation is shown below: Table 1.6 Biblio economic r econciliation for the second q uarter of 1844 April May June Calcutta Star 2.50 Calcutta Star 1.55 Calcutta Star 2.50 Foreign Quart. Re v. 10.44 20.59 24.08 14.55 Morning Chronicle 19.82 Morning Chronicle 4.98 Morning Chronicle 11.68 New Monthly Mag. 4.92 New Monthly Mag. 3.15 Punch 20.95 Pictorial Times 1.10 Punch 22.05 Punch 14. 48 Total 60.12 Total 62.46 Total 56.76 Obviously the revenue the lower projected revenue for June suggests that there are likely additional Thackeray writings in the June Morning Chronicle (see the June 1844 Morning Chronicle candidate articles identified in chapter 3) namely, the Morning Chronicle and Punch each appear to contribute
44 journalistic income. In his case, at least, it required multiple journalistic outlets to support an early Victorian journalist at a rate of approximately per annum. Punch or The Morning Chronicle or possibly both periodicals increased starting in late 1845 or early 1846. In a letter dated by Ray as being written in January of 1846, between Punch & the Chronicle. 77 800 l [ Vanity Fair ] begins [in 1847] Both of these references imply Thackeray anticipated, whether or not it was realized, a combined Punch and Morning Chronicle income approximating per year. One possible explanation for this increase is that Thackeray was receiving more money from Punch, and that Thackeray projected 1846 periodical revenues may have been roughly Punch 0 and the Morning Chronicle In 1859, many years after he had ceased writing for both periodicals, Thackeray summarized his career earnings in a diary entry. He estimated that he had earned 0 from Punch; if that estimate is correct which it need not be th en he must have earn ed near ly per year in his 1845-1851 peak years for Punch Indeed, there is one undated partial letter from Thackeray to Mark Lemon, the editor of Punch, in which Thackeray wrote: "100 will do for the present very well and you are heartily welcome to let the other stand over. The implication of that letter is that Thackeray was owed more than 100 pounds (and well more than the 70 pounds that he was apparently at one time receiving per quarter). Further, in a letter dated June 5, 1848 with Punch & what not can do very like 700 or Punch income had increased. Going back to the 1859 career income diary entry we also
45 find a strangely placed (and thus questionable earnings from the Morning Chronicle were 78 ; since roughly half of all known Thackeray Morning Chronicle articles were published in 1846 this total value would be consistent with 1846 earnings of Under this reading of the evidence Thackeray received more money from Punch as his work succeeded and his popularity increased. Yet the question about he may have been getting paid for political articles written for but not published by the Morning Chronicle is presented in chapter 3 of this dissertation. 1.5 Payment Practices and Rates Table 1.7 below displays the rates of payment Thackeray received from a variety of early Victorian periodicals; this apparently is the largest and most comprehensive data base of its type ever presented for a Victorian journalist. Typically payments were made on a per-sheet or per-column basis. Rates that have been validated by specific real or virtual account book records are shown in normal font; estimated rates, based on nonshown in italics. Multiple rates with associated time spans are shown for several periodicals where evidence indicates that the rate of pay changed over time. I have been unable to examine the original format of the Republic or the Calcutta Star thus rate of remuneration for those publications is given on a per-article basis. As indicated previously, Thackeray worked for enger the Examiner and the Constitutional on a daily or weekly salary basis.
46 Table 1.7 ay from p eriodicals Periodical Dates Rate Page = rows x characters / per 1,000 chars 1842 10 guineas / sheet 67 x 78 or 88 1837 12 guineas / sheet 53 x 68 4.4 Britannia 1841 2 guineas / col umn British & Foreign Rev. 1839 11 / sheet 40 x 62 5.5 Calcutta Star 1843 1845 .5 / article Comic Almanack 1838 1840 13 1 /3 guineas / sheet Constitutional 8 guineas / week Corsair 1839 1840 1 guinea / column 80 x 74 3.5 Edinburgh Review 1845 32 guineas / sheet 45 x 65 18.3 Examiner 1845 4 / week Foreign Quarterly Rev. 1842 1844 10 / sheet 45 x 65 4.3 Fras 1837 3/1838 10 / sheet 62 x 76 2.65 4/1838 1847 12 / sheet 62 x 76 3.18 1841 13 1/3 guineas / sheet 1845 13 1/3 guineas / sheet Heads of the People 1839 1840 10 / sheet 42 x 70 4.25 London & Westmin. Rev. 1839 8 / sheet 45 x 65 3.41 1838 4 / week Morning Chronicle 1842 1848 2.5 guineas / column 190 x 52 5.3 New Monthly Magazine 1837 6/1845 12 guineas / sheet 51 x 72 4.3 New Month ly Magazine 7 8/1845 8/1845 16 guineas / sheet 51 x 72 5.7 Pictorial Times 1843 1844 1.5 guineas / column 117 x 62 4.3 Punch 1842 1843 1 guineas / column 85 x 72 3.4 Punch 1844 1847 3 guineas / col umn 85 x 72 10.2 Republic 1844 Times 1837 18 40 2 guineas / col 190 x 52 4.25 Westminster Rev. 1840 8 / sheet 45 x 65 3.41
47 As one might expect, each of these periodicals has its own page or column dimensions and font sizes which greatly affects its true rate of pay. A journalist analyzing remuneration levels from different periodicals would, presumably, look beneath the surface to make comparisons. To facilitate that analysis, table 1.7 contains a column showing the number of shillings paid per 1,000 characters. (Thackeray based his own remuneration comparisons on numbers of letters or characters rather than on numbers of words. 79 ) The numbers largely speak for themselves. Indeed, when placed on a per-thousand-characters basis, compensation rates vary by as much as a factor of 5! The high rates paid by the Edinburgh Review stand out compared to the other quarterlies. The per-thousandcharacter rates paid by the monthly magazines are much more tightly grouped. And Punch paid more than any of the other weekly or monthly periodicals. The remains to be determined for example, did the Westminster Review offer low rates to most or all of its contributors or was that peculiar to Thackeray and his relationship with the editors, William Hickson and Henry Cole? Payment practices varied as described in the narratives presented in this chapter. Most periodicals ( New Monthly Magazine, Edinburgh Review, British & Foreign Review, Times, etc.) paid their contributors only after their contributions were published. When long waits were involved, writers sometimes negotiated partial payment in advance of publication, as Thackeray did with the Foreign Quarterly Review and Comic Almanack equent pleas to editors, there was some room to negotiate prices exceeding standard rates for individual articles. salaried core staff approach was fairly unusual.
48 I n 1838 as an emerging journalist Thackeray earned an average of per month for his periodical work; by 1844, by increasing the number of periodical venues and g etting higher rates of pay, he increased that monthly figure to per month. Despite his best ef forts he was never able to earn more than that sum per month from his journali sm By and large, and as described in the narratives presented in this chapter, continuing search for higher rates of compensation. Thus, it is clear why in 1846 Tha ckeray shifted his journalistic focus from to Punch: Punch was pa ying over 10 shillings per thousand characters, more than three times as much as fina ncially-driven relations with periodicals presented in th is chapter, as well as the pecuniary interactions with T he Times, The Morning Chronicle, and The Calcutta Star described in subsequent chapters of this dissertation, provide a new richness of biographical and bibliographical detail, including a si and thereby demonstrate the utility of biblio-economic analysis. Notes 1 Edgar Harden, C hecklist of Contributions by William Makepeace Thackeray to Newspapers, Periodicals, Books, and Serial Part Issues, 1828-1864 (Victoria, British C olumbia: U of Victoria, 1996). 2 See Richard Pearson, Review of A Che cklist of Contributions by William Makepeace Thackeray to Newspapers, Periodicals, Books, and Serial Part Issues 18281864, comp. by Edgar Harden, Victorian Pe riodicals Review 30, no. 3 (1997): 295; Gary Victorian Periodical Review 40, no.4 (2007 ): 332-54. 3 Thackeray used this language to request that he be paid all he was owed by in July of 1839. See Gordon Ray, ed., The Letters and Private Papers
49 of William Makepeace Thackeray (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard UP, 1945-6), 1:387. 4 and relationships with book publishers. See Peter Shillingsburg, Pegasus in Harness: Victorian Publishing and W. M. Thackeray (Charlottesville, VA., UP of Virginia, 1992). 5 See Ray, Letters and Edgar Harden, ed., The Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray: A Supplement (New York, London: Garland, 1994). 6 T he Great Metropolis is devoted to a study of the London periodical press. Grant does provide supposedly representative rates of remuneration for contributors to various periodicals. Unfortunately, I have found that the payment rates reported by Grant are often overstated and are inconsistent with information from other sources. See James Grant, The Great Metropolis (London: S aunders & Otley, 1837), 2:278, 281, 284, 289, 292, 317, 322, 325, 331, 335, 337, 340, 347, 352. 7 S 8 David Luck (Assistant Archivist, Coutts & Co), personal communication, F ebruary 23, 2009. 9 Henry Sayre Van Duzer, A Tha ckeray Library (New York: Burt Franklin, 1919) 21. 10 New York Times January 22, 1922. 11 See end note 3. 12 Ray, Letters 1:513-516. 13 Derek Hudson, (Cambridge: University Press, 1944) 105. 14 William Makepeace Thackeray, T he Oxford Thackeray, George Saintsbury, e d. (London: Oxford University Press, 1908), 2:461. 15 Hugh Blair, Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres (London: Charles Daly, 14 Leicester Street, Leicester Square, 1839). http://books.google.com/books?id=irgCAAAAYAAJ&dq=Daly%201839%20Lectures% 20on%20Rhetoric%20and%20Belles%20Lettres&pg=PR3#v=onepage&q&f=false 16 Vicar of Wakefield http://books.google.com/books?id=xC4vAAAAYAAJ&dq=inpublisher%3ADaly&pg=P P15#v=onepage&q&f=false ; Pocket Lacon htt p://www.rookebooks.com/product?prod_id=7380 ; Koran http://www.earlyamerica.com/shopping/ebayproducts.html?itemid=300421021158&rp=a ntiquebooks ; Marmion http://books.google.com/books?id=fmHyQAAACAAJ&dq=inpublisher:Daly&hl=en&ei =VHsvTPmjDsKqlAebsYWeCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0
50 CD4Q6AEwBQ ; Gregory, Chapone and Pennington http://ukbookworld.com/bookde tails/erictmoore/062796/gregory-chapone-and-pennington-grego ry chapone-andpe nnington-the-improvement-the-mind ; Robert Burns http://books.google.com/books?id=2K2dNoyVf1cC&lpg=PA21&ots=0dCeJUpTTp&dq= 1838%20Daly%20%22Poetical%20and%20Prose%20Works%20of%20Robert%20Burns %22%20Orr&pg=PA21#v=onepage&q=1838%20Daly%20%22Poetical%20and%20Pros e%20Works%20of%20Robert%20Burns%22%20-Orr&f=false ; Lady of the Lake http://books.google.com/books?id=DeDpPQAACAAJ&dq=1838+Daly+%22The+Lady+ of+the+Lake%22&hl=en&ei=THgvTJLiIsL6lwenqoyNCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=r esult&resnum=6&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBQ ; Sacred Harmony http://books.google.com/books?id=woQgAAAAMAAJ&dq=1838%20Daly%20%22Sacr ed%20Harmony%22&pg=PR1#v=onepage&q&f=false ; Boccaccio and Chaucer htt p://books.google.com/books?id=4tVByFPuhAC&dq=inpublisher%3ADaly&pg=PR3# v=onepage&q&f=false 17 H. Sutherland Edwards, Pe rsonal Recollections (London: Cassell and C ompany, 1900), 37. 18 Patrick Leary raised this as an unanswered question in his study of the early y ears of and the Literary L ife, 1830Victorian Periodicals Review 27 no.2 (Summer 1994): 109, 122-123. 19 Leary, 109. 20 The a sheet rate for is established more definitively in 21 Ray, Letters 2:64-5, 22 Eventually Thackeray contributed to all but the Dublin Review 23 Alvin Sullivan, ed., British Literary Magazines. The Romantic Age, 17891836 (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1983), 53. 24 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:20. 25 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:38. 26 [William Makepeace Thackeray s of British and Foreign Review 8 (April, 1839): 490-539. 27 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:52, 54, 59; Ray, L etters 1:406, 420. 28 Harden, Lett er s Supp lement, 1:84. 29 Harden, Lett er s Supp lement 1:84. 30 Ray, Letters 2:48, 50. 31 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:114. 32 Ray, Letters 2:830. 33 Ray, Letters 2:42.
51 34 Harden, Letters Supplement ,.1:118. 35 Ray, Letters 2:51. 36 Ray, Letters 2:51. 37 Ray, Letters 2:70. 38 Harden, Lett er s Supp lement 1:121. 39 Ray, Letters 2:74. 40 See Ray, Letters 2: in Chapter 2 of this dissertation. 41 Robert Garnett, ed., The New Sketch Book ( London: Alston Rivers, 1906), 313-4. 42 Ray, Letters 2:70. 43 There is no doubt that the articles 1843 issue of Foreign Quarterly Review are by Tha ckeray. Gordon Ray has concluded, based on a Thackeray letter which apparently is in private hands, that Thackeray also wrote that issue Wellesley Index concurs See Gordon Ray, Thackeray: The Uses of Adversity 1811-1846 (New York: McGraw Hill 1955), 485. 44 Harden, Lett er s Supp lement 1:131-132. 45 Ray, Letters 2:64-5 46 Ray, Letters 2:66. 47 Ray, Letters 2:74. 48 Malcolm Elwin, T hackeray A Personality (New York: Russell & Russell, 1932, 1966) 385. 49 Shillingsburg, Pe gasus in Harness 231. 50 Actually these day-books cover the specific periods 2/11/1843 9/30/1848 a nd 10/21/1848 8/11/1855. 51 Arthur Prager, T he Mahogany Tree: An Informal History of Punch (New York, Hawthorn, 1979), 96. 52 M. H. Speilmann, T he Hitherto Unidentified Contributions of W. M. (New York, Harper & Brothers, 1900), 16. 53 Harden, Checklist 10. 54 Ray, Letters 2:840-2. 55 Ray, Letters 2:160.
52 56 Ray, Letters 2:139-142, 160 57 Ray, Letters 2:139, 140, 159. 58 PM LA 60 (1945): 606-611. 59 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:146. 60 Ray, Letters 2:158-9. 61 In 1839, when Thackeray was writing for another American periodical, the C orsair a letter Thackeray dated July 25th was published on August 24, and a second -Atlantic foreign correspondence. Starting in 1840 Cunard steam ships reduced mail delays across the Atlantic by as much as a week [see Richard Altick, Punch: The Lively Youth of a British Institution 1841-1851 (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State UP, 1997), 14.] however one might still expect an extensive delay from writing to publication. 62 Harden, Letters Supplement 2:145-6. 63 Ray, Letters 2:842. 64 Ray, Letters 2:442. 65 S. M. Ellis, W illiam Harrison Ainsworth and His Friends (London: John L ane, 1911), 2:70. 66 The Punch individual pa ges for each separate weekly number or issue of Punch. On each of these pages the na me of each primary staff member is listed followed by his contributions (by title, and usually by column length in fractions of a column to the nearest quarter column) to that issue; the right side of the ledger indicates the total number of columns in that issue for also indicated, but it is clear from a perusal of these manuscript account books (which are now ma intained at the British Library) that the column lengths shown were both approximate and measures of text length only. At the bottom of each page there would be signified articles were supplied by Mark Lemon either directly through his own writing or indirectly through the contributions of non-staff contributors. Infrequently the name of a non-staff contributor might be shown in parenthesis after one of these articles, but most 67 Speilmann, C ontributions 320; Harden, C hecklist 30. 68 Times (London), December 21, 1843. 69 R. G. G. Price, A Histor y of Punch (London: Collins, 1957), 32. 70 Ray, Letters 4:325.
53 71 George Layard, Shirl ey Brooks of Punch: His Life, Letters, and Diary (New Yor k: Henry Holt, 1907), 135. 72 Marion Spielmann, T he History of Punch (London: Cassell and Company, 1895) 347. 73 Hist ory of Punch 104. 74 Spielmann, Hist ory of Punch 258. 75 Ray, Letters 2:135. 76 Ray, Letters 2:431. 77 Ray, Letters 2:225. 78 The strange placement was that the M orning Chronicle earnings were listed Perhaps this heading was just an idle jotting by Tha ckeray, because (1) it is most unlikely that he earned any significant money from the Morning Chronicle before 1840, and (2) he did not explicitly include the Morning C hronicle pe riodical in the mid-1840s. See Harden, Lett er s Supplement 2:1414. 79 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:667.
54 Chapter 2 he Victorian World in the Times attention to contributions to London newspapers, the Times and the Morning Chronicle. Despite this neglect, development as a writer and essential to his livelihood as a journalist. During 1837-1840, for example, Thackeray wrote as many as five articles per month for the Times In the f ace of Times 1 Later, however, he complained that for his Time s article on Fielding he earned 2 Although almost all of his Times articles nominally were book reviews, Thackeray often used his bully pulpit to expound on topics such as governance, commerce, colonialism, religion, biography, history, society, travel, literature, and art. As a result, these articles not only shed light on Thackeray, the man, but also serve as windows into the early Victorian world. A newspaper writings must address the uncertain circumstances, tentative time lines, and fragmentary bibliographic record of his newspaper work. anonymously, and no master logs matching article to author have been found. The articles themselves typically offer fewer clues for literary dete Thackeray never
55 collected and republished these articles. Only in 1888, 25 years after his death, did Charles Johnson first attribute a handful of Times critical reviews to Thackeray, and the currently most comprehensive academic edition of his works, the 1908 Oxford Thackeray Times critical reviews and only one Morning Chronicle review. 3 Further, scholars have reported a number of misunderstandings regarding his newspaper writings. This chapter explicates and analyzes Times ; the next chapter similarly addresses his work for the Morning Chronicle Specifically, this chapter known arrangements with the Times ; (2) summarizes the previous bibliographic record; (3) establishes and explores linkages between compensatory payments to Thackeray and his specific writings and proposes additional article attributions; and (4 ) explores aspects of the Victorian world particularly colonialism and imperialism, international affairs, attitudes toward religious differences, and medievalism as constructed by and through Sections 2.1 2.3 of this chapter have previously been published in somewhat altered form. 4 2.1 Thackeray and the Times During the years 1837-1840 the Times was published six days a week as a sixcolumn broad-sheet, typically in fouror eight-page editions. From July 1837 through December 1840 the Times published roughly 250 literary review articles, an average of approximately six per month. Novels, travel books, histories, biographies, and religious texts were frequently reviewed. Individual articles ranged in size from less than half a
56 column to four or more co that might be published days or even months apart (for example, the 1839 review of Life of Washington was broken into four notices, published on January 3, January 11, January 23, and April 2). As was standard for the time, frequently 50% or more of an article consisted of extracts from the work being reviewed. We do not know precisely the period of time that Thackeray worked as a literary critic for the Times Thackeray had been working for his step Constitutional which failed in July of 1837. Needing funds to support his young family, Thackeray apparently used a family connection with Edward Sterling, a Times leader writer, to secure assignments from the Times ; his first generally acknowledged article, a The French Revolution was published on August 3, 1837. 5 Although Thackeray contributed a few essays to the Times in the 1860s, his work as an active reviewer is variously assumed by Thack death of Sterling in November of 1840 or with the death of Times editor Thomas Barnes in March of 1841. 6 published on September 2, 1840. During this three-and-a-halfhard at work for the Times 7 In the August 24, 1839 issue of the Corsair N. P. Willis, the editor, introduced Thackeray to his r Times 8 However, there is surprisingly little information as to which reviews Thackeray actually wrote. A surviving invoice for November 1838, the only month for which an incontrovertibly complete list of his contributions to the Times exists, enumerates five November 8
57 November 12 November 16 November 27. 9 There is no reason to believe that this month or this rate of article generation is atypical; even y contribution during his three and one-half years of active reviewing was only half as large as that of November 1838, his projected total writings in the Times would exceed 100 reviews. Yet external evidence has thus far been found for only 18 critical articles, 10 which accordingly might well represent less 2.2 Bibliographic Background In his 1934 book Apprenticeship, Gulliver extended the list of articles previously attributed to Thackeray using four techniques: (1) He found extraordinary agreements in wordings and content between reviews contemporaneously written by Thackeray for and reviews of the same works in the Times ; since Thackeray was simultaneously writing for both publications, one might reasonably infer that Thackeray also penned the reviews in the Times (2) He reasoned that if Thackeray was the known author of one notice in a review that was partitioned into several articles or notices, he was most probably also the author of the others. (3) He utilized cross-references, in which one review referred to another review as if it were by the same author; although these cross-references could have been the products of editorial intrusion, in general their embedded emplacements within the articles suggest that they were placed by a reviewer in this case, Thackeray who was responsible for both reviews. (4) He considered external evidence offered in the letters and memoirs of Lady William Macready, and Thomas Carlyle. 11
58 -based attributions are questionable, in general his arguments are persuasive. As shown in the summary table included in this chapter, the authorship of several articles that Gulliver first attributed to Thackeray has since been confirmed. Gulliver more than doubled the number of reasonably supported attributions of Thackeray articles in the Time s. Nevertheless, perhaps not fully and suggested as new attributions several reviews that had previously been attributed by Gulliver. 12 Indeed, in the absence of a modern coordinating and consolidating review of Times other scholars may have inadvertently missed prior Thackeray attributions in the literature; perhaps this is why Edgar Harden declared Austria notwithstanding Lela 13 A Checklist of Contributions by William Makepeace Thackeray to Newspapers, Periodicals, Books, and Serial Part Issues, 1828-1864 the current standard bibliography of Thackeray publications, 14 includes attributions of Times articles to Thackeray. 15 Of course, sometimes external evidence of authorship can be more misleading or more subject to misinterpretation than internal analyses. Several confusions in the literature are associated with external evidence that in retrospect was not definitive. For example, based on an errant twenty-yearsdaughter, Lady Ritchie, it was believed that Thackeray wrote the November 1, 1851
59 Times Life of John Sterling even though the review expressed opinions that were contrary to those Thackeray normally held. recollection, this article was included in the standard Centenary Edition of Thackeray's works, and this attribution was subsequently endorsed by Gulliver and by pre-eminent biographer, Gordon Ray. 16 In 1999, however, K. J. Fielding demonstrated that the review in question was actually written by Samuel Phillips. 17 Working with an extract of a Thackeray letter that was published in the 1898 Biographical Edition of his works, Gulliver also fell prey to inaccurate external information. Gulliver seized upon the (apparently dated March 20, have been writing all day, and finished and dispatched an article for the Times argued that Thackeray was the author of an article regarding a public dinner at the Casino Paginni that was dated March 20 and published on March 23. 18 But this attribution is unlikely to be correct. A complete version of the Thackeray letter in question shows that this was a multi-day letter, and that the quotation cited by Gulliver was actually written after March 20. 19 April 5 (with a letter date of March 21, and, the Times certainly the article in question. Gulliver had argued for this exhibition article being by Thackeray as well, but, misled by the date on the published letter extract, had argued for the existence of two Thackeray articles sent from Paris when it now appears that there was only one. Ray published an undated letter f
60 to ask if you have seen an attack on Mrs. Jameson in the Times this morning. I am the 20 After persuasively dating the letter to January of 1839, Ray concluded that th Winter Studies and Summer Sketches in Canada However, that book was never reviewed in the Times in fact, there were no Times reviews of any works by Mrs. Jameson in 1839. A review of a work by Mrs. Jameson was published in October of 1838 a review that in style and content may well have been by Thackeray but other information precludes an October 1838 date for the letter. One is almost forced to conclude that Thackeray deliberately lied, but, of course, there is a better answer. On January 24, 1839 the Times The Widow Barnaby Using cross-references Gulliver attributed this article to Thackeray. letter is that, like many of us, Thackeray miseed to be treated with skepticism and carefully validated against other information. Indeed that very same letter to Mrs. Proctor contains another confusing reference. In this letter Thackeray awkwardly asserts that another reviewer wrote the December 28, 1838 Times Writings by Barry In an critic of literature, Lidmila regarding Jonson. 21 This interpretation and attribution seem most unlikely. The reviewer whose identity is in question praises Jonson but disparages Barry Cornwall, claiming that
61 alue is to be found in the memoir which is prefixed to it written by Mr. B. Mr. Cornwall was a close personal friend of Thackeray, and it is highly unlikely that Thackeray would have disparaged him in those terms. But more significantly, Barry Cornwall was the pseudonym of Bryan Proctor If Thackeray had made such negative comments about her husband it is most unlikely that he would have freely acknowledged his authorship to Mrs. Proctor. Hawes has also questioned this attribution, but on stylistic grounds. 22 If authors sometimes misstate their own contributions, third-party assertions regarding authorship are even more suspect. Apparently once Carlyle knew that Thackeray had written the review in the Times of his The French Revolution, he tended to be easily persuaded that other related reviews in the Times were also by Thackeray. Carlyle erroneously attributed a January 1838 series of Ti mes articles entitled Old asserted that a May 1, 1838 review of the first of a series of Times was also by Thackeray. 23 Gulliver correctly noted attribution of the May 1 article to Thackeray and assumed that a May 22 review of the last of his lecture series was by Thackeray as well. 24 It is possible that the May 1 and 22 reviews are by Thackeray, but given the u uncertain. 25 Gull November 7, 1837 review of a production of Hamlet at Covent Garden Theater to Thackeray should also be regarded as uncertain. Thackeray was an inveterate theatergoer and would have been a good candidate to write
62 theater reviews. The Times often ran several theater reviews in the course of a month, however, and one might expect that if Thackeray had been regularly assigned to write theater reviews that sometime over the course of three and a half years there would be clear external evidence of at least one Times such evidence has been found; with the exception of his opportunistic letter on the art exhibition in Paris (which presumably was written because of his trip to the French capital), his Times contributions seem to have been confined to literary reviews. ed on a com April 14, 1838 26 Additionally, Gulliver himself th e attribution must be regarded as uncertain. 27 2.3 Following the Biblio-Economic Money Trail As discussed in chapter 1 of this dissertation, Thackeray wrote out of financial necessity, and there normally was a close connection between the articles he wrote and the compensatory payments he received. Following the money trail from payment back to article should, therefore, support bibliographic scholarship and possibly explicate the Times. To apply this technique A surviving invoice for Times however, substantively incorrect. 28 Times for the month of November 1838 details the number of columns in each of his five November articles as,
63 respectively, 2-1/4, 3/4, 3-1/4, 2-1/4, 1and explicitly sums the number of columns to 10.0. The bill further notes that these 10 columns are charged at 21 pounds, a rate of two guineas per column. 29 In further confirmation of this rate, Thackeray later wrote to Mrs. Brookfield that the Times paid him five guineas for a September 2, 1840 article on Fielding that occupies exactly 2.5 columns. 30 Times articles range from onehalf to over three columns, with the average article running approximately two columns. Thus, Thackeray received on average four guineas per article, more than twice as much as suggested by Ray. Times articles allows us to confirm, identify, or discredit some Thackeray attributions. In chapter 1 I establish ed that Thackeray received specific payments from the Times of 22.1.0 on January 1, 1838, 13.06 on February 2, 1838, and 14 pounds in late May of 1838. My contention is that these payments must be connectable at the 2-guineaper-column rate to specific Thackeray Times articles. Indeed, as I reported previously, 31 Thackeray January 1838 Times articles: an article published on January 6 which Thackeray cited as being 2-1/5 columns long, an article on January 11 which ran 2columns, and a 1--column article on January 31, for a total of 6.2 columns. 32 At two guineas per column, this would total 12.4 guineas, or a few pence over 13 pounds. This figure directly correlates with the Account Book notation that on February 2 Thackeray received from the Times 13 pounds six pence. 33 In this instance, at least, the Times apparently paid promptly at mo work. the Times slowed.
64 periodicals during March and April, no payment is shown during those months for the Times. However, after a May 5 payment entry for there is an undated entry for the Times sh owing Thackeray received 14 pounds. According to the 2-guineaper-column rate, 14 pounds equates to 6-2/3 columns of contributions. Depending upon a cross-reference in a confirmed Thackeray article, Harold Gulliver suggested that the February 6, 2.25-colu 34 External evidence supports the attribution of two Thackeray Times articles in April 1838, the 1.2a 1.2-column April 17 article reviewing The Poetical Works of Dr. Southey 35 And Gulliver also proposed that the April 24 2-column review of Alice; or the Mysteries was by Thackeray, again based on a cross reference. 36 Thus, external evidence and crossreferences account for some 6.65 Thackeray columns for the Times during the months of February, March, and April of 1838 against a payment from the Times which would cover 6 2/3 columns. Based on this agreement it is unlikely that there were any additional contributions by Thackeray to the Times between January and April of 1838. Moreover, this biblio-economic analysis supports 2.3.1 New Attributions further; however, the Account Book shows a payment of 22 pounds one shilling from the Times to Thackeray on January 1, 1838 suggesting payment for 10.5 columns of Thackeray articles printed in December 1837 or possibly in prior months 37 The question
65 remains as to whether any of these compensated for but as yet unattributed articles can be identified. In December of 1837 nine literary reviews were published in the Times : Table 2.1 Literary r eviews in the December 1837 Times Article Date Cols 1 3.1 2 3.0 Literary and Scientific Men of Great 11 1.5 14 2.2 20 2.6 21 1.0 23 3.1 23 1.0 25 0.7 Note: E stimate d article length in frac tions of a column; these values may not be identical to those used by Thackeray or by his editors. Footsteps of Don Quixote, December 23, 1847. Internal evidence suggests that the two Cyclopaedia are by Thackeray; the writing is certainly in Additionally, Thackeray poked fun at Lardner in his December 1837 article on the Annuals in (which was reprinted in the December 25 and 26 issues of the Times ) and further mocked him in The Yellowplush Correspondence in August 1838. 38 Gulliver had previously noted, without reference to the payment information presented here, that the December 11, 1837 Lardner article had 39
66 reviewer critiques presumptive biographers. The article Rambles in the Footsteps of r. 40 With a somewhat lower degree of confidence, I suggest that the article on George Whitefield is also by Thackeray. The reviewer expresses a non-dogmatic view of religion which values individu privately expressed views. 41 Additionally, the review explicitly documents In fact, p h also discusses Whitefield). The Lardner, Cervantes, and Whitefield articles total 7.3 columns, leaving approximately 3.2 columns of unattributed but compensated work. The review of the Life of Wallenstein is not by Thackeray, for cross references suggest that the reviewer of that article also wrote the April 27, 1838 article entitled reviews during April of 1838 are already accounted for. The reviewer of the Memoirs of Dr. H. Bathhurst takes political and religious positions specifically gratuitous Whig which are atypical of opinions expressed elsewhere by Thackeray. A possible final attribution for Thackeray for
67 December of 1837 and the one that best fits the financial payment data given in is the 3.1-column article on the dispatches of the Marquis Wellesley. That article, however, lacks any identifying Thackeray touches, and all that can be asserted is that it is a possibility that best fits the financial evidence. Other possibilities exist; although they also lack distinctive Thackeray indicators, the reviews could have been written by Thackeray. Gu Times cannot be ruled out; accordingly, a number of short reviews (typically .2 or .3 columns) of presentations at Drury Lane, Covent Garden, the Adelphi, the Victoria, and the Olympic theate r hypothetically might, in various combinations, fill out some of the unallocated columns. Or perhaps Thackeray was able to secure payment from the Times for the aforementioned reprinted Annuals articles from Lastly, it is possible that the January 1, As I have noted previously, 42 nt to his mother in a September 1, to do about worth of work for the Times 43 contains another useful financial clue to his writings. Ray glosses this reference as referring to a September 2 article on Fielding, but that 2.520 pounds. would expect that he wrote on the order of nine or 10 columns of work in the latter half of August that were published in that time period or perhaps in the early part of September. History of the Popes were published on
68 August 11 (2.25 columns) and August 18 interpreted literally, the first of these Thackeray articles would not be included as part of A detailed examination of the August 1840 issues of the Times however, reveals two additional articles that, with a high degree of probability, were written by Thackeray: the August 21, 3.1embedded cross reference H And the August 15 syst As discussed later in this chapter, t Evangelism, and contains an eloquent denunciation of Austrian totalitarianism. are new attributions to Thackeray. Thus, from August 15 through September 3 Thackeray reviews can be identified: August August 18, August 21, September 3, Sometimes, even in the absence of cross-references or guiding financia l information, internal evidence is so strong that with reasonable assurance a claim of attribution can be made. Indeed, I submit that such attributions to Thackeray can be made poleon
69 ; notices, September e December 4, 7, & 9, 1840). Des Idees Napoleoniennes, par Le Prince Louis Napoleon Bonaparte October 21, 1839. In chapter 1 of this dissertation I used records of financial payments to Negative references reviews. On December 11, 1839, 44 At the end of that month Thackeray wrote his Times of the Times 45 By exclusion, then, one can infer that Thackeray did not contribute any Times critical reviews in December 1839. In fact, it Times as there is only one confirmed Thackeray contribution from May 1839 through February 1840 a time period which, almost certainly not coincidentally, coincides with That single confirmed late 1839 Thackeray article, however, is a new attribution. It is well kn The Paris Sketch Book were previously published in periodicals such as the Corsair , the National Standard and the New Monthly Magazine It appears to have escaped prior notice, however, that the segment of The Paris Sketch Book
70 Times on October 21, 1839 as a book This article which, as discussed later in this chapter, summary of Frenchis, therefore, a certain new attribution of a Times critical review to Thackeray. September 18, 26 & October 16, 19, 1838. History of New South Wales Times Times reviews such as the November 8, 1838 the tone of this review is generally humanism. However, the September 26 notice includes a tell-tale commentary that strongly smacks of Thackeray. In describing the convict population of New South Wales, violence of the criminal himself, who prates from the hulks about his political rights, and meriting a halter, demands gravely a vote, could only be properly illustrated by Hogarth, Thackeray, but the appeal to the wisdom of Dr. Johnson and to reference points Hogarth and Fielding in fact, the mere beloved 18 th century English humorists into the review of a book which is so unrelated to them marks Thackeray as the likely reviewer. Indeed, th is review reveals a great deal
71 Times work between his August 1837 review of Carlyle and his confirmed reviews of January 1838. 46 ames Fenimore Cooper December 19, 1838. On August 27, 1846, the Morning Chronicle published a review by Thackeray of James Fenimore Ravensnest; or the Red Skins that Harden has cited as a source document for 47 In fact, however, all the characteristic Thackeray attitudes regarding Cooper are also revealed in the December 18, 1838 Times Eve Effingham One sees in both English and American society badly despite being well-treated in both countries, and a claim that Cooper is bitter and malevolent toward all mankind. It is impossible to look at the two reviews sideby -side and not believe they were written by the same hand. Thus the Eve Effingham review can with reasonab le probability be attributed to Thackeray, and it becomes clear that his attitudes toward Cooper and his own sense of the inherent conflicts between republican and hierarchical values were established well before the review of Ravensnest (For a Times review of a Cooper novel which takes a very different tack, and which, I submit, was most probably not written by Thackeray, see the December 24, Mercedes of Castille .) Records of Real Life in the Palace and Cottage by Miss Pigott April 18 1840. In and bad French. 48 Thus, the April 18, 1840 Times review of Records of Real Life in the
72 Palace and the Cottage an entertaining and elegantly written review which contains much Thackeray-like language and sentiments, is most likely by Thackeray. Its opening statement one and all remarkable for an immoderate indulgence in the French language, have given us an unfaithful picture of genteel society, the members of which, as we thought, if they must employ silly French phrases to eke out silly English conversations, at least would authorship. If any further evidence is needed, sarcasms within the article aimed at some Bulwer, provide it. 49 The cutting humor of this review makes it fully worthy, on a literary December 4, 7, & 9, 1840. From the 1820s into the 1850s the annuals were popular in literary Britain. Typically published shortly before Christmas, these frothy books were filled with colored prints or steel engravings, poems, short stories, and essays. Thackeray was a regular (and normally disparaging) reviewer of these publications, as in his December 1837 review in his November 1838 review in the Times or his January 1839 review in 50 In December of 1840 the Times published a heretofore unattributed three-notice review of annuals reviews. The style, values, nature of comments, and even expressed pet likes and dislikes of this review are consistent with his prior reviews. Moreover, the December 9
73 it that is worth reading may be condensed into less than half that number of lines. Its dullness is mortal, not merely to t This language is so similar to the words Thackeray employed in his 1833 critique of another Robert Montgomery poem in which he declared the only pleasant line to be the line identifying the publisher, and in Dunciadli that it is difficult to conceive that the two reviews were written by different authors. 51 Other Candidate Thackeray Times Literary Reviews. A full list of Times would undoubtedly also include critical reviews which lack sufficient distinguishing markers for even tentative identification. However, there are a number of unattributed Times articles whose tone, style, or sentiments and sometimes all three are strongly redolent of Thackeray. In the absence of supporting external data, embedded crossit would be inappropriate at this time to attribute any of these articles to Thackeray, yet there are legitimate reasons for suspecting that Thackeray is the likely author of at least some of them. Consider, for example, the following articles: August 25, 1838. The focus on personalities and the liberal use of personal adjectival modifiers (crafty, courtly, fiery), as well as the sense of charm and irony, are Thackerayesque. September 14, 15, 1838. This review is Thackeray-like of moral values being more important than political affiliation. October 16, 1838. The light humorous touch is characteristic of Thackeray, and the descriptions of the
74 beauties of the court are reminis novel The History of Henry Esmond December 21, 1838. The reviewer ironically and sarcastically sees Reynolds as a classic Irish rogue, in the spirit of Ensign McShane in -1840 novel, Catherine December 26, 1838. This review concerning a displays his sense of humor. Additionally, Thackeray wrote a similarly structured review of this same work which was published in the February 1839 issue of January 3, 11, 23 & April 2 1839. of Washington seems very close to the Washington Thackeray described in his private correspondence, his 1853 letter to the Times and in The Virginians 52 February 1, 1839. In his admiration for good English, his comments about various biographies of Bunyan, and his use of personal adjectival describers this reviewer may well be Thackeray. April 22 & 28, 1839. The sense of irony, the focus on personalities and human characteristics rather than events, and the commentary on what is needed in a May 19, 1840. esses of republics. the Borages and the Vines September 24, 1840. The
75 and the comments describing an English gentleman with a great mass of luggage and the flavor of the opening passages The Paris Sketch Book The existence of these and other possible Thackeray Times articles suggests that the current Thackera y Times Times there appear to be a greater number of contributions by Thackeray to the Times than scholars had, perhaps, previously projected. 53 2.3.2 A Thackeray Times Bibliography Times are listed chronologically. In all probability the 60 listed citations, in toto still understate ntribution to the Times, and it is unlikely that a full Thackeray Times bibliography will ever be established. Nevertheless, this bibliographic list captures the Times including reviews of novels, travel books, biographies, histories, and books with religious themes. Within these articles one can find much of the manners and life of the early Victorian world: assessments of the world of art; reviews of the works of leading English and American authors and the literary trends of the day; ruminations on the aesthetics of poets and France, Ireland, and Russia; sentiments regarding both Ev angelism and Catholicism; thoughts on the roles of commoners, aristocrats, and royalty, and on the essential nature
76 of republics and of totalitarian regimes; insightful remarks regarding travel to and the cultures of countries of Europe, Africa, and Asia; observations on medieval and modern what were the essential characteristics of a good man and a good writer. The pattern a Times are now clarified. There were extended periods of time in which Thackeray wrote articles on essentially a weekly basis, and other periods, particularly from May of 1839 through February of 1840, during which he wrote very little. Edgar [after the initial Carlyle review in August of 1837] for the Times had to wait until the turn Richard September 1840 a Times. 54 Hopefully, this bibliography, in its textual variety and chronological range, will enable future a the early Victorian world during a critical period of his literary apprenticeship. Table 2.2 ontributions to the Times Date Article Attri bution 8/3/1837 Johnson, Early Writings, 51; Ray, Letters, 1:347n 9/5 1837 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 97; based attribution uncertain 9/18/ 1837 New South Wales. Simons; based on internal evidence 9/26/ 1837 The Simons; based on internal evidence
77 9/30/ 1837 by the Author of Rienzi, Eugene Aram, Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 100; based on comparison to Thackeray review in 10/6/ 1837 by Miss Gulliver, Apprenticeship 100; based on comparison to Thackeray review in 10/16/ 1837 The Colonist Dr. Lang on Trans portation and Simons; based on internal evidence 10/19/ 1837 The Colonist Dr. Lang on Transportation and Simons; based on internal evidence 10/25/1837 by Gulliver, Ap prenticeship 98 99; based on comparison to Thackeray review in 11/3/ 1837 Simons; extracted from Thackeray article in 11/11/ 1837 (Revi ew of Macbeth) Gulliver, Apprenticeship 96; based attribution uncertain 12/11/ 1837 Vol. 93 Lives of Literary and Gulliver, Apprenticeship ,103; Simons, based on int ernal evidence and billing consistency 12/14/1837 Lives Simons; based on internal evidence and billing consistency 12/20/ 1837 Simons; based on internal evi dence and billing consistency 12/23/ 1837 Simons; based on internal evidence and billing consistency 12/25/ 1837 Simons; reprinted from Magazine 12/26/ 1837 Simons; reprinted fr om Magazine
78 1/6/1838 Johnson, Early Writings, 52; Ray, Letters, 1:515; based on Account Book for 1838 1/11/ 1838 or Love, by Lady Charlotte Bury and A Diary Relative to George IV and Johnson, Early Writings, 53 54; Ray, Letters, 1:515; based on Account Book for 1838 1/31/ 1838 Johnson, Early Writings, 56; Ray, Letters, 1:515; based on Account Book for 1838 2/6/1838 ca and the Pacific, Gulliver, Apprenticeship 109; based on cross reference 4/5/ 1838 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 110; Ray, Letters, 1838 4/17/ 183 8 Johnson, Early Writings, 56; Ray, Letters, 1:516; based on Account Book for 1838 4/24/ 1838 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 111; based on cross reference 5/1/ 1838 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 92; based on Carlyle letter, attribution uncertain 5/22/1838 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 92; based on assumed consistency of authorship, attribution uncertain 8/30/ 1838 Harde n, Letters Supplement 1:38 9/4/ 1838 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 113; based on cross reference 9/7/ 1838 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:38 9/25/ 1838 Gulliver, A pprenticeship 113; based on cross reference 10/2/1838 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 111 112; based on cross reference
79 10/4/1838 Gulliver, Apprent iceship 111 112; based on cross reference 10/9/ 1838 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 113; based on cross reference 10/19/ 1838 1400" Gulliver, Apprenticeship 114; one of three notices 10/25/ 1838 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 115; one of three notices 11/2/ 1838 Ray, Letters 1:375; based on monthly bill 11/8/ 1838 Ray, Letters 1:375; based on monthly bill 11/12/1838 R ay, Letters 1:375; based on monthly bill 11/16/ 1838 Ray, Letters 1:375; based on monthly bill 11/27/1838 History of the Reformation in Ray, Letters 1:375; based on monthly bill 1 2/19/ 1838 Simons; based on internal evidence 1/24/ 1839 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 114; based on cross reference 10/21/1839 Le Prince Louis Napoleon Simons; bas ed on comparison to Paris Sketch Book 3/5/ 1840 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 115; based on cross reference 3/10/1840 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 117; base d on internal evidence 3/16/ 1840 Winegarner, Contributions to the British and Foreign Review, 244 245; Harden, Letters Supplement 1: 60
80 4/18/ 1840 Palace and Cottage by Miss Simons; based on internal evidence 6/10/ 1840 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 117; based on cross reference; Ray, Letters, 1:461 8/11/ 1840 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 117; based on cross reference; R ay, Letters, 1:461 8/15/ 1840 Simons; based on cross reference and billing consistency 8/18/ 1840 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 117; based on cross reference; Ray, Letters, 1:461 8/21/ 1840 Simons; based on cross reference and billing consistency 9/2/ 1840 Volume with a Memoir by Johnson, Early Writings, 51; Ray, Letters, 2:462 12/4/ 1840 nnuals of 1841" Simons; based on internal evidence 12/7/ 1840 Simons; based on internal evidence 12/9/ 1840 Simons; based on internal evidence 4/30/ 1851 Ray, Letters, 2:766 11/21/ 1853 ton. To the Editor Ray Letters, 3:319 321 6/21/ 1862 Harden Letters Supplement 2:1093 1094 5/15/ 1863 Johnson, Early Writings, 51; based Cruikshank 2.4 What the Large Loose Baggy Monsters Left O ut Henry James -class
81 society, The Newcomes large 55 and the same descriptor an society, such as Pendennis and The Adventures of Philip also admitted, bring to life the Victorian world, with their hundreds of distinctly drawn characters, thousands of pages of detail, extensive allusions to contemporary institutions, and panoramic vistas of social activity. Nevertheless, these novels still le ave out or treat minimally some aspects of the Victorian world several of which are, paradoxically, instead addressed in minnows, his newspaper articles. George Osborne, Arthur Pendennis, Major Pendennis, George Warrington, Colonel Newcome, Clive Newcome, Philip Firmin, and others) are all writers, artists, or soldiers, and thus are generally removed from direct involvement with Although some of these figures draw incomes from India, these connections are left shrouded in st commercial forces which drove Victorian Britain. the Times particularly his fourHistory of New South Wales and his two articles on Peter Scarlett navigation in the Pacific, do explicitly address these issues. dayto -day circumstances affecting individual lives. Unlike, say, books, ev er address issues of governance. Yet Thackeray had strongly held opinions on governance, most particularly on international affairs, which he expressed in many of his Times reviews. Likewise, in an age of religious controversy,
82 muted stand on religion typically Thackeray presents clerical figures as (sometimes amiable) hypocrites, and extols (perhaps ironically) of sincerely devout women. Yet the disparate roles of dissenters / low church / and high church advocates are never brought into high relief as they are in the works of Anthony Trollope or George Eliot. Similarly, the anti-Catholicism evident in novels such as Yeast or Westwood Ho! Villette is suppressed in Thacke Attitudes toward religion and religious differences do however, come to the fore in Times articles. Even with regard to literary large loose baggy monsters. For example, the Victorian era was marked by an intense interest in medievalism. Essayists such as Thomas Carlyle, John Ruskin, Walter Pater; poets such as Alfred Tennyson, Robert Browning, William Morris, and Dante Gabriel Rossetti; and novelists from the extraordinarily influential Walter Scott ( Ivanhoe and others) through George Eliot ( Romola ) or Charles Reade ( The Cloister and the Hearth ), all integrated this passion into their works. not reflect this fascination, and his one attempt at a medieval novel was quickly aborted. 56 Indeed, Thackeray has been described by Lorretta Holloway and Jennifer Palmgren in their study of Victorian medievalism -medieval. 57 One finds, however, that Times newspaper writings reveal his own conception of and enthusiasm for medievalism. In the following subsections I Times articles to assess his views on these four facets of the early Victorian world that his large loose baggy monsters left out colonialism and imperial commerce, international affairs, religious
83 conflicts and values, and medievalism. 2.4.1 Colonial Emigration and Imperialism Thackeray four 1837 articles on An Historical and Statistical Account of New South Wales and his two 1838 South America and the Pacific are, for the most part, summaries of information rather than critical reviews. Indeed, Thackeray discuss the controversial points . but chiefly to recapitulate the facts as he states them, 58 accurately describes both sets of articles. Further, editorial direction or intervention may well have dictated the opinions expresse 59 s opinions on these nominally non-Thackerayan subjects do bleed through. Thackeray offers a disturbing assessment of Australian colonization that sharply contrasts with th e impressions left by Charles Great Expectations or It s Never too Late to Mend and a prescient advocacy for the commercial and imperial advantages to be associated with a Panama Canal. one might recall that Thackeray, arguing that crime novels by Harrison Ainsworth (or Oliver Twist ) made heroes out of criminals by glorifying lives of crime, strongly critiqued the Newgate novels of the early Victorian era. Despite his political Radicalism, Thackeray thought rogues were rogues and should be presented accordingly Jonathan Wild Accordingly, it is not surprising that, following Lang, Thackeray s aw the convict population of New
84 South Wales not as a sympathetic group deserving a second chance in life, but rather as a still criminal and avowedly immoral popula ce which, by virtue of their numbers: [W]ith impunity dictate the morals, the politics, and the religion of the colony. . And this is a settlement where, to answer the purposes of its formation, the system of government . should be stern, prompt, implacable where, as a kind of legal purgatory, there should be punishment, and gloom, and repentance. We find in of the law; convict attornies conducting suits, convict editors inculcating morals, convict politicians spouting about the rights of man, convict Lovelaces with harems of convict women all the debauchery and drunkenness, all the swindling and thievery, which these gentry practised in England . 60 Instead, Thackeray argues, there should have been an honest, reputable, peaceable, middle class of colonists, farmers, tradesmen, artisans, and then neither the New South Wales nobility nor the convict helots would have attained the indecent degree of influence which each party seems to have acquired 61 Moreover, displaying a skeptical attitude toward emigration in general, Thackeray considered the English campaign to encourage the non-convict poor to emigrate to New South Wales as manipulative and deceptive dy emigrants who flock to New South Wales in order to better their condition . will do well to . not trust so strain of Victorian morality and paternalism emerges as Thackeray characterizes the effort to encourage the emigration of unattached poor women as ortation [T]he females now emigrating from England, to whom the Government promises
85 such a brilliant avenir must fall for the most part to the convicts share; a pretty pretext with which to lure honest women from their homes; an excellent asylum for those of doubtful character the one going to Sydney but to lose in the corruption of the place the innocence which they had kept in England, the others but to increase and consolidate crime, and propagate fresh villains from generation to generation. . It may be harmless for families of artisans to emigrate to New South Wales, where . the resources and extent of the country still insure them a profitable market for their labour; but for women without a calling or a protector, who have no resources or means of livelihood but to become the wives or paramours of the inhabitants of the colony, none but Whig statesmen would venture to recommend their transportation. 62 Thackeray enormous gains made in New South Wales by those middle-class emigrants who have comment that the icers now on Her anecdotal reports. Although Thackeray is dubious about the benefits of emigration to distant colonies, he does argue for an imperialist extension of British commercial power around the globe. Thackeray is openly supportive of proposals for constructing a Panama canal and establishing steam navigation in the Pacific
86 boasted march of scientific knowledge, of commercial intelligence and industry, of political foresight and modern statesmanship, that 34 statute miles [the Isthmus of Panama] should form an obstacle to the intercourse of the inhabitants of Europe, Asia, Africa, and America? . . The plan cannot fail of being ultimately acted upon . 63 Moreover, Thackeray articulates the advantages to English mercantile interests: Such a plan will reduce the period of the communication between Great Britain and the western coasts of America two-thirds at least from nearly four months, that is, to six weeks; and the merchant will receive the proceeds for his goods four or five months earlier than he could have done before, and will have moreover the advantage of knowing what goods to send, by the frequency of advices from his correspondents in the foreign markets. . . When the isthmus shall be (virtually) no more, a glance at the map is sufficient to show how the western American coast will rise into importance from the immense increase of intercourse which the removal of the present barrier will necessarily cause. It opens to us a direct road to China. are, when to reach them our ships are obliged to make the dangerous passage round Cape Horn; and we may look, too, to find Jamaica . once more the entrepot of supplies for the northern ports of the Pacific, and enabled, to a great extent, to resume that lucrative trade by which her prosperity was formerly so much promoted. 64
87 2.4.2 International Affairs For it no more follows, because a man is a clever novelist that he should be a great political philosopher, or an historian, or a controversialist, than that he should be able to dance the tight rope or play the flute. All virtuous indignation against grinding aristocrats, artful priests, &c., all sentimental political economy, ought, we think, to be marked and branded. It is not only wrong of authors thus to meddle with subjects of which their small studies have given them but a faint notion, and to treat complicated and delicate questions with apologues instead of arguments . it is not only dishonest, but it is a bore. 65 Indeed, Thackeray, the novelist, stayed true to this credo; Thackeray the newspaperman, however, felt free to comment on governance, governments, and international affair s. Indeed, Times articles reveal a politically involved personage, offering extended political commentaries on the great powers of Europe and the emerging United States. Thackeray posits a superior English society facing competitors and adversaries burdened with inferior political systems. The se assessments can be drawn from the indicated articles: (1) Austria the August 15, 1840 article on Memoirs of a Prisoner of State ; (2) Russia the two City of the Czar reviews (August 30 and September 7, 1838) and the October 2, 1838 review, (3) France the October 21, 1839 article on Prince Louis Napoleon Bonaparte; and (4) America December 19, 1838 review of a James Fenimore Cooper novel. Of course,
88 about political issues are not intrinsically more insightful than his opinions on dancing the tight rope or playing the flute; however, they do flesh out the views of a canonical author and, to the extent that Thackeray is representative of a segment of Victorian educated opinion, his views provide insight into early Victorian thought. Thackeray Austrian and the Russian empires reveal him to be wary of controlling governments and authoritarian states. Austrian emperors of the 1830s and 1840s (Francis I and Ferdinand I), although absolute rulers, portrayed themselves as paternalistic and committed to the welfare of their citizens. English travel writers such as Frances Trollope and Peter Evan Turnbull accepted that vision and wrote books praising the Austrian system, delighting in the pleasurable aspects of Viennese society, and ignoring the police state operating behind the curtain. But Thackeray would have none of this he denounced the : immediately follows that where a nation receives so much benefit from a good monarch, it suffers equally under a bad one, and it is better to guard against such chances altogether. . surely there is no government toward which we should be more careful and chary of our praise than that amiable, dangerous one of the s children from speaking what they think, and that shuts out books from them, and sets them to play for fear the poor little things should think too much. Pleasant it is, no doubt, to be a child and have a good natured prudent father, who orders your meals and settles your walks. . nor enlarge too much upon the virtues of political pap, whipping, and babyhood.
89 . Let the reader look at a Vienna newspaper; there are but two published in th e capital: no Englishman can look at the mean, shabby, narrow, ill-printed scrap of paper without contempt contempt for a Government which endeavours in our days to make such a miserable compromise between human intelligence and its own interest . Un perpetually at work 12 pairs of shears ceaselessly clipping slices of the truth out of every manuscript to be published . 66 In a later review Thackeray peers beneath the veneer of paternalism to expo se the Austria that Trollope and Turnbull missed: [T] . to what horrid exercises of tyranny it is obliged to resort, to what infinite meannesses it must have recourse in order to assure the obedience of its children. An English reader . can form no idea of the rascalities recorded in it, the tyranny and spying, the miserable shifts of bigotry and falsehood, to which the magnificent monarchy condescends, that at a little distance appears to us so venerable and so stately. . Mr. Turnbull travels through the country, and from the cushions of his britschka surveys smiling landscapes and peasantry, or, descending from the said britschka, dines with Herr Graaf or Herr Baron, and pronounces the system to be good: the fashionable Trollope jumps out of her place (in the back part of the eilwagen no doubt), presents her letters, and is straightway cheek by jowl with Metternich, Kolowrath, Esterhazy, in the midst of that everto be -famous Cr me de la crme de la haute vole What is good to Turnbull seems to Trollope divine. What a government, what a society, what a
90 country, what a benevolent pater patrice and what a charming happy family does he govern! Yes, indeed, and in the meanwhile the Spielberg prisoners are scraping lin t in their dark dungeons, and gaolers are bricking up the only place from which they could peep into the fields and gain a little harmless glimpse of consolation! 67 Thackeray offers similar denunciations of the censorship, political imprisonment and executions imposed by the Russian autocracy, but here there is an added element of geopolitical concern and condemnation, not of British authors, but of the policies of the British Government. Fifteen years before the outbreak of the Crimean War Russia is portrayed as an eternal adversary of Britain, and political positions are argued in language reminiscent of that used during the twentieth-century cold war between the USSR and the West: [F]or every step taken by Russia itself [England] must fall back for every advantage gained by her must itself incur a proportional loss for every new accession of territory or increase of commerce, its foreign trade must suffer a diminution in its own power and dignity . . And what has our Government been doing to check the progress of a power about which it talks so much! What are the plans of Lord Palmerston, which are to maintain our commerce and the honour of our name, the integrity of our territories, and the supremacy of our flag upon the seas! Why, in the first place, he instructs his friends in the Legislature to pour out floods of abuse against the monster who governs all the Russias, of whining cant over the fallen Poles of sham sympathy for the brace Circassians. This is to show our spirit. Then he ordains that a series of state papers, taken from the Russian archives, shall be published, that all the world may read. These are to
91 awaken the national indignation, and to smother Nicholas under the weight of Portfolios Well, he discharges his whole artillery of stationery, and then proceeds with his great crowning measure, which is to knock the Muscovite giant from off his heels, and leave him prostrate for eyes. . English emissaries make their appearance in a country at war with Russia, encourage its resistance, inflate its hopes, and promise it support. An English vessel appears on the coast to defy an unjust and unrecognized blockade. And what then? Why, then the English vessel is seized and confiscated, and the English Government declares that the seizure is legal. As for its poor agent, it abandons him, as it abandons every friend in the hour of need, and every principle upon the sacred and honourable plea of self-preservation. 68 Thackeray views France in a different but not necessarily more flattering light, describing French instability and recurring dreams of glory as a national character flaw, and postulating eternal (or almost eternal) French hostility toward the English: If in a country where so many quacks have had their day Prince Louis Napoleon thought he might renew the imperial quackery, why should he not? It has recollections with it that must always be dear to a gallant nation; it has certain claptraps in its vocabulary that can never fail to inflame a vain, restless, grasping, disappointed one. hate us. Not all the protestations of friendship . not all the benefit which both countries would derive from the alliance, can make it, in our times at least, permanent and cordial. They hate us. The Carlist organs revile us with a querulous fury that never sleeps; the moderate party, if they admit the utility of
92 the alliance, are continually pointing out our treachery, our insolence, and our monstrous infractions of it; and for the Republicans, as sure as the morning comes, the columns of their journals thunder out vollies of fierce denunciations against our unfortunate country. They live by feeding the natural hatred against England, by keeping old wounds open, by recurring ceaselessly to the history of late, have had the uppermost, they perpetuate the shame and mortification of the losing party, the bitterness of past defeats, and the eager desire to avenge them. 69 As for America, Thackeray sees in American society a fundamental ly hypocritical national ideology, namely the failure to acknowledge the importance of social rank. He All men are equal, therefore an hereditary aristocracy is odious and absurd; but some men are superior to others (by birth, merit, wealth, or other Thackeray adds: Whether, since the fact is, and has been since God made man, it be better to think good that an acquiescence in it is not a sign of inferiority, but should rather cause our pride whether the manly humility which is necessary for those who maintain the law is not a higher quality than the turbulent independence of those who would subvert it, we shall not argue here . and thus specifically raises the particular argument that he said he would not raise! Thackeray goes on to summarize his views: And what becomes, then, of . .the sweeping reforms proclaimed by the founders of his republic, that banished titles and declared all men equal?
93 Human nature is stronger than the statute-book, and though rank may be an article of which the introduction into the States is forbidden by the laws of the union, the people do with this commodity as with others they smuggle it, and use it in fact, if not by name. . The Americans respect rank as much as we, only they are a free people, and do not like to say so. 70 2.4.3 Attitudes Toward Religion Thackeray wrote multi-part reviews of two multi-volume works describing the Historical Sketch of the Rise, Progress, and Decline of the Reformation in Poland and Leopold von The Ecclesiastical and Political History of the Popes of Rome Although these works nominally focused on events of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, for Thackeray, and presumably for most early Victorian English readers, these books were relevant to the perceived contemporary threat posed by Roman Catholicism against (as Thackeray put it) Anglicism. 71 Thackeray was not rabidly anti-Catholic: in other forums he attacked those who demonized Irish and English Catholics, 72 and even in his Times articles he takes care performing 73 Yet underlying his articles is a sense of palpable threat which may be hard to appreciate in the context of Thackeray saw in Catholicism a dangerous odox slavishness which is 74
94 every man . was endowed by nature with exactly the same opinions, had precisely the same degree and quality of intellect, had gone through the same opinion of thought and experience, which led him to behold the truth [in Thus, while Thackeray as a reviewer could admire Reformation, his articles contain many judgmental anti-Catholic and pro-Protestant assessments Providence checked [the Counter Reformation] at the height of its triumphs, and restored, never more to be 75 Thackeray describes a powerful and threatening seventeenth century Roman Catholic Church: And what energies she had, and what a tremendous power did she possess and employ! In every corner of Europe, and over high and low, her influence was felt; she employed the best means and the worst alike; she worked upon the purest feelings of the heart and upon its basest; she could lead mobs or persuade princes; she could bring to her aid the force of Christian example and captivating purity of life, learning and intellectual superiority not less persuasive, or dreadful tyranny or monstrous falsehood where these were ineffectual; she had at her service the pure lives of martyrs, or the bloody weapons of assassins, and with so much virtue and crime, so much to excite admiration, or cupidity, or fear among those over
95 whom she was determined to reassume her sovereignty, we scarcely can wonder at the successes which she obtained, and at the feeble resistance which a party disunited was able to offer her. 76 To Thackeray, and presumably to his readers, this threat continued: Are they beaten yet? Indeed no: and one must admire, if not the principles, at least the incredible activity, of the men. They manage in Belgium to turn out one King and establish another; in Prussia to set one half of the nation against the other; in England they are establishing newspapers, nunneries, colleges, cathedrals, with a dexterity that is not a little curious. Catholic bells are tinkling in 500 villages, where such music has not been heard for three centuries: nay, conversions take place in a decent number, and proselytes are as usual ardent. 77 Yet, in the context of his times, Thackeray was not an alarmist: If one did not know the good sense of our country, indeed, we might take leave to be alarmed; but a man must have a very poor reliance upon the strength of his own religion, and upon the truth and independence, which, thank God, are part of debasing system of Jesuithood can ever take a serious hold upon free and honest men. 78 Of course, early Victorian Anglicanism not only confronted Catholicism, it also was challenged by the more austere formulations of Protestantism such as Evangelicalism or Methodism. Thackeray s Times articles on two of the leading lights of eighteenthcentury Methodism, George Whitefield and Selina Hastings, express his admiration for their zeal, earnestness and desire to do good, while simultaneously and gently deploring
96 what he saw as their bigotries, and offering an alternative and more humanistic vision of religion. Thackeray carefully focuses his discussion on Whitefield the man rather than on Of the doctrines laid down . it is not now intended to give an opinion. Whether or not Calvin and his followers are the best interpretors of, or the best commentators on, the religion of the Bible, it would be improper to enter into a controversy about, in the columns of a newspaper . .Whatever may be the opinions of those who differ with, or those who agree with, the tenets of Whitefield, no person can deny that he was a zealous and an able labourer in the vineyard of religious instruction, that he was actuated by an enthusiastic zeal for the welfare of his fellow creatures, and that whether or not that zeal was directed by discretion, his sincerity is beyond suspicion. . 79 Three years later, reviewing a biography of Selina Hastings, Thackeray once more expresses his admiration for the zeal and integrity of the early Methodist leaders, but now he distances himsel f and his readers from evangelical belie fs stating that the book can profitably be read by those interested in Moreover, Thackeray takes reports of supernatural visitations and claims to unique insight Men of the world will smile at some of the enthusiastic rhapsodies in which Lady Huntingdon and persons of her way of thinking indulged; readers of a calmer temperament, though, let us hope, with as strong a conviction as that of her Ladyship or any of her congregation, may be disposed to question the authenticity
97 of that direct Divine influence under which the followers of Whitefield and Wesley believed they acted indeed, every sect in and out of Christianity has had its revelations, its prophets, and its miracles; but, however we may incline to doubt the genuineness of their pretensions in matters of belief, we cannot refuse to admit the excellence of their practice, and admire their integrity and zeal... 80 And when discussing a comment supporting John ding the antiSpectator Thackeray is moved to defend one of his beloved eighteenth-century humorists. In the process Thackeray offers an articulate defense of his own humanistic but still Christian religious beliefs: To the writer, a good and just man doubtless, this harmless and beautiful book [the Spectator ], the work of a delightful genius and a most refined and gentle Christian spirit, appears a stumbling-block to the truth and an inducement to error, because it does not directly advocate the principles which he holds, and out of which he fancies that everything must be erring and sinful. . who has not heard of a conqueror who burnt all the books in a famous Eastern library because the Koran contained everything that was necessary for the spiritual welfare of all believers, and therefore all other books were needless and harmful. The Methodist argument, as we take, and the Turkish are precisely similar. with the honesty of the persons who advocated either, but we may thank God that the world has formed a different judgment, and acted on a plan more liberal. Even in the matter of religious improvement, how is Mr. Wesley, biographer . to say what shall or what shall not conduce toward it? The work before us is full of remarkable instances of conversions which took place from
98 trivial causes, that at first sight would appear to have no possible connexion with the good which was made to arise out of them; may we not fairly say on our side that the view of a fine landscape, or picture, the reading of a fine poem or of a kind Christian essay in this very Spectator may lead a man to turn toward Heaven and be thankful towards it, as much as any sermon by stout-hearted Whitefield or gentle Wesley himself? . We can praise God in a thousand ways as well as on our knees: it is good to address him no doubt in church, or from the hymn-book of the conventicle, but he is a poor philosopher, as we fancy, who pronounces all bad except what he can find on his own prayer-cushion or from the lips of his own preacher . 2.4.4 In October and November of 1838 the Times published three articles by Thackeray that were stimulated by history Henry of Monmouth: or, The Life and Character of Henry the Fifth The articles were among the longest Thackeray ever published in the Times each containing approximately 5,000 words, more than half of which is original writing rather than extract. Thackeray described these writings as articles or notices rather than reviews; indeed, although there is some critical commentary regarding Tyler -pursuit of details), articles are more recountings of the lives of Richard II (October 19, 1838), Henry IV (October 25, 1838), and Henry V (November 12, 1838) than commentaries on more
99 often he deviates from Tyler and offers his own judgments. Interestingly, Thackeray brings in a wealth of other sources, particularly antiquarian biographies and accounts, to support his presentation of events. The articles are studded with entertaining footnotes containing quotations in archaic English from fifteenthand sixteenth-century sources. These articles, then, show us Thackeray more as a would-be medievalist historian than as a literary critic. But Thackeray, unlike Tyler, is more a narrator than an antiquary. H but personalize the action, and he intertwines character-revealing anecdote with political and military history. Just as, in another context, Thackeray brought to life the political and social figures of eighteenthand early nineteenth-century England in his Four Georges he here imbues the leading characters of his medieval study with distinctive personalities. And, although Thackeray is clear-headed as he describes the villainies and tribulations of the medieval era, he nevertheless revels in romanticized visions created largely through the archaic language of his sources, as when he quotes a description of 81 Thackeray 82 as a cynic, Thackeray does not fill his medieval world which Holloway and Palmgren suggest most Victorians constructed as part of the medieval world. 83 randparents, Thackeray interjects: Common gallantry will not allow us to dispute the correctness of these surmises
100 ladies may have been very moral, and let us give them the benefit of the surmise. not very likely to learn principle from them . . Time-honoured Lancaster was a greedy traitor and conspirator, and his son no better. 84 Richard II similarly does not fa re Focusing on the contradictions in the writings of a Frenchmen who accompanied Richard II upon his return from Ireland, Thackeray concludes that Richard Further, the sentimental cynic 85 rcasms is a nostalgic sense of the energy, bustle, and humanity of the medieval era. For example, Thackeray offers an extensive quotation buyers of food and clothing around West picture of the city in those old days. Similarly, Thackeray quotes the writings of an attendant upon Henry regarding the education of young noblemen partly (I submit) to revel in the sense of antiquity, and partly to debunk the ecclesiastical arguments all nurture;
101 At sixteen they are and ride, and castles to assail, Their literary education being thus completed at the mature age of six, it is evident that they could not have learned to use, or even to understand, the priggish allusions to Roman lore, the continual allusions to the early Bible history, and the endless logical quibbles and complications which were the weapons of the ecclesiastics. 86 Moreover, when describing the lead-up to Agincourt and the battle itself, Thackeray loses his traditional skepticism and offers a stirring and rather patriotic account of English bravery and heroism, including a justification for the slaying of French prisoners as driven by military necessity. In addition, Thackeray closes his third article with an abridgement of an ancient account of Agincourt surrounded ked a giant with an axe and the keys to the city, It is possible that cynical side of Thackeray presents this mythic text to his readers as an object of ridicule, but I would argue that instead
102 Thackeray, the renowned realist, the writer who abhors and denounces exaggeration, is him self sentimentally entranced with this medievalist fantasy which he delights in shar ing with his readers. Thackeray knew well that Victorian medievalism was characteristic of medieval war than were exploits with the sword, 87 and appreciated that medie val noblemen were largely ignoble; yet he, too, could take pleasure in this world that never was. Notes 1 Gordon Ray, ed, The Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace T hackeray (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1945-6), 1:362, 375, 515. 2 Edgar Harden, T he Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray. A Supplement (New York; London: Garland. 1994), 2:1097. 3 Charles Johnson, T he Early Writings of William Makepeace Thackeray (London, 1888), 51-56; William Makepeace Thackeray, The Oxford Thackeray e d. George Saintsbury (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1908), 1:67-110, 3:383-96. A moder n scholarly in progress under the general editorship of Peter Shillingsburg 4 Gary Simons, T imes Victorian Pe riodicals Review 40, no. 4 (2007): 332-354. 5 Gordon Ray, T hackeray: The Uses of Adversity 1811-1846 (New York: McG raw-Hill Book Company, Inc, 1955), 199. 6 Ray, Adversity, 199; Malcolm Elwin, T hackeray: A Personality 1932 (New Yor k: Russell & Russell, 1966), 105. 7 Ray, Letters, 1:437, 469; Harden, Letters Supplement 1:34, 60. 8 Henry Van Duzer, ed., A Tha ckeray Library (1919; New York: Burt Franklin, 1971) 37. 9 Ray, Letters, 1:375. 10 In addition to the reviews listed in the above invoice, a partial account book for the early months of 1838 specifies four other articles (Ray, Letters, 1:515-516). Other letter s support three 1840 articles (Ray, Letters, 1:461); two 1838 articles (Harden, L etters Supplement 1:38-39); a review of an art exhibition in Paris on April 5, 1838
103 (Ray, Letters, 1:361); a review of Turnbull on March 16, 1840 (Harden, Letters Supplement Letters, 2:462). The French Revolution comes from a fairly definitive letter written by Carlyle (Ray, Letters, 1:347). There are additionally four known la terin -life Thackeray articles in the Times : a poem in 1851, a letter to the editor in 1853, and essays on Leech and Cruikshank, respectively, in 1862 and 1863. 11 Harold Gulliver, (Valdosta, GA: pr ivately printed, 1934). 12 T hackeray Newsletter 48 (1998): 1Thackeray Newsletter 49 (1999): 7; Robert Colby -2001, Dickens Studies Annual 31 (2002): 367. 13 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:63; Leila C ontributions to the British and Foreign Review Journal of English and German Philology 47 (1948): 245. 14 Edgar Harden, A Che cklist of Contributions by William Makepeace Thackeray to Newspapers, Periodicals, Books, and Serial Part Issues 1828-1864 (Victoria, Canada: Unive rsity of Victoria, 1996). 15 Richard Pearson, review of A Chec klist of Contributions by William Makepeace Thackeray to Newspapers, Periodicals, Books, and Serial Part Issues 18281864, comp. Edgar Harden, Vi ctorian Periodicals Review 30 no.3 (1997): 295. 16 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 93; R ay, Letters, 2:808. 17 R eview of The Life of John Sterling Victorian L iterature and Culture (1999): 307. In correcting one error in the literature Fielding apparently made another, as he attributed the wrong article on Sterling in the Leader to Thackeray; se e Edgar Harden, T hackeray Newsletter 50 (1999): 8. 18 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 104-07. In corrections to his published Thackeray L etters Ray followed Gulliver and incorrectly matched this March 23 published letter Book for 1838; see Ray, Letters 1:516 and Harden, Letters Supplement 2:1431. The ma pping should have been to the April 5 Times 19 Ray, Letters, 1:362. 20 Ibid. 1:377. 21 Brno Studies in English X22 Donald Hawes, review of W M. Thackeray as a Critic of Literature by Review of English Studie s ns 24.95 (1973): 363. 23 Elwin, Personality, 72.
104 24 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 94. 25 Hawes, Review of Critic 363. 26 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 96. 27 Ibid. 95. 28 Ray, Adversity, 199. 29 Ray, Letters, 1:375. 30 Ibid. 2:462. 31 See note 4. 32 Ray, Letters 1:515. 33 Ibid. 1:513. 34 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 109. 35 Ray, Letters, 1:361, 516. 36 Gulliver, Apprenticeship, 111. 37 The payment book actually shows a payment from J. Delane, whom Ray glosses as the editor of the Times However, John Thadeus Delane was still at Oxford in 1838 and apparently did not start working for the Times until July of 1840; see Arthur Dasent, It is more likely that the payment in question came from W. F. A. Delane, who was paymaster for the Times in 1838; see Derek Hudson, (Cambridge: University Press, 1944), 105. error. 38 This reprinting which does not appear to have been noted previously Magazine and his contemporaneous work for the Times Since the reprints are noted as coming from presumably the Times did not pay Thackeray for them. 39 Gulliver, Apprenticeship 103. 40 See, as examples, Thackeray, Oxford Thackeray, 6:607; [William Makepeace Thackeray Ernest Maltravers --by the Author of Rienzi, Eugene Aram, &c Times (London), September 30, 1837; and Ray, Letters, 2:249. 41 Ray, Letters, 1:466-67. 42 See note 4. 43 Ibid. 1:469. 44 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:57. 45 Ibid., 1:60. 46 Edgar Harden, (Basingstroke, New York: Palgrave
105 47 by William Thackeray (Ann Arbor: U of Mi chigan P, 2005), 73-74. 48 C ritic, 183, 189, 192, 193, 195. 49 Ibid., 181. 50 Author ity, and the Literary Annual Genre Victorian Periodicals Review 39 no.2 (2006): 158-78; Thackeray, O xford Thackeray, 2:337-48, 349-58, 359-78. Apparently Thackeray a lso wrote reviews in 1833 of the Annuals for the National Standard; see Richard Pearson, W.M. Thackeray and the Mediated Text: Writing for Periodicals in the MidNineteenth Century (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), 244-45. 51 Thackeray, O xford Thackeray, 1:25-29. 52 Ray, Letters, 3:331 ; Thackeray, Oxford Thackeray 10:629 -30. 53 Harden, Letters Supplement 2:1303. 54 Harden, Writer, 11; Pearson, Thackeray, 153. 55 John Auchard, ed. T he Portable Henry James (New York: Penguin, 2004), 477. (Quoted from Henry James, Preface to The Tragic Muse, The Novels and Tales of Henry James vol. VII, (New York: Scribners, 1908).) 56 Ray, Adversity 261, 268. 57 Loretta M. Holloway and Jennifer A. Palmgren, eds., Be yond Arthurian Romances: The Reach of Victorian Medievalism (New York: Palgrave Mac millan, 2005), 3. 58 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), September 18, 1837. 59 [William Makepeace Thackeray], rica and the Pacific, by Hon. P. Times (London), February 6, 1838. 60 [William Makepeace Thackeray], T imes (London), September 26, 1837. 61 Ibid. 62 [William Makepeace Thackeray], from The Times of Sept. 26.) The Colonist T imes (London), October 16, 1837. 63 [Thackeray], d the Pacif 64 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), November 8, 1838. 65 [William Makepeace Thackeray], No. III, Morning Chronicle (London), December 31, 1845.
106 66 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), Mar ch 16, 1840. 67 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Memoirs of a Prisoner of State Times (London), August 15, 1840. 68 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), August 30, 1838. 69 [William Makepeace Thackeray], nce Times (London), October 21, 1839. 70 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Ev e Effingham by Fenimore Cooper, Times (London), December 19, 1838. 71 [William Makepeace Thackeray], of the Reformation in P ol Times (London), March 5, 1840. 72 L etters from a Club-Armchair as discussed in C hapter 4 of this dissertation. 73 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), June 10, 1840. 74 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), November 27, 1838. 75 Ibid.; [William Makepeace Thackeray], he Reformation in Poland Times (London), March 5, Time s (London), August 11, 1840. 76 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), August 11, 1840. 77 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), August 18, 1840. 78 Ibid. 79 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), De cember 20, 1837. 80 [William Makepeace Thackeray], s of Selina Countess of Hunting Times (London), August 21, 1840. 81 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), October 25, 1838. 82 Lambert Ennis, T hackeray: The Sentimental Cynic New York: AMS Press, 1950. 83 Holloway 4. 84 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), October 19, 1838.
107 85 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), October 25, 1838. 86 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), November 12, 1838. 87 Ibid.
108 Chapter 3 he Victorian World in the Morning Chronicle During the years 1844-1846 and 1848, and quite possibly earlier, Thackeray wrote fine arts and literary reviews for the Morning Chronicle Faced with the continua l need to produce a stream of copy, Thackeray was, as he put it, etting good pay always thinking. 1 Indeed, although this type of financially-driven short-term journalism is often was always thinking, and his newspaper articles often metamorphosed into essays on history, international affairs, biography, society, travel, literature, and art. Inevitably, embedded in these articles are many markers of Thackeray as a major Victorian novelist and essayist. Fu rther, given the range and scope of his newspaper writings, one can Morning Chronicle writings representations of the early Victorian world. Unfortunately, Thackeray never collected and republished his Morning Chronicle articles. The Oxford Thackeray includes only one article from the Morning Chronicle 2 During the twentieth century scholars brought to light some of notably as documented by Harold Gulliver in his 1934 book Apprenticeship 3 and by Gordon Ra y as part of his 1945-6 publication of The Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray 4 and with the subsequent republication
109 in 1955 of some of these articles in William Makepeace Thackeray : Contributions to the Morning Chronicle. 5 Yet large gaps in our knowledge remain. Accordingly, this chapter pecuniary and contributory arrangements with the Morning Chronic le ; (2) summarizes and assesses previous related scholarship; (3) proposes additional article attributions to flesh out our understanding of work; and (4 ) explores early Victorian attitudes toward Irish and Eastern peoples and the projection of English middle-class identity implicitly newspaper writings. 3.1 Thackeray and the Morning Chronicle -thirties and eighteen-forties the Morning Chronicle was the chief rival of the Times 6 Under the editorship of John Black in 1834 the Morning Chronicle had been revitalized and converted into a Whig organ to act as counterweight to the Toryish Times By 1844 Black had been replaced by Andrew Doyle, and the Chronicle had lost circulation and influence. The paper supported the aggressive foreign policy advocated by Lord Palmerston and published the political-economic articles of John Stuart Mill. famous Morning Chronicle was only to appear later, during the years 1844-1846 the paper was still Times (as compared to less serious Da ily News ). 7 In the spring of 1835, when the twenty-three-year-old Thackeray was living in Paris and studying art, he was a regular visitor to the household of Eyre Evans Crowe, the
110 Paris correspondent of the Morning Chronicle 8 In what appears to be his first effort to get full-time employment, Thackeray (but did not receive) a foreign correspondent position at Constantinople for the Morning Chronicle 9 Later, in March of 1838, Thackeray spent time in Paris and with the Crowes. In an 1853 letter Thackeray wrote, "I recalled to Mr. Crowe as we walked back from the cemetery; how 15 years ago he use to pay me 10 francs a day to do his work as Newspaper Correspondent for him." 10 In a subsequent letter Thackeray again wrote "How welcome those 10 francs a day used to be when he was away & I was doing his work for the Chronicle." 11 Thus, Morning Chronicle submissions in 1835 or 1838 were apparently written in whole or in part by Thackeray. Moreover, at the conversion rate of 25 francs per pound, the young Thackeray was happy to work for 8 shillings per day a rate he surely would have spurned at a later date. Charles Mackay, a subeditor of the Morning Chronicle from 1835-1844, wrote in his memoirs tha -1840, was a frequent contributor to his favourite journal, the Morning Chronicle though he never succeeded in 12 In another memoir Mackay adds that often a paid contributor to the Chronicle especially on subjects related 13 contributions to the Morning Chronicle in his own name in the early 1840s (although any such submissions would, of course, have been published anonymously). There is a surviving letter from May of 1839 documenting the rejection of a Thackeray 14 Mo rning Chronicle articles from the early 1840s remain largely
111 undetected; however, later in this chapter I argue that an April 1, 1842 art review in the Morning Chronicle likely a Thackeray free-lance contribution. On March 11, 1844 Thackeray wrote to his mother about a couple of potential Morning Chronicle where my friends Doyle & Crowe are working anxiously in my favour. 15 Thackeray thought that these positions would each be -matters which Indeed, Thackeray projected that with both positions his total income would be Gordon Ray speculates that this other position was with the Examiner ; 16 my suspicion is that Thackeray was referring to his recently appointed staff position at Punch. As I have shown in chapter 1 of this dissertation, in 1844 Thackeray was presumably receiving near ly 300 annually from Punch, and was on track to earn -200 from which would be In any event, Thackeray reached some agreement with the Morning Chronicle ; two articles by Thackeray totaling 3.05 columns were published in the Morning Chronicle in appropriately shows an entry of 8 pounds for the Chronicle reflecting a rate of 2.5 guineas a column. As mentioned previously, Mackay stated that Thackeray never had a permanent (presumably a salaried staff) position with the Morning Chronicle, and that apparently is true; in early as safe as if I had an engagement 17 (emphasis added). Later, in June of 1844 Thackeray for the Chronicle instead of 40 but it is my
112 own fault As noted subsequently in th is chapter, attribution to Thackeray of two Morning Chronicle art exhibition reviews. comment further raises a question about political articles one wonders what he was attempting to write, and why th newspaper work was interrupted during his August 22, 1844 February 8, 1845 trip around the Mediterranean, but he appears to have resumed his Morning Chronicle contributions in March of 1845. During March Ju ly 1845 Thackeray also held a time -consuming position as subeditor of the Examiner and in the second half of 1845 he was absorbed with writing his travel book, Notes of A Journey from Cornhill to Grand Cairo, conflicting responsibilities which perhaps explain his generally low level of Morning Chronicle activity for most of that year. Previous Thackeray scholars have not identified any Thackeray articles from the period JuneNovember of 1845; however, a Thackeray letter dated November 28, 1845 in which Tha they relieve the dullness of that estimable paper, makes it clear that unattributed Thackeray articles continued to be published. In a letter tentatively dated January, 1846, Thackeray returned to the issue of between Punch & the Chronicle: 18 One reading of this letter included roughly from Punch and from the Morning Chronicle In chapter 1 I have presented evidence that
113 at least at one time Thackeray was earning per quarter or nearly per year from Punch. And the same January 1846 letter which projected his combined Punch Morning Chronicle income at -The 400 may subside possibly into 2 or 300 but you see there will be enoug refers to a projected income from the Morning Chronicle which Thackeray feared might drop because of his inability to write political articles. Indeed, in February of 1846 the Chronicle[;] all my articles miss 19 And in March of 1846 Thackeray wrote "The Chronicle and I must part or I must cut down half the salary. They are most provokingly friendly all the time, and insist that I should neither resign nor disgorge -but how can one but act honorably by people who are so good natured?" or reducing income. All this suggests that the Morning Chronicle may have then been litical articles which may or may not have been published and that because his political articles were unacceptable Thackeray believed his income should be reduced. Under this interpretation several questions remain open: which political articles did Thackeray write for the Morning Chronicle were they published, what opinions did he express, and why were those articles deemed to be failures? In February of 1846 Thackeray temporarily resigned from the Chronicle ; however, he soon rescinded this decision and wrote articles from March through at least October of 1846. In January of 1847, coincident with the initial serialization of Vanity Fair Thacker ay wrote to Caroline Norton that 20 But this also was not a final decision. In March of 1848, Thackeray, despite
114 the money he was then earning from Vanity Fair wrote to his mother own expenses are something very severe and with debts keep me always paying & To find this extra income, Thackeray Indeed, Thackeray letters from April, October, and November of 1848 establish that, he continued to write for the Chronicle. 21 However, with his other income continuing to grow, there is no indication that he wrote for the Morning Chronicle after 1848. From first to last 8 to the Morning Chronicle experience was a product of his financial need; the trajectory of Thacke and context by the pecuniary comments and evidence documented in his surviving letters and papers. 3.2 Bibliographic Background At the start of the twentieth century only one signed letter and one critical review in the Morning Chronicle a review of R. H. New Spirit of the Age had been positively attributed to Thackeray. In 1934 Gulliver pointed out one other certain attribution Smith and, largely on stylistic grounds, attributed a handful of other book reviews: a Beau Brummell biography; Coningsby ; a biography of Lord C In 1942 C. L. Cline found attribution of the Coningsby review to Thackeray. 22
115 In 1945-46 Gordon Ray, in the course of collecting and editi letters and private papers, developed and published his own attribution list of 35 Morning Chronicle articles purportedly written by Thackeray during the years 1844-1846 and 1848. 23 Ray accepted Beau Brummell and Conningsby attributions but rejected other suggestions. Approximately ten years later Ray reprinted those same 35 articles, along with introductory comments and notes, in his volume William Makepeace Thackeray: Contributions to the Morning Chronic le attributions have been generally accepted by Thackeray scholars. list are included in toto in authoritative 1996 Thackeray bibliography. 24 Even including Thackeray letters that have come to light since the 1950s, only 8 proposed Thackeray Morning Chronicle attributions are now validated by external evidence: the April 2, New Spirit of the Age, the May 13, Coningsby the May 13, s Sybil a March 21, 1846 review of the Life and Correspondence of David Hume, a n August 20, History of Ireland a September 21, 1846 review of Horace Poetical Works and two short reports on the Chartist movement from March of 1848. Two other attributions the March 16, Irland and the August 2, Historic Fancies are less firmly supported reading the works in question shortly prior to the published review. Additionally, an indirect cross-reference in Sybil strongly suggests that Thackeray also wrote the April 3, St. Patrick Eve Lastly, a consistent Thackeray critique . investigating questions of greater social or political
116 reviews of December 24, 26, and 31, 1845 are also by Thackeray. Thus, fourteen of Thackeray Morning Chronicle attributions have explicitly argued and reasonably firm support. es of to his familiar opinions so obvious, and his stylistic peculiarities so manifest, that no doubt as to the 25 In support of this argument, but without providing any specific rationales or explanations, Ray lists in a footnote some of the relevant echoes ; these references support some of the fourteen previously mentioned articles as well as ten additional articles. The attribution of the remaining eleven articles is asserted without any supporting citations or commentary (see table 3.1). In light of the uncertainty generally and properly associated with attributions based on purely internal evidence, one needs to remember the tenuous attributions. 3.3 Bibliographic Analyses: Contents, Circumstances, and Cash This dissertation chapter includes, apparently, the first reconsideration and Morning Chronicle bibliogra he mid1940s. Indeed, my independent examination demonstrates that Ray was a careful and knowledgeable evaluator of potential Thackeray articles. Although Ray did not provide any specifics regarding eleven llels, and The 1844 and 1846 Morning Chronicle reviews of Water Color
117 Lectures on Painting and Design artistic opinions. The March 1844 review of Ireland and its Rulers since 1839 ties nicely with a Morning Chronicle other writings on the French and the Irish. The March 1845 review of Egypt Under Mehemet Ali and in the 1846 review of Travels in the Punjab all have a Thackerayan flavor. The July 1846 review of The Gastronomic Regenerator -term friendship with Alexis Soyer, and the September 1846 review of Life at the Water Cure contains tell-tale pet phrases of Thackeray. the memoirs of Royal Palaces have the least overt support, but even in these cases the expressive language and opinions In fact, a case can also be built for the probable attribution of one of the articles suggested by Gulliver but not included by Ray the July 15 and 25, 1844 two-part rmer British Lord Chancellor, Lord Eldon. In addition to stylistic and pointof -view arguments, Gulliver supported his attribution by referring to a comment on Four Georges lectures. Indeed, Edgar Harden has since shown that in the mid -1850s Thackeray consulted this biography in preparation of his lecture on George IV. 26 However, there are more contemporaneous as in the December 26, 1846
118 publication in Punch of chapter 43 of the Snobs of England the May 1847 number of Vanity Fair and the April 1849 number of Pendennis which intimate acquaintance with this biography. 27 Further, as shown in chapter 1 of this dissertation, Thackeray depended on the Morning Chronicle for roughly 1/3 of his income in May and June of 1844, and the attribution of these reviews to Thackeray is consistent with the reasonable expectation that he would have continued to write for this needed revenue in July. There is, of course, an inherent conflict between the need to avoid (or minimize) erroneous attributions and simultaneously achieve as complete and representative a set of attributions as possible. Diversity and range of attributions is important, as different article perceptions and thinking, and his development as an author. Indeed, since the 1940 s scholars and biographers such as Robert Colby, Laura Fascik, Judith Fisher, Donald Hawes, Charles Mauskopf, John McAuliffe, Claire Nicolay, Lidmilla Richard Pearson, Catherine Peters, S. S. Prawer, and D. J. Taylor have relied upon and Morning Chronicle list to support their 28 Attributions based sol however, I submit that attributions can reasonably be made on a broader basis of content, circumstances, and sometimes even cash payment records. Indeed, through a pageby page examination of a file of the 1840s Morning Chronicle encompassing over 400 previously unattributed literary and artistic reviews, I have identified a number of articles not previously mentioned by Ray which I submit more than
119 parallels, and peculiariti es In two cases external financial data support the attribution; in other authorship. Accordingly, I offer ten new attributions, which collectively place more meat on the bones of the skeletal framework Morning Chronicle writin gs In Contributions to the Morning Chronicle Robert the specifics of the 29 Accordingly, in the following subsections I offer individual, specific, and fully articulated rationales whose persuasiveness can be evaluated. 3.3.1 New Attributions The Exhibition of the Louvre, Thackeray was in Paris in the spring of 1842; and the article published in the April 1, 1842 Morning Chronicle entitled appears to be his. According to Charles Mackay, Thackeray was a free-lance contributor of fine arts articles for the Chronicle during the early 1840s. More specifically, Thackeray attended opening day (March 15) at the 1842 Salon, 30 and it would have been unlike him not to seek to profit from that exhibition and to publish a review. And the 1842 Morning Chronicle review of the exhibition at the Louvre bears striking similarities to 1838 Times review of the Salon. Unlike essentially all the non-Thackeray contemporary newspaper art reviews, both of these reviews are overtly humorous. Further, both articles have similar extended and personal introductions; both joke about the large number of poor-quality works exhibited; both satirize the alleged vanity of
120 French artists; both epigrammatically attack artistic pomposity; both regard French portraits and landscapes as inferior to their English counterparts; both single out for praise the artists Biard and Winterhalter; and both are full of archetypically Thackerayan gentle mockery. to Paris of the decade, is the only independent review (not reprinted from another paper) which the Morning Chronicle published on the Salon during the entire first decade of the Victorian era. 8 & 10, 1844. The attribution of the two Morning Chronicle art exhibition reviews published on May 8 and 10 of 1844 is a detailed comparison of these articles with a Thackeray review of the same exhibition published in The financial argument is straightforward. I have established in chapter 1 that Thackeray received 2.5 guineas per column for his work for the Morning Chronicle In a letter dated June 1, 1844, Thackeray noted that he Chronicle; however, previous scholarship had attributed only two May 1844 articles to Thackeray which together total 4.8 columns and are thus valued at twelve and a half pounds. There are a limited number of candidates of previously unattributed May 8 th and May 10 th art reviews in the May Morning Chronicle Morning Chronicle writings to nearly 20 pounds, in line with his June 1 observation. Stimulated by this financial fit, I have conducted a detailed comparison of the Morning Chronicle
121 There is an extraordinary degree of agreement with regard not only to opinion, but also to specific wordings. For example, Edwin La Coming Events cast their Shadows before is discussed in both reviews: in Morning Chronicle p Shoeing, Morning Chronicle Rain, Speed, Steam the Morning Chronicle engine and train before you which are bearing down at the spectator at the rate of fifty In Magazine Rienzi addressing the People Morning Chronicle asserts Moors beleaguered in Valencia Morning Chronicle asserts that With regard to Trial of the Seven Bishops the Morning Chronic le A number of other similar points of comparison testify to the common authorship of the Morning Chronicle and reviews. Yet, it
122 should also be noted that each review also contains ideas and expressive wording that are not in its counterpart; thus, the attribution of these Morning Chronicle reviews to Thackeray meaningfully extends our knowledge of both his journalistic endeavors and his artistic criticism. Thackeray often philosophized in his Morning Chronicle reviews regarding the importance of realistic writing and the proper attributes of novels. Accordingly, some introductory comments in the June 20, 1844 Morning Chronicle review of the novel Ellen Middleton are of particular interest : We are promised at the commencement an every-day picture of life, and the artist is true to her purpose, and to an evident horror of pretence avoids every digression, eschews sentiment, unless it comes naturally in the current of the story, shrinks even from exuberance of description, and indulges in no exaggeration of character. There is nothing to attract the reader of falsified taste, no limnings of high life or eminent persons, no piquant anecdotes, no personal satire so untainted is it with the follies and peculiarities of our day, that it might have been written an hundred years back by Fielding, if he could have divested himself of his coarseness, or by Goldsmith in his simplest vein. including his well-documented praise for pictures of everyday life, horror of pretence, aversion to over-sentimentality, disdain for exuberance of description and exaggeration of character, distaste for fashionable Goldsmith that it strongly suggests that Thackeray wrote that review. Those who are
123 look askance on the comments critiquing perhaps with self-induced amnesia regarding the very personal attacks he had made on Bulwer considered himself a social satirist, not a personal satirist. In an 1848 letter to Edward which a man descends to describing my public works but of me a gentleman 31 Other evidence also suggests that Thackeray is the author of this review. Th e reviewer writes: [T] possible. a story. . portrayed with a minuteness and warmth which binds us through ever so many volumes to the exaggeration . . But it has the same sustained tone of passion, the same depth of interest throughout. This comment is particularly relevant because when Thackeray read Mathilde in 1841 his first thought was likewise about the possibility of imitation. 32 Moreover, a review of Mathilde in the July 1842 issue of Foreign Quarterly Review which is probably by Thackeray offers similar sentiments to describe that novel, referring to Mathilde Lastly, one finds the Morning Chronicle r
124 praise for the author of Ellen Middleton Lady Georgiana Fullerton, echoed in 33 A review of a travel book, Spain, Tangier, &c., visited in 1840 and 1841, is most likely by Thackeray. (1) repeatedly well known aesthetics, as s tr ueto -life portrayals; or (2) use of artistic terms of comparison, as frequently employed by Thackeray, i.e., the ; or (3) ability to turn an ironic phrase, as in th chamber in which Mr. Barry has, with a truly democratic spirit, doomed the Lords, for their sins, to sit. review lie in two points of content which connect Catholic Spain with particular concerns of Thackeray regarding Catholic Ireland. Thackeray had written earlier that spring, in an article published June 9, 1845 in the Calcutta Star that if England respected and supported the Irish Catholic church (through the Maynooth grant) then Ireland would the loyal kingdom of the three, rallying round the old fashioned Monarchy, the 34 It is, accordingly, striking that the Morning Chronicle reviewer seizes upon precisely the same argument and quotes a lengthy likeMoreover, the reviewer goes on to with the Irish idle
125 Irish Sketch Book 35 Thus, style and content both suggest that Thackeray is the likely author. 27, 1846. In 1945, in an appendix to Volume II of The Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray Gordon Ray announced the attribution to Thackeray of Morning Chronicle reviews of the 1846 exhibitions of the Old and New Water Colour Societies and of the Royal Academy. Indeed, it is surprising that Ray did not also attribute to Thackeray the review of the exhibition of the Society of British Artists (SBA) which was published on March 30, 1846. Presumably this omission was inadvertent, since the SBA and demonstrates his particular style in the same fashion and to the same degree as do the exhibition reviews included by Ray. The SBA review begins with an extended humorous complaint regarding exhibition crowding ; countless chariots Structurally, thematically and stylistically this introduction is vintage Thackeray. Moreover, in typical Thackeray fashion this review contains an oblique satirical comment about Benjamin histor I submit that this through-and-through marbling of serious art review with
126 strands of humor is uniquely Thackerayan. Moreover, in conformity with Thackeray previously demonstrated artistic views, this reviewer gives Frederic Hurlstone pride of place as the lead SBA exhibitor although he simultaneously criticiz es raises the heads drawn by Charles Baxter. Lastly, one should note that this March 30 review fits a pattern of essentially weekly Morning Chronicle contributions by Thackeray in the early spring of 1846 [known Thackeray articles were published on March 16, March 23, April 6, April 11, April 21, and April 27] and that it might be expected that the reviewer of the Water Colour and Royal Academy exhibitions would also review the Society of British Artists exhibition. Londres et les Anglais des Temps Modernes Par Dr. Buraud-Riofrey, 24, 1846. Thackeray often mused about the inability of the French to understand the English. In his Punch 36 for example, Thackeray visit London with but a poor understanding of the English language, and misunderstand everything they see. misrepresent England. A French journalist, Ledru Rollins, wrote what Thackeray Frenchman has ever seen at all the dear old country of ours, which he reviles and curses, According to Thackeray even G.W.M. Reynolds, author of The Mysteries of London, a penny dreadful that misrepresents English life, had no time to give information to Ledru.
127 An 1849 Punch 37 plays upon the same theme satirically using a similar I have been to see a piece of a piece called the Mystres de Londres [presumably the play by Fval, not the serial by Reynolds] and most awful mysteries they are indeed. We little know what is going on around and below us, and that London may be enveloped in a vast murderous conspiracy This same theme of French failure to understand the English also runs through 1843 Foreign Quarterly Review essays. In an 1846 Morning Chronicle review of Londres et les Anglais des Temps Modern es which contains a number of suggestive stylistic authorship, one finds the same discussion in almost the same language: journey from each other, that such have obtained vogue among our neighbours as a fair representation of English life? Is it the custom of young lords to disguise themselves as policemen, for the purpose of carrying on their sentimental intrigues? Do Englishmen divide their lives between boxing and getting drunk? We give this as but one example, probably a striking one, of the misapprehension under which our neighbours lie as to Englishmen and their modes of life; but we have no hesitation in saying that such trash as this, sometimes a little better and sometimes a little worse, is the manner in which Englishmen are represented in the imaginative literature of France. 38 Incidentally, Thackeray argues in his review that Buraud-Riofrey is an exception to the general rule and is an accurate French reporter of English life; nevertheless, this
128 review apparently provided Thackeray with an opportunity to give voice to one of his hobby horses. stine, in 1845-6. By Mrs. Romer, to the Temples and Tombs of Egypt, Nubia, and Palestine, in 1845-6. Thackerayex aggerations, expressed weariness with obsolete romantic styles, and privileging of the human and quotidian as opposed to the exotic. forbidden and unseen (by men) Notes on a Journ ey From Cornhill to Grand Cairo and the one-eyed sheikh. while it does not have to have been written by an Eastern traveler, certainly reads like the observation of one who has been to these places, as Thackeray himself had been in 1844. come Thackeray often used names in his writings to represent special qualities. In particular, once Thackeray took from Byron the names Zuleikah (or Zuleika) and Medora as representing exotic women of the East, he frequently used one or both names, often with ironic implications. 39 Thus, when the Morning Chronicle reviewer punctures the eyebrows, who has been transferred from the Pasha to the Bey; Medora consoles herself
129 strong probability that Thackeray is the reviewer. erg. A Romance. By G.P.R. James, From April through October of 1847 Thackeray published a series of mini-novel sp oofs of the styles of several leading novelists. This series was later republished in collected form as Novels by Eminent Hands In addition to satirizing -mes Plthe peculiarities of Edward BulwerJames Fenimore Catherine Gore George Payne Rainsford In the introduction to his critical edition of he [Thackeray] was writing for The Morning Chronicle in 184440 Specifically: the can be loosely paired with April 21, 1846 New Timon ; mocks those aspects of ing which Thackeray called out in his Ravensnest on August 27, 1846; is a takeConingsby which Thackeray reviewed on May 13, -speaking, coarse, Sketches of English Character on May 4, 1846; and noted in his April 3, 1845 review of s ve. This parallelism suggests that there may well also be an as yet unattributed Thackeray Morning Chronicle review of the romance novelist G. P. R. James to serve as a prequel and Indeed, there is a
130 September 23, 1846 Morning Chronicle review of James Heidelberg. A Romance that perfectly fits that bill. Th is review runs in virtual lock ; both begin by commenting on two cavaliers on horseback, both emphasize the melodramatic nature of the narrative and the overly romantic description of the countryside, and so on. Indeed, Morning Chronicle joking style which mocks romance and at the same time displays an underlying affection for the work is distinc spoofs on his prior reviews there can be little doubt that Thackeray is the author of this review. April 17, 1848. writing a little for the Chronicle and getting good pay always thinking, plunging about, 41 Through the first half of that month, however, there was little that could reasonably be associated with Thackeray. On April 17, however, an art review published which circumstantial evidence suggests is very likely by Thackeray. In overall the Societies of Water Colour Painters, Morning Chronicle in 1846, and unlike 1843 and 1845 Morning Chronicle exhibition reviews by other writers which are mere assemblages of ratings with little explanation. As Thackeray normally did, this reviewer begins with an extended joke ferocious encounter conducted with the fierce pugilistic competition which distinguishes Artistically, there are
131 points of equivalency in the analyses of several artists discussed in the 1848 and 1846 reviews. extraordinary waterSimilarly, in 1846 Thackeray Female figures by Miss Egerton are praised in both reviews. Mr. Absalon and Miss Setchel, water colorists whom Thackeray had praised as early as 1842, 42 receive strong praise again in the 1848 review. As a further indicator, the Thackeray, of course, had visited Cairo in 1844, and would be one of a limited number of art critics of the era able to judge the verisimilitude of Egyptian scenes and the color of the Egyptian sky. Other Candidate Thackeray Reviews in the Morning Chronicle. A number of other literary reviews evidence is lacking to claim attribution. Interested readers might want to examine some or all of these articles to enjoy their expressiveness, language, and sometimes humor; explore their social contents and subtexts; or make their own assessments as to authorship and significance. Some candidate articles are: the Committee, and the Candidates June 17, 1844. This tonguein Punch brochure appears to be
132 and Thackeray, was, of course, the common denominator between Punch and the Morning Chronicle June 20, 1844. Th is review nsters have been ere now. Men, it has been said or sung, have made monsters for and of themselves. There have been (it is whispered) women, also, who have made monsters of men. We have had monster meetings, monster speeches, monster trials, and monster tra this comment free-wheeling review style. July 1, 1844. This review of a Douglas Jerrold story ng him for all the lords selfish and all This accurately reflects toward Jerrold and is similar in approach to known Thackeray iers March 22, 1845. Thackeray was something of an expert on recent French history and he sought to review works of this kind. The attitudes expressed toward Thiers and French political figures of the review is consistent with November 24, 1845. This is an entertainingly written and thoughtful commentary on a Thackeray interest area, the French view of England. On Novem The Chronicle articles are very well liked they relieve the d 43
133 this might well be the article Thackeray had in mind. January 13, 1846 This Morning Chronicle review praises Hood in Thackeray-like language and describes the Thackeray favorite subsequent 1860 Roundabout Paper in Cornhill on Hood 44 reveals similarities which suggest common authorship. -book of a Traveller, September 3, 1846. The reviewer gently lectures the author on ways to improve his writing by making his plots more probable. The the author adopt to eschew gipsies for the term of his natural life, and the satiric take on second loves, both September 8, 1846. This review, written during a period when Thackeray was writing a great deal for the Morning Chronicle, has several Thackeray earmarks: expressive language, humor, well-turned editor and well-known Eastern travel writer. Countess of Blessington October 8, 1846. Although Thackeray attacked most silverfork novels, he never attacked the Countess of Blessin The Morning Chronicle reviewer adroitly avoids assigning the Countess any responsibility for this bad close personal relationship.
134 lestine. Edited by Thomas Wright October 12, 1848. Th is joyous satiric commentary on the fantastic travel writings of Sir John Maundeville appeared to Harold away in the Chronicle 45 I agree. 3.3.2 A Thackeray Morning Chronicle Bibliography The table at the end of this section lists Morning Chronicle Without doubt the 48 listed entries total contribution. Moreover, although Gordon Ray argued that possible future additions to his somewhat smaller subset of 35 republished contributions estimate of his work for the Chronicle, 46 I respectfully disagree. As detailed previously, it is possible that Thackeray was paid for unidentified political articles. Moreover, it is also likely that are more distinctive, with more expression and more potential cross-references and authorship clues, than his reviews of biographies, histories, or travel writings. Thus, the currently attributed Morning Chronicle writings may not be fully representative of his contributions. Nevertheless, the articles that have been ide deal to our understanding of his ideas and his times. As discussed in chapter 5 of this Morning Chronicle, and these articles document his views. As Gordon Ray observed, Morning Chronicle literary reviews establish, perhaps better than do any of his other writings, his aesthetics and philosophy with regard to fiction. Looking outside the
135 domestic sphere, no less than six of Thacke Morning Chronicle articles address the tangled relationship of England with Ireland, and another four comment on English views of the mysterious (or, as Thackeray claim ed no longer so mysterious) Eastern world. Further, varied comments on people and current events offer the empathetic perspective that one would expect from the author of English Humourists of the Eighteenth Century and The Four Georges and consequently shed light on Thac for the Morning Chronicle were tightly clustered. There were extended periods of time in which Thackeray wrote articles on essentially a weekly basis: namely, from mid-March through July of 1844, the spring of 1846, and especially from mid-August into October of 1846. identified in this chapter tend to be associated with those time periods. However, there are long periods where simply nothing that clearly Morning Chronicle The general rule that whenever Thackeray was out of England he stopped his newspaper writing explains the gap from mid -August of 1844 to mid-March of 1845. The reason for Thackeray rite for the Morning Chronicle in the second half of 1845 is less clear. there is little published in 1848 that can unambiguously be attributed to him. Morning Chronicle. Tabl e 3 1 ont ributions to the Morning Chronicle Date Article Attribution 4/1/ 1842 Simons, based on circumstantial evidence and comparison to Thackeray 1838 Times review of same exhibition.
136 3/16/ 1844 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on diary entry : Ray, Letters 2: 143 3/20/ 1844 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray writings 4/2/ 1844 Melvil le, Thackeray Biography 2: 192; S. R Townshend Mayer ed. Letters of Elisabeth Barret Browning addressed to Richard Hengist Horne With Comments on Contemporaries Volume II (London: Richard Bentley and Son, 1877) 276 278. 4/4/ 1844 By t he Vicomte Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray writings 4/29/ 1844 Society of Painters in Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray wr itings 5/6/ 1844 Gulliver Apprenticeship, 143 44 based on a comment in a 5/15/1844 article by Thackeray in the Pictorial Times as well as references to Coningsby 5/8/ 18 44 Simons, based on financial data and similarities to review in 5/10/ 1844 Simons, based on financial data and similarities to review in 5/13/ 1844 Gulliver Apprenticeship 144 based on similarities to Thackeray review in the Pictorial Times ; see also Thackeray letter a term taken from Coningsby ] in the Morning Chroni cle : Harden, Letters Supp lement 1: 138 6/3/ 1844 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on similarities to other Thackeray writings (Ray, Contributions xiiin) 6/20/ 1844 Tale. By Lady Simons, b letters and to other Thackeray Morning Chronicle articles
137 7/15/ 1844 Life of Lord Chancellor Gulliver Apprenticeship 143; based on style and point of view. (Ray did not incorporate this attribution into his own list.) 7/25/ 1844 Life of Lord Chancellor Gullive r Apprenticeship 143; based on style and point of view. (Ray did not incorporate this attribution into his own list.) 8/2/ 1844 the Hon. George Sidney Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on 7/22/1844 diary 3/27/ 1845 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray writings 4/3/ 1845 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on implied cross reference in the 5/13/1845 review of Sybil 5/13/ 1845 Ray, Letters 2: intent to review it in the Chronicle : Ray, Letters 2: 149n 6/26/ 1845 visited in 1840 and Simons, unpublished, based on characteristic Thackeray expressions and comparisons to Irish Sketch Book. 12/25/ 1845 Ray, Letters 2: authorship of Christmas Books # 3 12/26/ 1845 Ray, Letters 2: authorship of Christmas Books # 3 12/31/ 1845 Ray, Letters 2: 845 based on im plied cross reference to reviews of Sybil on 5/13/1845 St. Patrick Eve on 4/3/1845. 3/16/ 1846 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on similarities to a Thackeray article published in the March 1846 issue of zine 3/23/1 846 Correspondence of Ray, Letters 2: 845; based Thackeray note he has written a little article about the book: Ray, Letters 2: 234 3/30/1846 Society of British Artists in Suffolk Simons, inte rnal evidence (comments on Hurlstone, irony and humor, literary references ) and temporal pattern of once a week contributions to Morning Chronicle
138 4/6/ 1846 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to oth er Thackeray writings 4/11/ 1846 Year Among the Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on specified similarities to Irish Sketch Book 4/21/ 1846 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on similarities to spoof of 4/27/ 1846 Society of Water Color Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray writings 5/4/ 1846 of English Charac Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on similarities to 5/5/ 1846 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on similarities to Thackeray art reviews in 5/7/ 1846 Royal Academy. Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on similarities to Thackeray art reviews in 1845) 5/11/ 1846 Royal Academy. Third Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on similarities to Thackeray art reviews in 6/19/ 1846 Paint ing and Design Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray writings 7/4/ 1846 Gastronomic Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray writings 7/24/ 1846 et les Anglais des Temps Modernes. Par Dr. Buraud Simons, unpublished, based on comparison to Punch and in the Foreign Quarterly Review
139 8/20/ 1846 Ireland; from the Earliest Kings of that R ealm down to its Last Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on diary comment: Ray, Letters 2: 245 8/27/ 1846 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on similarities to 9/1/ 1 846 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray writings 9/4/ 1846 Temples and Tombs of Egypt, Nubia, and Palestine, in 1845 6. By Simons, unpublished, based on use of characteristic expressions and comparisons to Notes on a Journey From Cornhill to Grand Cairo. 9/21/ 1846 Horace Smith" Gulliver Apprenticeship 139; based on Ray, Letters 2 : 249 9/23/ 1846 Romance. By G. P. R. Simons, unpublished, based on similarities to published in Punch 9/ 25/1846 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray writings 10/5/ 1846 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on unspecified similarities to other Thackeray writings 3/14/ 1848 Ken n Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on 3/14/1848 Th Ray, Letters 2: 364. 3/15/ 1848 Ray, Letters 2: 845; based on 3/15/1848 Ray, Letters 2:365 4/17/ 1848 Society of Painters in Water Colours, Pall Simons, letter reference, internal evidence (Egyptian traveler; comments on Wehnert, Setchel, Egerton, Corbould, Riviere) 1/12/1850 Literature. To the Editor of the Morning Signed letter.
140 3.4 National Identity: Foreigners and Englishmen Many of Thac Morning Chronicle articles are either art reviews or commentaries on novels or poems. Here, however, I wish to examine treatment of mid -1840s English concepts of nationality and identity Orientalism, and th e markers of English middle-class culture. It should be noted that while these issues are clothed in many garbs including the residues of historic privilege and power, and the heritage of religious differences at their core they all fall under the rubric: factors underlying these English attitudes England, Eastern weakness in the face of Western advancing economic power, and the need for a distinctive identity for an ever wealthier and more numerous English middle class. Thackeray often wrote about national identity in the voice of an adopted persona. His Irish Sketch Book (1843) and his book of Eastern travel, Notes on a Journey From Cornhill to Grand Cairo (1846), were written using the persona of Michael Angelo Titmarsh, toned down from his earlier presentation as the drunken and boastful failed artist and but still a flamboyant and comfort-loving Cockney. His favorite voices of the period were the idle tobacco-addicted younger son of a baronet, George Fitz-Boodle, and the Irish rogue, Barry Lyndon. And his Punch contributions in various voices are almost entirely tonguein -cheek: everything is mocked and nothing can be taken at its face value. All of these narrative personas are themselves more objects of satire than reliable reporters. As a result, although literary critics have frequently attributed to Thackeray the opinions and
141 views of his creations, this assumption is problematic, for it conflates what he was mocking and what he was endorsing. In this regard the Morning Chronicle reviews provide, perhaps, a unique measuring stick. Although they are sometimes satiric, the intention of the author is not obscured by the presence of a mediating persona. As a result, these articles facilitate an informed reading of other Thackeray texts as well as an true views. 3.4.1 The Irish Question In the 1840s Ireland and England had been united by the Act of Union but were still separated by religion, a history of British conquest and Irish defeat, and enormous differences in wealth and power. Ireland was effectively a poor agrarian colony of a wealthy industrial power; at the height of the Irish famine of 1845-1850, in which over one million Irish starved to death, large amounts of corn were exported from Ireland to England. In the face of this mix of religious and mercantile differences there is ample evidence that the English public held strong anti-Irish attitudes. 47 Irish Sketch Book published in 1843 almost at the eve of the great famine, has been inequities. As summarized by John McAuliffe in a recent investigation of the Irish Sketch Book 48 beginning in the 1950s some scholars have viewed the comments (of the Sketch narrative persona, Michael Angelo Titmarsh), in the face of breath-taking poverty and starvation, as evidence of anti-Irish racial prejudice. McAuliffe argues that these scholars have inappropriately conflated Thackeray and Titmarsh; they have failed to appreciate that Titmarsh is an object of satire, and that the juxtaposition of Tit
142 extravagances with Irish poverty is intended as a telling condemnation of the social forces behind Irish poverty. McAuliffe offers and then critiques the strawman assertion through an analysis of the text and by offering the unsupported comment contemporaneous articles on Ireland in the Morning Chronicle Indeed, to the extent that the Morning Chronicle reviews reflect Thack inions, these reviews illuminate English attitudes toward the Irish and also indirectly contribute to the ongoing assessment of the Irish Sketch Book Morning Chronicle reviews do advocate practical measures for Irish advancement. In 1844 and 1845, for example, Thackeray argued for government support for the Irish Catholic church as a matter of fairness and good policy. 49 Thackeray believed that, given reasonable British policies, the Irish would be i and 50 Thackeray also intellectually accept ed a measure of English responsibility for misery. Irland Thackeray satirically refers to the si ster country 51 History of Ireland one of the most melancholy stories in the whole world of insolence, rapine, brutal, endless
143 persecution on the part of the English master; of manly resistance, or savage revenge and cunning, or plaintive submission, all equally hopeless or unavailing to the miserable victim. . Surely no Englishman can read the Irish story without shame and sorrow for that frightful tyranny and injustice, that bootless cruelty, that brutal and insolent selfishness which mark, almost up to the last twenty years, the whole period of our domination. 52 And yet even in these comments there is a twinge of self-justification: the above quotation emphasizing that English rule is legal and appropriate. comparison a trip grand misre minimizes the human impact of Irish poverty by satirizing it as a showpiece. And the revi that we are any worse than our neighbours of Europe in this respect. All Europe acts under the same principle; every government hangs and murders for the government religion . . Persecution was a condition of faith in the last period, axe and fire the Moreover, although acknowledging past injustices, Thackeray was unable to appreciate the continuing colonial nature of English policy toward Ireland. In 1846, when English policies toward the starving Irish were arguably Malthusian, Thackeray wro te in the Morning Chronicle the only possible conditions of government, tha ly and warmly interested in If injuries wrought during such a
144 53 Other Thackeray Morning Chronicle comments on Ireland demonstrate insensitivity to Irish suffering. at the onset of the great famine Thackeray defends hunger as an appropriate weapon for Irish Without hunger there 54 And, at least to twenty-first-century eyes, Thackeray is often guilty of stereotyping the Irish: e.g. they are idle, cruel in war, gallant but guilty of ignoring facts. 55 Lastly, while it is true that as a satirist Thackeray also mock s the English, that mockery frequently has an admixture of respect for English institutions, personalities and power. In contrast, Ireland, and the Irish people, never seem to be treated with respect in Morning Chronicle reviews. The Irish leader Daniel onnell is presented as an actor playing a role for his people; Irish aspirations for repeal of the Act of Union are never taken seriously; Moreover, running through these reviews is an elusive predomi a fault which the Irish would rather complain about than resolve, and a victimhood they would rather glory in than remedy through hard work. Insofar as the Irish Sketchbook is concerned, complexity and ambiguity of narrative presence are persuasive. However, while I agree with McAuliffe that Titmarsh as narrator is an object of satire his epicurean and comfort-loving tendencies are intended to provoke mirth I must also agree with those earlier critics of Thackeray who found markers of racial stereotyping Titmarsh and Thackeray are different and distinguishable, but they are not that different.
145 idleness, inability to complete practical tasks, boastfulness, or, positively, sociability and friendliness, are echoed in rather than rejected by Morning Chronicle essays. Thackeray Titmar the writer nor his persona emotionally Any effort to give Thackeray a twenty-first-century sensibility must fail; he remains, more interestingly and revealingly, a man of his times. 3. In his landmark book Orientalism an Eastern world which supposedly serves to test English mettle but actually solidifies racial prejudices and proclaims the superiority of English identity. 56 Said was commenting on Alexander Eothen, but similar comments could have been made regarding Titmarsh travel book, Notes on a Journey From Cornhill to Grand Cairo. Indeed, both books emphasize the Englishness of their narrators; as aptly summarized by Robert Hampson, place itself as the place refracted through the character and idiosyncrasies of the narrator. 57 58 Thackeray punctures the image of the intrepid Englishman by instead reveling in timidity and love of comforts. Of course, th is mask of humorous weakness can be read as a subtle proclamation of power. Similarly, Thackeray chooses to have it both ways as Titmarsh sometimes embraces a romantic East of titillating sensuality, and sometimes deflates Eastern mystery into commerce, inconvenience, and dirt.
146 travel narrative is richly ambiguous, embracing the need to entertain and reflecting the previously established character of Titmarsh. An alternative without the Timarshian presence contemporaneous newspaper reviews of Eastern travel books. Morning Chronicle reviews and one Times review directly deal with Middle Eastern travel: Mehmet Ali, Nubia, and Palestine in 1845-6, and the September 25, 1838 Times Other insights can be drawn from Morning Chronicle April 6, 1846) and from Times November 16, 1838). The first three of these articles suggest that travel to the Middle East and, by extension, the Middle East itself is no longer romantic. begins: Macon says, or fancied, that he saw on the route between Jericho and Jerusalem. It is only to such favoured beings as the author of the Poetic Meditations that a sight of those ferocious animals is granted. Thousands of travellers have been on the same road, and never saw a lion, unless it might be a Mayfair lion on his annual tour. of. Romance has gone off the road. The Company of Jerusalem Hadjees in this town must amount to thousands, who would no more credit a story of panthers
147 about the Jordan than they would an account of wild elephants in Kensington Gardens. And we take it the romantic style for books of Eastern travel has come to an end too, and will soon become as obsolete as that fashion of writing classical works which used to obtain fifty years ago, when quartos were written by the governors of young noblemen who went the grand tour. 59 Continuing in a similar vein, Thackeray teasingly invokes masculine sexual fantasies of the sensual East only to mock them and substitute a sense of the shopworn: Mrs. Romer had opportunities of beholding in the East many sights which are forbidden to the most curious male traveller. Numerous hareems were unveiled to her (behind the curtained gates of which and the eunuch guard every reader of the Arabian Nights has peeped in his imagination): but the romance and beauty of those mysteries disappears too upon close view; the charming houris whom we ad mire in poetry are seen in prose with rouge on their tawdry cheeks. Zuleikah is a fat matron, with corked eyebrows, who has been transferred from the Pasha to -buffoons and inharmonious singers; the famous Ghawazee are filthy posture-mistresses, the celebrated magicians exploded humbugs. This vision of a tawdry East hardly challenges English mettle; not only is it not romantic, in some respects it is not even Eastern. Western commerce and trade have made the Middle East a tributary extension of the West. Thackeray argues that visitors to Egypt are now tourists : European. he Nile . . A widely different place, indeed, is the Egypt of the present day from the savage land it
148 was. . 60 These steamers are, of course, emblematic of Western commerce, Western ideas, Western presence, and Western money. more about money than mystery. For example, in the late 1830s Egypt occupied Syria; England opposed and was able, in 1840, to reverse this occupation. In an 1838 Times article Thackeray reviews the comments of a former British Consuloccupation. Interestingly enough, discussion is largely pecuniary, including specific observations on supposedly inappropriate taxation policies and currency debasements, with attendant negative impacts on the quality of Syrian life. Thackeray has no doubt that Westernization is displacing an inferior social order. He writes that Mehemet Ali, the ruler of Egypt, is building railways; establishing fleets, civilized [emphasis added] whether they To make certain that we have captured this central idea he later repeats it, praising the [Ali] labours in his great work of the There is no indication that Thackeray, an educated man as well as a celebrated satirist, sees any irony or satire in his depiction many regard as the home of civilization. Travels in the Punjab Lal traveled with various English explorers in India, Afghanistan, Persia, and Central Asia. Thackeray ridicules Lal for egotistically exaggerating his role and accomplishments. Of course, Thackeray also ridiculed Westerners whom he regarded as pretentious. (S ee, for example, his Morning Chronicle review of a travel book by the German Doctor Carcus. 61 )
149 has a racist and colonialist edge when Thackeray wont of English gentlemen in the Indian service to weep in the embraces of their Hindoo This is not an exceptional case. Indeed, an earlier Thackeray newspaper review of a book recounting a journey to Persia by an English diplomat cheerfully d 62 That same article includes an extract, characterized bout humorous consequences. In short, a 63 conquered by Western commerce and open to Western civilization, but populated by an inferior people who are fit subjects for ridicule. 3.4.3 English Middle-Class Identity Thackeray wrote for an upper-middle-class English audience, and his major novels 64 Yet before the creation of Arthur Pendennis it is problematic to consider narrative personas as themselves representative of English middle-class identity. I have already commented on the exaggerated and non-stereotypically English flamboyance and eccentricity of Titmarsh. other persona of choice was George Savage Fitz-Boodle. With obvious and unmerited conceit the indolent and overweight Fitz-Boodle prides -best whist player
150 in Selfbaronet was rusticated at the University and expelled from the army. His romantic opportunities have been sabotaged by his addiction to tobacco. While this persona embodies and satirizes upper-class vices, he is an extreme parody that cannot be taken as representative of Englishness. Likewise, far from being an English everyman, the eponymous anti-hero of the 1844 serialized novel Barry Lyndon is a completely amoral rogue and Irish to boot! However, a less extreme yet distinctly personable everyman English presence inhabits -1846 Morning Chronicle articles. I suggest that the overt and implicit attitudes of this unnamed reviewer are aligned with eption of mid-1840s Victorian middle-class English identity. Morning Chronicle articles present and endorse an Englishness which encompasses the enjoyment of literature, respect for the heritage of great English authors, and an appreciation of contemporary English art. A love of nature particularly the relatively benign and domestic English countryside runs through many of also be taken as an assumed national characteristic. Beyond these aesthetic concerns, it is a truism that we are defined by what we are not, and, as I have noted in this chapter, Morning Chronicle Englishman is clearly not Irish and most definitely not Eastern. Compared to the Irish, Thackeray views the English as more reserved and more practical; showing more persistence and exhibiting less braggadocio; reflecting independence and strength rather than subservience and weakness. characteristically hypocritical in their self-interest, they nevertheless drive and subdue the world, particularly the Eastern races which are generally portrayed at best as simple and
151 kindly, and at worst as superstitious, credulous, and somewhat hapless. Indeed, Thackeray further contrasts the English with the French ( who show a lack of judgment in idolizing and who for the most part are vainglorious and fail to understand the English 65 ); the Germans (suffering from the misfortune ; and presented as overly literal, diligent, credulous, and dull 66 ); and even the Americans ( although he officially rejects class distinctions, he nevertheless admires and seeks them 67 ). Thackeray Englishmen are anchored in realities. When Thackeray The Snow Storm perhaps, in the book, is the description of a supper, which is exceedingly luscious and 68 he is making a social point as well as a literary one: in a world full of falsity and pretence Englishmen realize the Indeed, with victuals, their attack upon the enemy was irresistible (as under such circumstances Along with food, of course, money is a continuing downto -earth English concern, and love of money is an aspect of Englishness. Morning Chronicle if he succumbed to the desire for money, so did the Englishmen he wrote about. Beau
152 to get money from his friend s. 69 Thackeray often refers to large sums satirically, ef fectively emphasizing that they exceed realistic middle-class possibilities: Coningsby is unbelievably -year 70 Mrs. Romer tells about an Oriental Viceroy who presumably offered to give 100,000 pounds for a beautiful woman, and Thackeray is 71 When Thackeray wishes to offer approbation in his Morning Chronicle reviews he frequently employs adjectives such as manly. Thackeray valued honesty, but one can hardly argue that Thackeray saw it as a general mark of Englishness; his novels are full of self-serving dishonest Englishman. I also doubt that in the sense of being elevated or lofty or showing moral superiority but it is interesting that he used such a classinflected word. For Thackeray certainly considered class and class-consciousness to be part of middle-class English identity. Indeed, class awareness runs through Morning Chronicle reviews, from his belief that Disraeli had from bankers or gentlemen, from in Lectures -class life to his careful demarcation of the Chartist meeting on Kennington Comm 72 iolations of class norms as inappropriate.
153 On the other hand manliness is arguably perceived by Thackeray as an English virtue. The English biographer Captain William Jesse and the famous schoolmaster When Thackeray discusses behavior he considers to be unassociated with Jesuitical self-flogging. 73 The Oxford English Dictionary defines using referents such as courageous, strong, independent of spirit and presumably all of but one cannot escape the secondary Sometimes words regarding Victorian womanhood, as expressed in his Morning Chronicle reviews, suggest that satire includes a strain of misogynism. In the review of for example, Thackeray writes: They [Mrs. Caudle and Mrs. Nickleby] are both types of English matrons so excellent, that it is hard to say which of the two should have the pas Mrs. her mamma, brother, and family, and her jealous regard of her Caudle, make her an object of incessant sympathy with her numerous friends. 74 When Thackeray wishes to express his approval of English women he often does so in terms that would give offense today but which provide insight into the early Victorian mindset regarding feminine identity. Mrs. Romer, a travel writer whom and a hand that is at once elegant and faithful. 75 In another review Thackeray quotes the
154 anonymous female author X.Y.Z as declaring as they exist in England, have their equals no where, either in external appearance, in manner, in conduct, or in character. In response, Thackeray opines ing that the of an English lady. 76 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Morning Chronicle articles, taken as a whole, arguably offer a multidim ensional view of the early Victorian world, and provide a significant gateway into ing and artistic development. They deserve to be considered part of the Tha ckeray canon. Notes 1 This comment was made by Thackeray about his writing for the M orning Chronicle in a letter dated April 14, 1848. See Gordon Ray, T he Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1945-6), 2:373. 2 Charles Johnson, T he Early Writings of William Makepeace Thackeray (L ondon, 1888), 51-56; William Makepeace Thackeray, The Oxford Thackeray, George S aintsbury, ed., (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1908), 1:67-110, 3:383-96. A modern torship of Peter Shillingsburg has not yet included 3 Harold Gulliver, Va ldosta, GA: privately printed, 1934. 4 Ray, Letters 5 Gordon Ray, ed., William Makepeace Thackeray: Contributions to the Morning Chronicle. (Urbana, IL, University of Illinois Press, 1955). 6 Ray, Contributions xi. 7 Henry Richard Fox Bourne, British Newspapers: Chapters in the History of J ournalism (London: Chatto and Windus, 1887), 2:87-95, 143, 168. 8 Joseph Archer Crowe, Re minisces of Thirty-Five Years of My Life (London: J ohn Murray, 1895), 10.
155 9 Ray, Letters 1:281, 283. 10 Edgar Harden, ed., T he Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray. A Supplement (New York; London: Garland, 1994), 1:604. 11 Harden, Lett er s Suppl ement 1:777. 12 Charles Mackay, Forty Years Recollection of Life, Literature, and Public Affairs from 1830-1870 (London, Chapman and Hall, 1877), 2:294. 13 Charles Mackay, T hrough the Long Day, or, Memorials of a Literary Life During Half a Century (London: W. C. Allen, 1887), 1:58. 14 Ray, Letters 1:384. 15 Ray, Letters 2:164. 16 See Ray, Letters 2:164. 17 Ray, Letters 2:170. 18 Ray, Letters 2:225. 19 Ray, Letters 2:229. 20 Ray, Letters 2:264. 21 Ray, Letters 2:362, 373, 442, 459 22 C. L. Cline, Morning Chronicle London Times Literary Supplement December 19, 1942. 23 Ray, Letters 2:845. 24 Edgar Harden, comp., A Checklist of Contributions by William Makepeace T hackeray to Newspapers, Periodicals, Books, and Serial Part Issues 1828-1864 (Victoria, Canada: University of Victoria Press, 1996). 25 Ray, Contributions xii-xiii. 26 Edgar Harden, (Newark, De laware: University of Delaware Press), 1985, 213, 266. 27 William Makepeace Thackeray, T he Oxford Thackeray ed. George Saintsbury (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1908), 9: 444-445; 11: 189; 12: 367. 28 Robert A. Colby, Public (Columbus: Ohio State U P, 1979), 45, 69, 129, 207, 243, 341; Laura Fasick, Nineteenth-Century Literature 47, no Victorian Studies B urney and Notes and Queries Nineteenth-Century Fiction 21 (1966): 21-33; Sk Irish Studies Review 9, no. 1 (2001): 25
156 of Mosaic Influence : Thackeray, Disraeli, and AngloNineteenth Century Contexts 25 (2003): 119-145; Richard Pearson, W. M. Thackeray and the Mediated Text: Writing for Periodicals in the Mid-Nineteenth Century (Burlington, USA: Criticism in the Morning Chronicle (1844 1848), Brno Studi es in English 2 (1960): 79105; C atherine Peters, Shifting Worlds of Imagination and Reality (N ew York: Oxford University Press, 1987), 250; S. S. Prawer, Breeches and (Oxford: European Humanities Research Center, 1997); D. J. Taylor, Thackeray: The Life of a Literary Man (New York: Carroll & Gr af, 1999), 240, 256, 271; Deborah Thomas, Thackeray and Slavery (Athens, Ohio: Ohio UP, 1993), 2, 24, 31. 29 Robert Metzdorf, review of C hronicle, ed. Gordon Ray, J ournal of English and Germanic Philology 55, no.2 (April 1956) : 335-337. 30 Letters Supplement 1:118. 31 Ray, Letters 2:456. 32 Ray, Letters 2:32. 33 Harden, Letters Supplement 1:583. 34 Henry rom a Club Arm-Chair: William Makepeace Thackeray, Nineteenth-Century Fiction 18 (1964), 222. 35 Thackeray, Oxford Thackeray 5:5-9. 36 Thackeray, O xford Thackeray 8:367-371. 37 Thackeray, O xford Thackeray 8:472-476. 38 [William Makepeace Thackeray], dres et les Anglais des Temps Modernes. Par Dr. Buraud-Riofrey, Morning Chronicle (London), July 24, 1845. 39 See the 1839 Ox ford Thackeray 2: 371), the 1840 Paris Sketch Book ( Oxford Thackeray, 2:170), the 1846 From Cornhi ll to Grand Cairo ( Oxford Thackeray 9:246), the 1847 Punch Oxford Thackeray 7:113), the 1847-1848 Vanity Fair ( Ox ford Thackeray 11:645), the 1848 Our Street ( Oxford Thackeray 10:125); the 18481849 Pendennis ( Oxford Thackeray 12:30, 666); the 1851 Keepsake article entitled Voltigeur ( Oxford Thackeray ,10:594), and the 1851 Punch article An Ingleez Family ( Oxford Thackeray ,8:548) 40 Edgar The Snobs of Engla Prize Novelists (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005), 73. 41 Ray, Letters 2:373. 42 [William Makepeace Thackeray],
157 M agazine July 1842. 43 Ray, Letters 2:216. 44 Thackeray, O xford Thackeray 17:460-472. 45 Ray, Letters 2:442; Gulliver, Apprenticeship 144-145, 242-243. 46 Ray, Contributions xiii. 47 A. N. Wilson, T he Victorians (London: Arrow Books, 2003), 74-83 48 40. See also Kenneth Brewer, Irish Sketch Book Papers on Language and Literature 29, no.3 (1993): 259-283. 49 Ray, Contributions 10; [William Makepeace Thackeray], Morning Chronicle (London), June 26, 1845. 50 Ray, Contributions 10, 165, 166. 51 Ray, Contributions 1. 52 Ray, Contributions 164-5. 53 Ray, Contributions 166. 54 Ray, Contributions 76. 55 [Thackeray], Tangier. 56 Edward Said, Orie ntalism (New York: Pantheon, 1978), 193. 57 The Yearbook of English Studies 34 (2004), 214-229. 58 Said, Orientalism 193. 59 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Egypt, Nubia, and Palestine, in 1845Morning Chronicle (London), S eptember 4, 1846. 60 Ray, Contributions 65. 61 Ray, Contributions 107-113. 62 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), November 16, 1838. 63 See the comments by Dickens in Chapter 14 of S ketches by Boz; Charles Dickens, Sketches by Boz (Philadelphia: Carey, Lea and Blanchard, 1837), 117-118 64 Edgar Harden, T hackeray the Writer: From Journalism to Vanity Fair (New York: Palgrave, 1998), 171; Juliet McMaster, Thackeray: The Major Novels (Toronto: U niversity of Toronto Press, 1971), 127. 65 Ray, Contributions 118, 23; [Thackeray],
158 66 Ray, Contributions 2, 107-113. Note that the Germans Venedy and Carcus a re both presented as credulous and overly literal. 67 Ray, Contributions 167. 68 Ray, Contributions 106. 69 Ray, Contributions 35. 70 Ray Contributions 43, 82, 106. 71 [Thackeray], E gypt, Nubia, and Palestine. 72 Ray, Contributions 85, 140, 94, 192. 73 Ray, Contributions 127. 74 Ray, Contributions 94. 75 [Thackeray], E gypt, Nubia, and Palestine. 76 [Thackeray], Tangier.
159 Chapter 4 The Squab Idler Newspaper Correspondence half-century-old (but still authoritative) two-volume biography of William Thackeray contains only the following brief comment ritings for the Calcutta Star : Between March, 1843 and August, 1844, he [Thackeray] wrote a long letter each month for the Calcutta Star a newspaper established by his old associate James Hume who had gone out to India in 1842. Though Hume was able to pay him only about three pounds a letter, friendship kept Thackeray faithful to his task, and he seems to have resumed his contributions for a time after he returned from the East in 1845. 1 which include 2 Unfortunately, Ray was not able to examine any of these Calcutta Star articles, as no Western library is known to possess a file of that newspaper. In 1963, however, Henry Summerfield examined an incomplete file at the National Library of Calcutta and was able unequivocally to identify six letters, each headed Letters from a Club Arm-Chair as written by Thackeray. One of these letters contains t prominent local contributor to the Calcutta Star Arguing that these
160 letters merited examination as at sustained political comment and can speak for itself, Summerfield reprinted them in Nineteenth Century Fiction 3 In addition to political commentary these letters also include interspersed musings on the commonplaces of ordinary life, such as London emptying in August as people take their vacations, the glory of view of traveling fifty miles per hour on a train, and similar Thackerayish Nevertheless, with the exception of Richard Pearson, who has made several interesting comments regarding these articles, 4 recent Thackeray biographers and scholars have generally contented statement. 5 To date these letters have not been re In this chapter I establish that the Calcutta Star James Hume. More significantly, the Calcutta Star Squab letters were, in fact, answered in the Calcutta Star Idler letters. And although most Hume republished letters are accessible for scholarly examination. 6 Idler-Hume to Squab-Thackeray (in conjunction with other data) support the construction of a chronological listing of and narrative commentary on Calcutta Star writings. that direct payment was the sine qua non newspaper; in fact, as we shall see, brief account is wrong in several of its particulars.
161 Further, although James Hume himself has become almost lost to history, his is an intriguing colonial voice and counterbalance to the cosmopolitan Thackeray. Hume was enterprising and influential, a scion of a prominent Radical political family and a cousin of one of the founders of the Indian Congress party. Not only was Hume a pioneer in the development of the Indian colonial periodical press, he also played a central role in colonial Indian politics, commerce, sports, and justice. Accordingly, the Squab Idler letters not only provide new insights into the personalities and viewpoints of both Th ackeray and Hume, they also collectively constitute a culturally revealing dialogue on the issues of the day. 4.1 James Hume and the Calcutta Star James Hume was reportedly born in 1808 as the third of six children of a James Hume and a Marianne Grant. 7 The Humes were a prominent Anglo-Indian family (Anglo-Indian in the sense of living in India for lengthy periods rather than of being of mixed Indian and British ancestry ) that originated in Montrose, Scotland. Joseph Hume, the Radical MP and uncle of the James Hume born in 1808, had spent a decade in India before returning to England and entering politics. Hume, went on to become a well-known ornithologist as well as a leading Anglo-Indian politician and cofounder of the Indian Congress party. Most of James s siblings spent part or all of their adult lives in India. James was educated in England, studied law at the Inner Temple, 8 and was called to the bar on January 27, 1832. 9 William Thackeray was undergoing his own legal training at the Middle Temple in 1831 and 1832, and possibly then met James Hume. At any event, they certainly knew
162 each other when Thackeray was owner and editor of a London-based weekly periodical, the National Standard and Journal of Literature, Science, Music, Theatricals, and the Fine Arts from May of 1833 to February of 1834. A surviving Thackeray letter from 10 Th ere are no surviving Thackeray-Hume letters from that period, but, as we shall s ee, the nature of their personal relationship can be inferred from subsequent correspondence. Their common AngloIndian family heritage, their shared Radical political views and legal training, and their mutual literary and journalistic interests may have drawn them together. 11 Hume arrived in Calcutta on April 29, 1839, and lost no time getting involved in the judicial, political, and journalistic aspects of colonial life. On June 15 he was admitted to practice as an advocate in the colonial Supreme Court, and in a public meeting on October 5 eulogized the public character of the independent-minded Whig politician, Lord Brougham and attacked the Bengal regional government. 12 On December 5, 1839 Hume announced that he was starting a new weekly newspaper, the Eastern Star whose first number would be published on January 5, 1840. In June of 1841 Hume took over the Daily Calcutta Intelligencer and Commercial Advertiser and repositioned it as the Calcutta Star a daily newspaper which commenced publication on July 1. 13 A listing of the holdings of the National Library of India at Calcutta notes that the Calcutta Star contained: Advertisements, Notices, Domestic occurrences, Commercial Intelligence, Shipping Intelligence, Bank shares, Price of Bullion, Rates of interest and discount, Literary articles, Sporting intelligence, Original correspondence, Editorial paragraphs, Orders of the Governor General in Council, European
163 intelligence with special reference to England, House of Commons reports, Parliamentary miscellanea, Precis of miscellaneous events, Europe births, marriages and deaths. 14 There are no firm data on the size or circulation of the paper, but it appears to have been a rather general mainstream newspaper targeted to the English community in Calcutta. Hu me himself wrote in May of 1844: When the Calcutta Star was started, it addressed itself to no particular section of the community here, nor body of the Europeans in India . . it entered the field, careless of whom it displeased by the publication of opinions honestly believed to be true, and material to the public good and what has been the result? There are papers with a larger circulation, but there never was one which met with greater success. It has a very much larger circulation in little more than 2 years than as I am informed the Englishman had in more than double the time [according to another Hume Calcutta Star letter, in 1842 the circulation was about 1200 a month 15 ], and I have very little hesitation in saying, that here, wher e it is best known, it has a larger bon fide circulation than any Paper in Calcutta has, or ever has had. 16 reported that he is flourishing at Calcutta, where he may set up his papers Apparently Thackeray 17
164 Hume, indeed, flourished in Calcutta. An anonymous correspondent offers as a capsule description of Hume that He was the Police Magistrate of Calcutta and Justice of the Peace. He was Secretary to the races. He was proprietor and editor of the India Sporting Review and Secretary to, and General correspondent of the Agricultural and Horticultural Association. He was the acknowledged proprietor and editor of the Calcutta Star He was a Director of the Inland Steam Navigation Company. 18 Indeed, other evidence adds credence to th is miniature biography. The History of the Royal Calcutta Turf Club notes that Hume resigned as Secretary of the club in 1849. 19 The June 1846 issue of Simmonds Colonial Intelligence and Foreign Miscellany states that in April the editor of the Calcutta Star has been appointed to the vacant magistracy. 20 The Madras Journal of Literature and Science reprints January 1849 and May 1850 letters which James Hume signed as Secretary of the Agricultural and Horticultural Society of India. 21 Reginald Burton asserts that Hume edited the India Sporting Review starting in 1845; 22 as Sidney Laman Blanchard reports, th e long standing relationship between Hume and this periodical was nearly all its contributors being besieged somewhere or engaged in besieging somebody, and its editor, Mr. James Hume, the senior magistrate, not be able to find sufficient aid at 23 Hume outlived the great mutiny by only five years, as he is reported to have died at Galle (outside of Calcutta) on September 21, 1862. 24 Hume had dramatic and literary aspirations. A contemporary journalist revealing ly reports that His declamatory powers were fine, and he had a tendency to tear a passion to tatters, which found room
165 for gratification in Othello and Macbeth ; but his figure was thick and stumpy, and his 25 Exercising his literary bent, Hume published a biographical memoir of the Anglo-Indian author and colonial administrator Henry W. Torrens in 1854. 26 And, most significantly for this analysis, W. F. B. Laurie established that 27 Indeed, starting in June of 1842 a series of long letters addressed to various European friends was published each month in the Calcutta Star Idler. These letters contained opinionated commentary on both local news and on events in England. Three volumes of these collected letters were subsequently published, the first covering June 1842 May 1843; the second, June 1843 to May 1844; and the third, June 1844 to May 1845. 28 It is not clear when these monthly letters terminated; they could not have gone on for much longer as n Mail reports that Hume resigned as editor of the Calcutta Star on April 29, 1846. 29 In any event, there is no indication that a fourth volume of letters was ever published. These volumes collectively include 36 letters; 10 of these are addressed to As listed in table 4.1, some of these letters actively engage and comment on prior Thackeray Squab letters. In other cases it is not clear if Thackeray Squab was then an active correspondent or if s name was simply being retained as a placeholder. Other Idler letters in these volumes are addressed to Mackenzie (June 1842, October 1842, January 1843, February 1843, May 1843, August 1843, March 1844), Charlotte (September 1842, September 1843), and Al fred (July, 1842, November 1842, December 1842, March 1843, April 1843, April 1843, October 1843, November 1843, December 1843, August 1844, September 1844,
166 November 1844, December 1844, January 1845, February 1845, March 1845, and April 1845). None of the Idler letters to addressees other than Squab are overtly part of a bidirectional published correspondence, and there is no information regarding the identity of these other addressees except that they are members of a family, with Alfred and Charlotte respectively being the son and daughter of Mackenzie. Table 4.1 Idler (Hume) l etters to Squab (Thackeray) Date Interactive ? Pages Volume June 8, 184 3 I nteractive 1 22 Vol 2 July 184 3 I nteractive 23 43 Vol 2 January 20, 184 4 I nteractive 142 165 Vol 2 February 18, 1844 I nteractive 166 188 Vol 2 April 19, 1844 Not interactive 219 246 Vol 2 May 13, 1844 Not interactive 247 287 Vol 2 June 8, 1844 Not interactive 1 29 Vol 3 July 12, 1844 Uncertain 30 67 Vol 3 October 16, 1844 I nteracti ve 102 122 Vol 3 May 10, 1845 I nteractive 219 246 Vol 3 Calcutta Star Both the Squab letters recovered by Summerfield and the collected Idler letters to Squab shed light on the particulars and circumstances of Thackera Calcutta Star The Thackeray-Squab letters recovered by Summerfield contain internal header dates within the letters (presumably indicating the dates on which the letters were written) as well as publication dates. Both sets of dates are shown in table 4.2.
167 Several conclusions can be drawn from this table: firstly, approximately 45 days elapsed between the writing and the publication of each Thackeray letter. This delay is associated with the slow Indian mail service of the 1840s; mail from England was transported with intermediate stops at Marseille and Malta to Alexandria, sent overland across the Isthmus of Suez, and then shipped to points in India, including Calcutta. As one might imagine, the arrival in Calcutta of mail from England was something of an event, and detailed records are available about specific mail departure and arrival dates in 1843 and 1844. 30 In January of 1845 the normal single monthly mail service to India (usually leaving London around the sixth of each month and arriving in Calcutta around the 20 th of the following month) was replaced by a bi-monthly service, under which letters from London could be sent on the 7 th or the 24 th of each month. 31 Indeed, the letters recovered by Summerfield show that Thackeray took advantage of the bi-monthly mail to write two letters each month. In fact, in September of 1844 Thackeray reminded Hume in a Calcutta Star remittances to him should be doubled. 32 Table 4.2 Squab l ette rs recovered by Summerfield Date Written Date Published Interval Letter 1 August 7, 1844 September 21, 1844 45 days Letter 2 March 24, 1845 May 7, 1845 44 days Letter 3 U ndated May 22, 1845 Letter 4 April 24, 1845 June 9, 1845 46 days Letter 5 May 7, 1845 June 21, 1845 45 days Letter 6 July 7, 1845 August 21, 1845 45 days
168 Although Summerfield did not state specifically the ways in which the Calcutta Star file he examined was incomplete, a separate list of the holdings of that periodical in the National Library of India at Calcutta is available and provides that information : -Dec.; 1844: July-Dec.; 1845: Jan.-June, Aug.-Dec..; 1846: Jan.-Dec.; 1847: Jan.-June; 1848-1849: Jan.-Dec.; 1850: Jan.-June. 33 This listing provides useful negative Summerfield did not find any Squab columns after August of 1845, even though copies of the Calcutta Star were available for the rest of 1845 and all of 1846, presumably the l in that paper. Likewise, the failure to find any Thackeray articles in the second half of 1843 strongly suggests that which began in early 1843, were interrupted an interruption which I will subsequently confirm and explain. On the other hand, Thackeray letters may well have been published in July of 1845, bridging the gap between his June and August articles, since that month s issues of the Calcutta Star were not available for Summerfield to examine. is dated June 8, 1843. of this letter states: There have now appeared three of your letters in the Calcutta Star I recognized your style before I saw your signature, and should have written you last month to correspond directly with your humble servant, had I not desired to close out the first dozen of my letters to the esteemed friend with whom they began. In 1843 mail service from London to India was usually once a month; the three mail deliveries to Calcutta prior to June 8 arrived, respectively, on March 23, April 23, and May 23. P ere published within a few days of their
169 receipt. Working backward, and looking at mail shipping records, these letters must have been written and sent from London by, respectively, February 6, March 4, and April 6. Summerfield was unable to recover copies of these columns, but indirect confirmation that they were written and that they marked the initiation of Calcutta Star In further support of this conclusion, Gordon Ray published an undated Thackeray letter, which he suggested was written in M t off a long letter yesterday to 34 However, letters for the next 12 months is demonstrably incorrect; in fact, apparently only these first three Squab letters were published in 1843. In his July 1843 Idler letter Hume acknowledged that Squab h 35 (which left London on May 6 th and arrived in Calcutta on June 14 th ). 36 in ch eek admonishment of Thackeray: You have no right to excite expectations if you are not prepared to gratify them. If you wrote to order, I should find some apology for you . but this idea cannot be entertained of a gentleman of ample fortune; albeit, with a wife and nine children, a town and country home, two carriages and a seat in Parliament to keep up. He wrote only i.e. for specific committed payments commentary suggests that uncertain payment prospects s pen; remember, as of August of 1842 Hume had apparently still not repaid an old debt to Thackeray. Indeed, all the remaining Idler letters for calendar 1843
170 were addressed to people other than Thackeray. In further support of this understanding, note that even though the appropriate issues of the Calcutta Star were available for his examination, Summerfield was unable to identify any Squab letters dating from July December 1843. By late 1843 the relationship between Thackeray and Hume must have been repaired or appropriate financial commitments or payments received January 20, 1844 Idler letter i s once again addressed to Squab. Hume announced that -selected descriptor, because a special mail leaving London on November 15, 1843, arrived in Calcutta on New Year s Day! 37 Accordingly, Thackeray must have written a mid-November letter which was presumably published in very early January. Unfortunately, Summerfield was unable to recover this letter because the National Library of Calcutta lacked the Jan-June 1844 issues of the Calcutta Star Presumably Thackeray also wrote a letter for the next India mail which left on December 6, 1843 (and would have arrived in Calcutta and been published around January 19, 1844), interactive response to Thackeray is dated February 18, and the January 6 London mail had Calcutta by February 18. do show that he continued this series and wrote letters to the Calcutta Star on January 3, 1844 and in early February. 38 It is however, unclear i f Thackeray wrote letters in March, April, or May. Moreover, it is unlikely that he wrote a letter in June because Summerfield did not find a published Squab letter in the National Library of Calcutta July 1844 file of the Calcutta Star and it is certain he did not write a letter in July. 39 A Thackeray diary entry indicates he was
171 anticipating a payment in March from Hume which he did not get; this failure to receive payment may have led Thackeray to cease submitting articles. 40 Idler continued to address his April, May, and June monthly letters to Squab, but, unlike his previous letters to Squab, the tone and content of these letters is impersonal and makes no mention of any prior Squab correspondence. The tone of to Squab is ambiguous as some comments might be interpreted as a response to an earlier Squab letter. On August 5, 1844 Thackeray wrote that he was returning from Belgium to 41 for August 6, 1844 states that he had only this would have covered about three letters. On August 7 Thackeray dispatched a letter to Hume which arrived in Calcutta on September 18, was published on September 21 and overtly acknowledged by Idler in his letter of October 16. 42 Thackeray was in the Mediterranean from m id -August of 1844 until February of 1845; thus, it is not surprising that neither Idler letters nor the Calcutta Star files suggest that any Squab letters were published during that interval. From late March to early July of 1845 (with corresponding publication dates of May August), however, it appears that Thackeray made semimonthly contributions to the Calcutta Star As indicated in table 4.2, Summerfield was able to recover many of these articles, with the noted exception of the missing July Calcutta Star files. Why Thackeray ceased his contributions remains a mystery, nor do we know if Idler wrote any letters to Squab after May of 1845. However, Thackeray wrote elsewhere in July of 1845 that he was being offered increasingly larger sums for his writings by London periodicals; hence, it may have been an economic decision that his time was better spent writing elsewhere that ended his contributions to the Calcutta Star 43
172 The following table presents a reconstructed bibliography for the Calcutta Star Estimated writing dates and publication dates are based on mail shipping records. Although only six letters have been retrieved to date, this analysis suggests that Thackeray wrote 15 to 18 letters between March of 1843 and July of 1845, with extended breaks in writing and publication primarily due either to payment issues Table 4. 3 Chronology of Squab (Thackeray) Calcutta Star l etters Written Published Status Attribution ~ 2/6 /1843 ~ 3/25 /1843 Lost ~ 3/4 /1843 ~ 4/25 /1843 Lost Confirmed by reference ; Thackeray letter ~ 4/ 6 /1843 ~ 5/25 /1843 Lost Confirmed by reference ~ 11/ 15 /1843 ~ 1/ 3 /1844 Lost Confirmed by ~ 12/6 /1843 ~1/ 21 /1844 Lost Projected by this analysis 1/3/1844 ~ 2/2 1 /1844 Lost Confirmed by Thackeray Account Book ~ 2/ 1 /1844 ~3/2 3 /1844 Lost Confirmed by Thackeray Account Book ~3/3/1844 ~4/18/1844 Lost Speculative (?) this analysis ~4/3/1844 ~5/19/1844 Lost Speculative (?) this analysis ~5/3/1844 ~ 6/17/1844 Lost Speculative (?) this analysis 8/7/1844 9/21/1844 Exists Recovered by Summerfield 3/24/1845 5/7/1845 Exists Recovered by Summerfield ~4/7/1845 5/22/1845 Exists Recovered by Summerfield 4/24/ 1845 6/9/1845 Exists Recovered by Summerfield 5/7 1845 6/21/1845 Exists Recovered by Summerfield ~ 5/22/1845 ~ 7 /7/1845 Lost Projected by this analysis ~ 6/7/1845 ~ 7/22/1845 Lost Projected by this analysis 7/7/ 1845 8/21/1 845 Exists Recovered by Summerfield
173 4.3 Personalities and Personal Commentaries The surviving Squab-Thackeray letters are friendly and collegial in tone, but they rarely address Idler-Hume in a personal manner, and they do not characterize their recipient. They do, however, characterize Thackeray, or at least the Squab persona that Thackeray adopted for this correspondence. For example, Thackeray starts the Calcutta Star letter written on August 7, 1844, and published on September 21, 1844, with a paragraph that concisely establish es Squab as socially involved, sarcastic, witty, artistic, indolence-loving, indulgent, urbane, humorous, and selfmo cking: The Club Arm-Chair will very soon find but few occupants honourable members are pairing off in the most touching union. Steamers are carrying away people by shoals to Boulogne and Ostend; dinners are becoming scarce; the opera boxes are filled with the queerest dubious faces and figures the common sort are rushing by myriads to Gravesend whither six-pence will carry you, and where shrimps, bad music, and the fresh air recreate the Cockney weary of the season. I be dated from from Munich, probably, for packet, having nothing to write about from a quiet little German Bath whither I had betaken myself. Squab effectively maintains this persona which is, arguably own personality throughout the correspondence. For example, later in this same letter orders to frapper the bro a few paragraphs later Thackeray (Here enter
174 whitebait, water souchy, Etc. and the correspondence suddenly ceases.), envisions Squab interrupting his writing precisely at that point to greedily consume his dinner. Idlerwhile never as expressive, nuanced or self-mocking are much more passionate and personal, accordingly providing insight into Hum In his June 8, 1843 letter Hume writes: I perceive, Squab, that you are the same wicked wag and professing Radical as ever; but in politics never was your particular delight: I doubt whether you would ever have thought of them unless the follies of party had attracted alike your satirical pencil and pen. I suspect you found more to laugh at in musty Toryism than in Whiggism, and the other two isms [Radicalism and Chartism] of party together, and that this decided you. . If I have measured you wrongly in politics, and your heart should be more in the cause than I believe, I am sorry we should both have made a mistake. These comments suggest that Hume viewed Thackeray as a jokester, and as a professing but not entirely sincere Radical, despite his 1836 service as a foreign correspondent for his step Constitutional Thackeray emerges from this correspondence as a political skeptic, while Hume defines himself as a true-believer Radical. To Hume, Toryism was inconceivable as a political home. Radicalism is the only refuge for a reasonable man. Chartism and its five points must
175 poked fun at party disloyalty and political inconsistency. Some of the contents of T letters can be inferred fr letter: . . us of the Marquis of Londonderry, who threatens to quit the Tory camp because he didn t get the Blues; hint that even republican Roebuck might perchance be black-balled at the Reform Club, had he again to pass the ordeal . and tell us were not entirely political: in that same June 8, 1843 letter mention nothing of the sort. Indeed, on March 30, 1843, just in time for Calcutta Star letter which must have been written the first week of April, the Times 44 describing the ideas of a Mr. Henson for a light-weight steam engine to be incorporated into an airplane. The project was in development; nothing had actually flown. The tone of the Times article is reserved but optimistic regarding eventual success; In his July 1843 letter Hume testifies writer. Complaining that Thackeray had not written by the May Mail, Hume wrote: I am about to pay you a compliment, and you must listen to the truth which is tacked on to it. You know so much of what is going on, and write so well, that not to hear from you is a double disappointment. We lose many items of interesting
176 intelligence, and the pleasant vein in which they would have been told. Your letters are most acceptable, and your silence most unpardonable. I correspondence and indirectly highlighted aspects of its contents through his responses. Hume wrote: May you live till your great English Revolution is realized, and write me faithfully the particulars of its progress. I am afraid Clubs, in which you so much luxuriate, will share the fate of so much of aristocracy as you would gladly see swept away. . It surprises me that a backbone Radical can regard them without horror . . You are a Radical, and you are eloquent in your denunciations of cliques and coteries, and parties you are all for the people, the industrious, hardworking unwashed, and the intelligent, modest, moral middle class; so am I, but k there is something anti-liberal in your . You may quarrel, my dear Squab, with this letter if you will, and growl over it in your Club Arm-Chair, but the Mail, generally, you will find is interesting. -Squab letter written in midNovember of 1843 and published in early January of 1844 did indeed comment on the ations of This would be an interesting and new aspect of public writings, as his published works including those Squab letters that have been recovered, all but one of which are from 1845 generally maintain a tone of ironic detachment and skepticism on issues of politics. (In a letter to his mother dated
177 November 24, 1843, Thackeray enthuses about the abolition of the Corn tariffs, the government of the country will fall naturally into the hands of the middle classes as it should do: and the Lords and country gentlemen will 45 Presumably these private attitudes bled into his Squab letter written approximately 10 days earlier.) Further, in his letter values. Thackeray was a professed Radical; i day to come when those 2 humbugs [ rascally Whigs & Tories ] are to disappear from among us? I would like to see all men equal, this bloated aristocracy blasted to the wings of all the winds. 46 At the same time, Thackeray seemed to value highly elitist club life and seek out aristocratic society. (Apparently in latter years Hume relaxed his own attitudes toward clubs, as he reportedly was one of the chief promoters of a Cosmopolitan Club in Calcutta which included both European and native members. 47 ) bbish sympathies did indeed create a quarrel. yet come to light, You tell me I am a Whig at heart. What can I have done to deserve this? If you mean that I am of that party it amounts to gross defamation: if you mean that my political principles are Whig, then I can only surmise something discreditable, for I never had the opportunity of discovering what Whig principles were. I told you in my last that I was, equally with yourself, for the people; the industrious, hardworking unwashed; and the intelligent, modest, moral middle class. Is that what
178 you understand by Whiggery? . Can you understand a man being in favour of the monarchical form of government hereditary if you will, as saving a good deal of trouble, -but opposed to the poisonous influences exercised by a class interest to the destruction of the principle of the thing professed, making that despotic in their hands which should be limited by the laws, in which laws the people should be heard. . I say, my dear Squab, if you understand there being a party who would for these days of popular instruction uphold the form of government under which we live, give reality to a fiction and substance to a shadow, and can find a generic name for that party, you may enroll me as soon as you please but if you love me call me not a Whig. provoke strongly-held anti-Whig and anti-party views as well as, perhaps, his personal tendency to take over-seriously what in all probability was gentle teasing. In any case, over the next quab are generally impersonal, and it is not clear if Thackeray was continuing his end of the correspondence. takes a less political and more personal tack in its response to the Thackeray letter written on August 7 and published on September 21, At one point in his letter Hume personally reach es out to Thackeray; after favorably noting the positive use by the new Governor General of India (Sir Henry Hardinge who has replaced Lord Ellenborough) of the phrase diffusion of knowledge Hume asks Thackeray: Do we not well remember when these words were
179 words o This suggests a shared recollection, perhaps from their time together in the mid-1830s, of their distaste for Tory rejections of the value of education for lower classes. to a Thackeray letter that is missing. Hume begins in what is likely a response to a jocular account by Thackeray of the end of his extended Mediterranean travels: I received your letter by the last Mail with unfeigned pleasure: I highly approve of your determination to abandon travel and attend your Club, where everything that goes on in the world is picked up without the smallest possible fatigue, and at the cheapest possible rate. . pleasure parties to the Pyramids are talked of so familiarly that they threaten to become another plague in Egypt. . My dear Squab you have been there [the desert] lately; tell me do you think there is any chance of the Bedouin taking heart and doing a bit of bold robbery with a touch of violence, say, carrying off a pretty girl or two on a fleet dromedary, and shooting some chivalrous fellow who might attempt a rescue. Unless something of this sort should occur, the interest of the Overland journey will speedily become a thing of the past. 4.4 Game With the World ,1842), an officer of the Sixth Bengal Light Cavalry, refers to Britain nineteenth century strategic rivalry in Central Asia. 48 But to Thackeray, as he wrote in a Calcutta Star letter published on May 7, 1845,
180 more generally to English international policies ; free trade; the enormous growth in wealth, commerce, communications, and power associated with the simultaneous industrial and commercial revolutions occurring in Britain; and the associated loss of established power in traditional The Squab-Idler letters were written during the 1841-1846 ministry of Robert Peel, a Tory Prime Minister who, repeal ed tariffs, promoted international trade and colonialism, and sought conciliation with Ireland. Foreign Secretary, Lord Aberdeen, advocated peaceful resolution of international conflicts. Nevertheless, in Asia these years saw the disastrous English intervention in Afghanistan, the conclusion of the first Opium War with China, and further English conquests in India. Thackeray and Hume, from their respective vantage points in London and Calcutta, commented on the events of the day through their published letters. Accordingly, the Squab-Idler letters constitute a revealing cosmopolitan-colonial discourse. Writing from the center of the growing British Empire, Thackeray had an overarching sense of the sweep of British power. Calcutta Star description of a summer view of the Thames can also stand as a metaphoric representation of the seat of British power: [I]f you could but behold the River Thames you would see a glorious sight. There is a bright sky and a terrible strong wind blowing. All the ships have their flags up; all the churches have theirs; there is [a] union jack floating from the top of the monument, and from the tower a prodigious royal standard, as big really as two [of] the corner turrets of the building. 49
181 After returning from his several-month trip to the Mediterranean in 1845, Thackeray viewed London with an exuberant sense of English commercial power. His Calcutta Star essay written on March 24, 1845, exclaims: be poor little cabbage gardens and rows of cottages devoted to washerwomen; and in the city grand streets of palaces rising splendid out of the dingy ruins of old courts and allies . . The wonder is who fills the new houses; where does all the money come from? As soon as the Bayswater washer-woman and cabbage garden have disappeared, up springs a fine mansion, with plate-glass windows . There is something frightful almost in this energy of procreation, this prodigious efflorescence of London wealth; it always strikes a man, especially coming from the Continent, out of the sleepy regions of the dozing effete old world. Thackeray, of course, knew very well where all the money was coming from. Writing expressively enter, he enthused: As for the city, the movement there is just as wonderful and startling. In those grand palaces which are daily springing up each garret is battled for by a hundred claimants, and let for a hundred guineas, there are offices on every floor, and every office contains the clerks, and the directors, and officers of undertakings, in which millions of money are wanted, found, spent, and beget more millions. Despite his characteristic skepticism about human foibles and the prospects of personal improvement, Thackeray Calcutta Star essays offer a vision of national and international progress based on capitalism, commercial growth, and free trade:
182 [I]t is all in the cards of that tremendous game which England is playing with the world just now, and which is carrying us, who knows whither? to free trade to abolition of nationalities and war in consequence to universal equality, peace, republicanism; far in the distance as yet, no doubt, but each consequence, I do believe, resulting from its predecessor. We are covering Europe with railways, that we may sell our goods there: Peace, freedom, personal and national equality, for all Europe, are the results of our desire to sell our cotton and iron. A new e conquerors, glory, violence, now it is all over with tyrants of every description from the Pope down to the Squire. 50 and, as always with Thackeray, there is a se lf -mocking overtone in his writing which questions his own enthusiasm. prowess as a writer. Nevertheless, Hume apparently shared vision of the advance of civilization through commercial development, although he expressed it in far more pedestrian and practical terms. Calcutta Star essays are studded with generally optimistic comments on the prospects of specific commercial ventures: exporting Indian wheat to English markets, opening up the interior of India through the Steam Ferry Bridge Company or the Inland Steam Navigation Company, the importance of the new Bank of Bengal, a new crop of indigo, new steamships and improved mail and transport systems. commentaries reflect the self-serving interests and attitudes of his time and class but
183 clash with modern outlooks and sensibilities. For example, on several occasions Hume wr ites about the opium trade with China. He opines been written by some of your virtuous gentlemen at home on this subject [the opium trade s -productionists say, when they hear that the last Government sale realized more than 51 In another Calcutta Star letter Hume writes: As for the Opium smuggling on the coast, with that we cannot interfere; the Chinese must protect their own laws, but it is impossible for them to do so! Their only course then is to admit it on duty, and to this I believe it must come in the end. It will be surely smuggled as it will be grown, and it would be grown even were this Government to attempt to prohibit it, which would be absurd. 52 Similarly, Hume wrote on several occasions about the so called specifically the sponsored emigration of Indian workers to the Indian Ocean island of Mauritius to work as agricultural laborers. In his comments the workers are treated as commodities. In fact, rnment pays a bounty of Hume felt this unfairly rewarded middlemen agents, and considered it a defect of the system that the bonus to individual Indian workers from Rs. 8 to Rs. 15. 53 Calcutta Star letters regularly comment on the policies of the British Government and the attitudes of the English populace with regard to France and Ireland. are representative of educated middle-class English thought of his
184 times, with an added dash of awareness of human self-deception and the ironically selfserving nature of human actions. Thus, although in his Calcutta Star letter of September 21, 1844 Thackeray recites, with real rancor, a list of English grievances against France including the French publication of a pamphlet on how to attack English coastal towns, alleged French misbehaviors in Morocco and Tahiti French newspapers in finding fault with Britain he also ironically points out the inherent hypocrisy and self-serving nature of a likely English response: We may hear some day of Espartero 54 returning to Spain on account of the intolerable tyranny of Narvaez in that country, and of our benevolent interference That is our way of showing our sympathy for oppressed nations and our hatred of French domination, -we were so angry at the murder of Louis XVI that we took the Spanish colonies. The insolence of the French Directory was so unbearable that we seized Malta; and, depend on it, we shall be showing our amiable sympathies soon in some way. These rascals of Frenchmen! what an infernal quarrelsome spirit theirs is! The Peel ministry wrestled with repeal of the Act of Union of 1800 between Ireland and England (that denied Ireland its own Parliament), and supported the Maynooth Grant, a partial funding by the British Government of an Irish institution to educate Roman Catholic priests. Thackeray Calcutta Star comments on these two controversial issues display a curious mixture o f concern and contempt. Ireland; in his characteristically sarcastic manner he praised those pro-Maynooth e
185 always right, were wrong in this case. Our Church will not fit you; we acknowledge it. . . You have a right to worship God your own way . we should not keep your Church 55 worst enemy to be not the English but the Irish themselves. He acknowledged Irish poverty to be a significant human tragedy, but seemed to consider it a national character flaw rather than a result of geopolitical circumstances; one of his essays contains a stinging and insensitive [Irish] districts of Connemara, where you see a pig now every 10 miles, and a beggar every three. 56 Thackeray never treats Irish politicians and the general Irish populace with much respect. himself put an end to any tender feelings one might have had regarding him by his 57 Thackeray later painted humbug, an insincere pawn of the Irish mob: The King of the Irish paid us but a short visit. He was wondrous meek and crestfallen in demeanour; and studiously gentle in public manners. But the very day before he left Ireland he gave his subjects a speech about the massacre at Wexford by the brutal Saxons; and immolated those three hundred women whom he has so often slain in his speeches. . . [B]y the way it is only in Ireland that he professes to be a temperance man. Among the Saxons he cracked his bottle with decent joviality. 58 Regarding this country, they are mad 59 They are not only blinded by
186 Anti60 suggested military action against England with the supposed support of America and France. 61 part, to the fact that it is the Tory leader, Peel, who is leading these reforms (rather than the Whigs). and otherwise mist 62 However, Thackeray reserves his greatest vehemence for his attack on the Anti-Catholic reaction in England to the Maynooth Grant. -popery cry is now roaring with considerable effect through the land, the tabernacles and the old women are 63 By even stronger: The pious of the country are in such a rage just now that in event of an election we might find a No-Popery Parliament sent back to govern us . [and] pervert the destinies of the world. Yes, the Protestantism of the country is up . the legion who amongst them make up the monstrous No-Popery Beast, quite as hideous and disgusting an animal as that Popery monster which they hate so. 64 An extended argument on the folly of basing political opinion on scripture follows this last quotation. Thackeray is at his best in his characterizations of the major political figures of the era. Just as his English Humourists of the Eighteenth Century and The Four Georges past, in these Calcutta Star letters, perhaps more than anywhere else in his writings,
187 the Duke of Wellington, and Prince Albert. As an example, Thackeray arguably raises political commentary to literature as he brilliantly employs metaphor to describe the parliamentary duels between Peel and Disraeli: The Tory aristocracy, that might have raised a dire commotion, and would, had they been left in opposition, are bound over and delivered neck and heels, by their Maroto 65 of a leader. They march out of their forts and strongholds one by one, the enemy occupying each as they retreat, and the free-trade flag flying there, and the poor fellows striking theirs as they disconsolately retreat. . He [Peel] is the best general that ever lived for the enemy. [Only Disraeli] of all the Tory host, [Disraeli] delivers his sarcasms in a bland easy manner, watching his points, and, between each, as the house is roaring with delight and laughter, he wipes his nose meekly with his pocket handkerchief. The great Bull, piqued by this Israelitish Matador, is said to suffer most direfully under the punishment. He has turned savage, and tried to rip up his antagonist once or twice; but Moses Almaviva is over his head, and has planted a fresh dart in his buttock before the big animal has touched him: there sticks the dart quivering with its silken pennon, and all the boxes shout bravo Matador! 66 Hume could never mat prose, but in his own way his letters also embody a long-gone society. Whereas Thackeray wrote primarily about domestic British and European concerns, Hume, in turn, understandably spent the bulk of his letters dealing with Indian and Asian matters. bte noire was Lord Ellenborough, the Tory Governor-General of India, whom
188 Hume criticized in virtually every one of his letters. The British East India Company was still in charge of British India, and leadership that company was pursuing an expansion of its influence and geographical domain. In violation of established treaties, the Western Indian province of Sindh was conquered by the British under Sir Charles Napier in February of 1843. The Punjab was brought under full British control in 1846. Hume offer an interesting colonial perspective on the se expansions of British India as he repeatedly comment ed on the first conquest and presciently anticipated the second. Despite his role as a colonist, he argued for moral distinctions regarding the expansion of British power. Regarding Sindh, in June of 1843 Hume wrote: palliation of this wholesale robbery . . The difficulty the Government will have to grapple with, independent of right or wrong, will be the violation of the nonaggression policy to which the triumphal songster [Ellenborough, who had dged himself. My own opinion is that on this occasion he did not change his mind, that he always intended to lay violent hands on Scinde, and that his flourish about natural limits was the tinkling charm of taking phrase . 67 In a July 1843 follow-up Calcutta Star essay Hume referred to the conquest of the Sindh 68 In cuts in this affair, having seized a country beyond what she had declared the natural
189 boundary of her empire in India and for that being without the shadow of a pretence of 69 Hume had a different attitude regarding the Punjab. He wrote in June 1843 that: ra ja of the Punjab] is said to be in a precarious state, and on his death the succession will fall on a child of about ten years of age, during whose minority it is next to impossible internal peace should be preserved without some external power. Shere Sing died in September of 1843, and in February of to the little boy in the Punjaub which he is doing 70 By October of 1844 Hume had idle to speculate, beyond saying that ere very long we shall be involved in its affairs, and that the probability is, our interference will end in apportioning the country into protected 71 Apparently, Hume found explicit treaty violations offensive, but considered a need for (or a pretext of) restoring or imposing order a sufficient cause for conquest and annexation. The British Afghan disasters of 1842 must still have been fresh in the memory of Anglo-Ind continued debate regarding who was to blame for the destruction of the retreating British army. Hume praised those he saw as heroes particularly Sir William Nott and Major Eldred Pottinger and assigned villains. Almost every Hume letter reports on unrest and fighting in one or more parts of India, and there are some reports of discontent in the army that anticipates the Great
190 Mutiny of 1847. In April of 1844 Hume wrestled with the question of what concessions should be made to disaffected troops who were refusing orders to go to Sindh. He concluded somewhat torturously that justifiable grievances should be remedied, but that mutiny should not be rewarded. 72 In May of 1844 Hume argued that mutiny was invited by the perfect immunity which has attended the infamous conduct of even the worst of He argued that leniency should be shown when the punishment should have been inflicted on those whose violent conduct betokened a spirit of Prophetically, Hume feared that a second mutiny might be more dreadful holding 73 In July of 1844 Hume reported because it was not what they had expected 74 ncern and the inherent and longrunning instability associated with depending on an army of sepoys. The Squab Idler correspondence was not entirely political and commercial and Thackeray wrote about subjects as varied as local murderers, new club houses, Queen return to London, Prince Albert reviewing the Life Guards, Punch, and the world people leave London in July. Hume, in his turn, wrote about the advancement of native Indians, colonial celebrations of the birthdays of the Royal family, balls and dances, the local Calcutta theater, the serialization of Martin Chuzzlewit in a local newspaper, military dinners, the Hindu Durga Puja festival, and the
191 horse races. The letters that Hume addressed to other European correspondents, though lac king the interaction with Thackeray, supply their own insights into Calcutta life. For e xample, an Idler letter dated July 5, 1842 and addressed to Alfred describes the financial be nefits available to Englishmen coming out to Calcutta: If he has got 100 worth of property in the world to convert it to cash it will br ing him out in a Liverpool ship and equip him besides. When he is here he has onl y to be introduced to any one of five or six gentlemen I will point out to him, and if he plays his cards well he will in a few months fall into some berth or another of say per month. joy at the thought of a year instead of 0. . he can have a house, four or five servants, a c ouple of horses and a buggy. 75 Both the Squab and the Idler letters provide a sense of social immersion and c reate an indelible portrait of their respective cosmopolitan and colonial worlds. Notes 1 Gordon N. Ray, Thackeray: The Uses of Adversity, 1811-1846 (New York: McG raw Hill, 1955), 330. 2 Gordon Ray, ed., T he Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1946), 2:166. 3 Henry Summerfield, Chair: William Makepeace Thackeray, Nineteenth-Century Fiction 18, no.3 (1963): 205-233. 4 Richard Pearson, W .M. Thackeray and the Mediated Text: Writing fo r Periodicals in the Mid-Nineteenth Century (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), 126, 139, 156, 158, 164. Pearson 5 D. J. Taylor, T hackeray: The Life of a Literary Man (New York: Carroll & Gr af, 1999 ), 198; Catherine Peters, (New York: Oxford University P ress, 1987), 99; Peter Shillingsburg, P egasus in Harness: Victorian Publishing and W.
192 M. Thackeray (Charlottesville, University Press of Virginia, 1992), 38. Shillingsburg state s C alcutta Star without reference to prior tracking and reprinting of six of those article s. 6 [James Hume], Letters to Friends at Home from June, 1842 to May, 1843 ( Calcutta: Star Press, 1843) ; [James Hume], Letters to Friends at Home from June, 1843 to May 1844 (Calcutta: Star Press, 1844); [James Hume], Letters to Friends at Home from J une, 1844 to May, 1845 (Calcutta: Star Press, 1845). The second and third of these volum es are available electronically on Google Books 7 http://boards.ancestry.com.au/surnames.hume/85.115.168/mb.ashx ; Hume of Montrose 1736http:/genforum.genealogy.com/hume/messages/629.htmp; I ndia http://boards.ancestry.com.au/surnames.hume/126.96.36.199/mb.ashx 8 Calcutta Monthly Journal and General Register of Occurrences for the Year 1839 (Calcutta: Samuel Smith & Co., 1840 ), 308. 9 Joseph Foster, Men-at-the-bar: a Biographical Hand-List of the Various M embers of the Inns at Court 2nd ed (London: Hazel, Watson, and Viney, 1885), 231. 10 Ray, Letters 1:270. 11 Thackeray and Hume were in every sense contemporaries; they were born withi n three years of each other (in 1811 and 1808, respectively), both married in 1836, a nd they died a year apart in 1863 and 1862. 12 Calcutta Monthly Journal and for the Year 1839, 68-69, 308; Asiat ic Journal and Monthly Miscellany 31 (June 1840): 11; The Quarterly Review of Historical Studies 7 (1968): 134-135. 13 Mrinal Kanti Chanda, H istory of the English Press in Bengal 1780 to 1857 (Calcutta: D P Bagchi & Co, 1987), 206, 220. 14 Newspaper holdings of the Na tional The Quarterly Review of Historical Studies 7 (19 68): 134135. 15 Hume, Letters 1:4 ( Calcutta Star letter published June 1842). 16 Hume, Letters 2:272 ( Calcutta Star letter published April 1844). 17 Ray, Letters 2:73 18 Ram Gopal Sanyal, Reminiscences and Anecdotes of Great Men of India, Both Official and Non-Official for the Last One Hundred Years (Calcutta: Herald Printing W orks, 1894), 154. 19 W. G. C. Frith, The Royal Calcutta Turf Club: Some Notes on its Foundation, Hist ory, and Development (Calcutta: The Royal Calcutta Turf Club, 1976), 24, 25, 36.
193 20 Colonial Magazine and Foreign M iscellany 8 (June 1846) : 382. 21 T he Madras Journal of Literature and Science 16 (1850): 253, 453. 22 Reginald George Burton, T he Book of the Tiger (London: Hutchinson & Co., 1933), 249. 23 Sidney Laman Blanchard, Y esterday and Today in India (London: William H Allen and Co, 1867), 272-273. 24 See John Murdoch, ed., The Indian Y ear Book for 1862 (Madras: Graves, C ookson and Co., 1863), 248; Reporter 7 (London: Yates and Alexander, 1863), 3. 25 Joachim Hayward Stocquelor, The Memoirs of a Journalist (Bombay, 1873), 116. 26 James Hume, A Se lection of the Writings, Prose and Poetical, of the Late Henry W. Torrens, with a Biographical Memoir (London: R. C. Lepage & Co., 1854). 27 Colonel W. F. B. Laurie, T he Dark Blue John C. Freund, ed ., III (March-August 1872 ): 628-649, 642. 28 See endnote 2 above. 29 5 (London, Wm. H. Allen and Co., 1847), 72. 30 The Asiatic Journal and Monthly Miscellany 3 (London: Wm. H. Allen & Co, 1844) 107, 663; 4 (Wm. H. Allen & Co., 1845), 111, 165. 31 Leitch Ritchie, T he British World in the East (London: Wm. H. Allen & Co., 1846) 478-9. 32 Summerfield, L etters 211 ( Calcutta Star letter published 21 September 1844). 33 See endnote 5. 34 Ray, Letters 2:97. 35 Hume, Letters 2:23. 36 See endnote 27. 37 Asiatic Journal 107. 38 Ray, Letters, 2:142, 166, 840. 39 C alcutta Star letter written on August 7, 1844, contains the See Summerfield, Letters 207. 40 Ray, Letters, 2:166. 41 Ray, Letters, 2:175.
194 42 Ray, Letters, 2:147, 148; Summerfield, Letters 207-212; Hume, L etters 3:102. 43 Ray, Letters 2:203. 44 Times (London), March 30, 1843. 45 Ray, Letters 2:129. 46 Ray, Letters 1:458. 47 Ranabir Ray Choudhury, C alcutta A Hundred Year Ago (Bombay: The S tatesman Commercial Press, 1987), 46. 48 Jennifer Siegel, Endga me: Britain, Russia, and the Final Struggle for Central Asia (London: I. B. Taurus and Co., 2002), xv. 49 Summerfield, Letters 207-8 ( Calcutta Star letter published 21 September 1844) 50 Summerfield, Letters 226 ( Calcutta Star letter published June 1845). 51 Hume, Letters 2:21-22 ( Calcutta Star letter published June 1843). 52 Hume, Letters 2:34-35 ( Calcutta Star letter published July of 1843). 53 Hume, Letters 2:14-17 ( Calcutta Star letter published June 1843). 54 General Baldomero Espartero was a regent who temporarily governed Spain in t he early 1840s. Espartero was supported by England but opposed by most European powe rs. Summerfield, Letters 206. 55 Summerfie ld Letters 224 ( Calcutta Star letter published 9 June 1845. 56 Summerfield, Letters 215 ( Calcutta Star letter published 7 May 1845). 57 Summerfield, Letters 208 ( Calcutta Star letter published 21 September 1844). 58 Summerfield, Letters 231 ( Calcutta Star letter published 21 August 1845 ). 59 Summerfield, Letters 231 ( Calcutta Star letter published 21 August 1845). 60 Summerfield, Letters 228 ( Calcutta Star letter published 21 June 1845). 61 Summerfield, Letters 227 ( Calcutta Star letter published 21 June 1845 ). 62 Summerfield, Letters 228 ( Calcutta Star letter published 21 June 1845). 63 Summerfield, Letters 219 ( Calcutta Star letter published 22 May 1845). 64 Summerfield, Letters 222 ( Calcutta Star letter published 9 June 1845). 65 Rafael Maroto was a Spanish general who was notorious for switching sides during the civil war in Spain in the 1830s. See Francis Duncan, T he English in Spain; or, The Story of the War of Succession Between 1834 and 1840 (London: John Murray, 1877), 244. 66 Summerfield, Letters 217 ( Calcutta Star letter published 24 March 1845).
195 67 Hume, Letters 2:9 ( Calcutta Star letter published June 1843). 68 Hume, Letters 2:28 ( Calcutta Star letter published July 1843). 69 Hume, Letters 2:249-250 ( Calcutta Star letter published May 1844). 70 Hume, Letters 2:170-171 ( C alcutta Star letter published February 1844). 71 Hume, Letters 3:108-109 ( Calcutta Star letter published October 1844). 72 Hume, Letters 2:222-224 ( Calcutta Star letter published April 1844). 73 Hume, Letters 2:257-259 ( Calcutta Star letter published May 1844). 74 Hume, Letters 3:40 ( Calcutta Star letter published July 1844). 75 Hume, Letters 1:46-7 ( Calcutta Star letter published July 1842).
196 Chapter 5 The Chronicler of the Paris and London Art Exhibitions During the first decade of the Victorian era Thackeray popularized serious painting and shaped middle-class artistic taste through review essays on contemporary art exhibitions in periodicals such as and in newspapers such as the Times and the Morning Chronicle In her seminal study of the commercial and cultural aspects of Victorian art collecting, Art and the Victorian Middle Class: Money and the Making of Cultural Identity Dianne Macleod noted understood independently of its relationship to money. 1 Indeed, in this chapter I demonstrate that what applies to the root must necessarily apply to the branch: the nature mic forces, and the contents of those reviews had class-specific cultural impacts and financial consequences. magazine-based art reviews, written in the guise and comedic persona of a failed artist, Michael Angelo Titmarsh, are easily traceable and identifiable. Indeed, these Thackeray art essays have remained at the intersection of literature and art history as they are regularly refe re nced and discussed in current-day studies of early Victorian art. Jeremy Mass, for example, begins his scholarly survey Victorian Painters James than from Ruskin. 2 Mass further describes Thackeray as an
197 and proceeds to report on historical painting, public taste, and several artists of the period. The index of Sir Charles Eastlake and the Victorian Art World contains 22 page criticism 3 -a total that is second only to the number of references allocated to Ruskin. -volume study of Water-colour Painting in Britain likewise contains numerous approving refe regarding late Romantic and early Victorian water colorists. 4 In his Victorian Painting Christopher Wood, a leading authority on Victorian painting, repeatedly refers to the artistic judgments and comments of Thackeray, whom Wood calls that supreme 5 In his Painting the Past: The Victorian Painter and British History 6 John Olmsted chose to highlight comments by Thackeray his collection, Victorian Painting Essays and Reviews: Volume One, 1832-1848. In addition to these general works, scholars such as Helene Roberts, Judith Fisher, in greater depth. Roberts concluded that century Thackeray can be compared only with Hazlitt, Haydon, and Ruskin in combining a knowledge of the technical aspects of art, a grounding in the aesthetic theories of his day, and an unusual command of the English language. Alone among art critics he displayed a playful wit and an ebullient sense of fun. 7 Fisher asserted knowledge of the art world combined with his training and versatility with the pen to make Thackeray the most readable and knowledgeable (despite some of his suspect
198 judgments) of the art critics writing for popular journals 8 And Prettejohn noted that called 9 While the above comments demonstrate the continuing interest in and importance of prior investigators have largely seized upon and discussed epigrammatic statements in individual essays. Significantly, no one has yet considered the essays as a comprehensive body of work and examined the journalistic and financial pressures which influenced their production and informed their content. Moreover, Thackeray also wrote many art reviews which were published anonymously in newspapers. These reviews are as much his legacy and cont ri bution as his Titmarsh articles and in some respects may reflect more sincerely held opinions. Yet many of these newspaper reviews have never been properly attributed, nor have the ir critical contents or cultural significance been analyzed. And lastly, the specific economic and social roles in shaping attitudes and influencing Victorian middle-class identity are largely unexplored. Accordingly, in this chapter I will (1) explicate the origin and nature of essays on art a s the products of a working journalist ; (2) attribute an additional newspaper review (in addition to the attributions made in chapter 3) ; (3) characterize the artistic critical values espoused in these newspaper articles in light of prior assessments of ; and (4) show how these reviews reflect ed their societal drivers and contributed to the early Victorian conversation on art. Table 5 six attributions established in this dissertation.
199 Table 5 .1 xhibitions Anonymous Essays / Reviews Magazine June 1838. at T im es (London) April 5, 1838. June 1839. Morning Chronicle (London) April 1, 1842. Magazine, June 1840 Pictorial Times April 1, 1843. July 1840. Morning Chronicle (London) April 29, 1844. A propos of a Walk in July 1841. Morning Chronicle (London) May 8 and 10, 1844. Magazine July 1842. Mo rning Chronicle (London) March 30, 1846. Pictorial Times May 6, 1843. Exhibitions of the Societies of Water Morning Chronicle (London) April 27, 1846. Pictorial Times M ay 13 and 27, 1843. Morning Chronicle (London) May 5, 7, and 11 1846. June 1844. in Water Colours, Pal l Morning Chronicle (London) April 17, 1848. June 1845 = new attribution made in this dissertation 5.1 The Journalist Art Critic As an erstwhile serious student of painting, a competent illustrator, and an inveterate sketcher, Thackeray understood artists and their craft and certainly possessed a well defined sense of aesthetics. Nevertheless, unlike, for example, Ruskin, Thackeray was a journalist reporting on artistic exhibitions, not an academician or a theoretician. Thackera y never wrote articles on art theory or books expounding his artistic principles.
200 Instead, his art criticism was published either in newspapers or in other non-specialist periodicals. Before the advent of his major novels Thackeray depended on journalism for his living; consequently, he viewed the major Paris and London art exhibitions as opportunities to 10 His selection of topic and venue, his authorial approach and method of argumentation, his attitudes and admonitions, and the various constraints imposed on his writings are all those of a popular press journalist. Scholars such as Roberts, Fisher, and Prettejohn, have tended to focus on specific comments and artistic judgments drawn from individual (and often highly quotable ) As a result, the journalistic drivers and patterns which shaped the overall body of work of the art critic journalist have received less attention, and anonymous newspaper art criticism has been comparatively neglected. As shown in table 5.2 (on page 205), much of Thackeray art criticism consisted of reviews of the major annual contemporary art exhibitions the March Salon exhibition at the Louvre in Paris, the late March Society of British Artists Exhibition in London, the April London Exhibitions of the Old Water Colour Society and the New Water Colour Society, and the May London Exhibition of the Royal Academy. 11 I contend that the financially driven Thackeray reviewed these exhibitions as a matter of course whenever the constraints of time and geography permitted him to do so. His art writings focused on exhibition reviews because exhibitions were newsworthy events and, accordingly, he could place articles in newspapers or magazines reporting the cultural events of the day. He rarely, if ever, missed an opportunity to write about an exhibition. Indeed, as detailed later in this paper, by investigating exhibition
201 ncovered six additional articles which circumstantial evidence strongly suggests were written by Thackeray. 5.1.1 A Narrative Chronology with the failure in mid 1837 of The Constitutional the newspaper for which he was the Paris correspondent, and his resulting free-lance writing of literary reviews for both The Times and Thackeray occurred in March of 1838, when he was in Paris for a month, and as an art devotee visit ed the Salon. Because he had informed James Fraser early in March that he would 12 it is not surprising that he chose to publish his 1838 Salon review in The Times (instead of Magazine) with the anonymous designation, This first review complies with the standards one would associate with the Times : although sometimes ironically humorous, the article is not flamboyant, and it addresses perceived differences between contemporary English and French painting, with the English patriotically receiving the laurels painters as good as their 12 best; and that our second-class artists are far superior. When Thackeray returned to London later that spring his relations with James Fraser had healed and he consequently reviewed the Royal Academy exhibition for was, of course, an outrageous, anything-goes periodical, as compared to the conservative Times Presumably stimulated by his prior success using Charles James Yellowplush, an orthographically challenged footman, as a voice for his literary reviews, Thackeray created Michael Angelo Titmarsh, a flamboyant and boastful
202 Magazine art reviews. In the persona of Titmarsh Thackeray interposed various exaggerated fictional exploits and complaints his paintings, fights with fictional editors, and fake bits of pretentious learned essays with serious commentary on contemporary artists and their works. Occasional over-thetop rhetorical flourishes added extra spice these articles were designed to be entertaining and provocative. Thackeray spent the spring art seasons of 1839 and 1840 in London; consequently, each year he wrote combined reviews of the four London art exhibitions for but was unable to review the Parisian Salon. He did, however, visit Paris late in 1839 and reported in Fraser s Magazine on exhibitions at the Louvre, the This discursive essay, which was subs Paris Sketch Book would never have met the focus and page limitation constraint s imposed by a daily newspaper. Seeking treatment abroad for his mentally ill wife, Thackeray spent the first half of 1841 in Paris, enabling him to continue his series of Magazine Titmarsh art reviews with a review of the Paris Salon, but he could not review the London art exhibitions that year. In 1842 Thackeray shifted his journalistic focus away from Fraser s Magazine (in 1840 and 1841 he published 11 and 10 articles, respectively, in Fraser s but in 1842 he published only 4 articles in that periodical). It is clear that Thackeray was unhappy with his rate of pay from and he accordingly spent much of the early part of the year
203 writing for the Foreign Quarterly Review or for Punch, both of which paid him at a higher rate than did Additionally, his friend Harrison Ainsworth had started a literary magazine and solicited submissions from Thackeray, and Thackeray sought to replace his old connection with the Times (which ended at the end of 1840) with a connection with the Morning Chronicle. In any event, when Thackeray was in Paris in March of 1842, he once again review ed the Salon, and this time, returning to the rhetorical style and themes he used in 1838 for the Times he placed an anonymous review in the Morning Chronicle Moreover, later that spring after Thackeray returned to London, he wrote a Titmarsh review of the London art exhibitions for Magazine Ainsworth, however, allotted Thackeray only 4 pages for this review in 1840 had given him 27 pages to cover the same exhibitions! Thus the style of the writing, and the extensiveness of the comments, changed from that of previous years because of journalistic limitations. Magazine for example, stressed the more prestigious Royal Academy exhibition and only briefly mentioned the Society of British Artists and Water Colour Exhibitions because of lack of space. In March of 1843 Thackeray agreed to write about fine arts for a new weekly newspaper, The Pictorial Times and in a series of four articles reviewed the Spring London exhibitions for that periodical. As newspapers placed more emphasis on on or newspaper art reviews for the Times and the Morning Chronicle. Each begins with a gently humorous and ironic paragraph of introduction and avoids the Titmar sh ian
204 exploits and hyperbolic rhetoric which were central to his magazine art reviews. the last three reviews in the Pictorial Times even though these articles do not internally reflect the character of or invoke that persona. By March of 1844 Thackeray had revitalized his connection with Magazine and had also established a regular contributory relationship with The Morning Chronicle. Accordingly, he double anonymously review the water color exhibitions and the Royal Academy for that daily newspaper and simultaneously publish a combined review in the voice of Titmarsh for In the spring he was not only writing for Punch and the Morning Chronicle but also acting as a sub-editor at The Examiner may have prevented him from reviewing th e March and April London art exhibitions or perhaps he did write reviews which to date have not been attributed to him but he did review the Royal Academy exhibition for Fraser s Magazine In 1846 he reviewed all the London art exhibitions in his congenial and humorous anonymous voice for The Morning Chronicle was diminishing he could make so much more money writing for other periodicals and he no longer review ed art exhibitions fo r The serialization of Vanity Fair began in 1847, and under the pressure of producing 32-page monthly numbers and with the financial relief provided by the 60 pounds per month coming from that serialization there is no evidence that Thackeray wrote art reviews that year. In the spring of 1848, however, once again seeking additional money, he reviewed at least the New Water Color Society Exhibition for The Morning
205 Chronicle. But the emerging novelist days as a financially driven reviewer of art exhibitions were coming to an end. By January of 1851 Thackeray, again in France and looking at an exhibition of pictures at the Palais Royal, wrote: "I went to see it [the exhibition]: wondering whether I could turn an honest penny by criticising the same. But I find I've nothing to say about pictures: a pretty landscape or two pleased me: no statues did: some great big historical pictures bored me -This is a poor account of a Paris Exhibition isn't it?" 13 Th pattern of exhibition coverage is shown in table 5.2. Table 5. 2 rt reviews by year and e xhibition Exhibition Year Periodical (publication date) Salon SBA OWCS NWCS RA 1838 Times (4/5); (6/1) 1839 (6/1) 1840 F (6/1, 7/1) 1841 (7/1) 1842 Morning Chronicle (4/1 ); (6/1) 1843 Pictorial Times ( 4/1 5/6, 5/13, 5/27) 1844 Morning Chronicle (4/29, 5/8 5/10 ); (6/1) 1845 (6/1) 1846 Morning Chronicle ( 3/30 4/27, 5/5, 5/7) 1847 1848 Morning Chronicle (4/17) Bold Face / Red new attribution; prior attribution; minor comments Salon = Paris Salon; SBA = Society of British Artists; OWCS = Old Water Colour Society; NWCS= New Water Colour Society; RA = Royal Academy
206 5.1.2 A New Attribution In chapter 3 of this dissertation I newly attributed five Morning Chronicle art reviews to Thackeray; in this section I suggest that a previously unattributed art review in The Pictorial Times is also by Thackeray. The Pictorial Times April 1, 1843. In his 1893 reminisces Henry Vizetelly recalled his 1843 involvement with the startup of The Pictorial Times a weekly paper intended to compete with The Illustrated London News One of the first people Vizetelly brought on staff 14 Vizetelly writes comprised some letters on Art Unions, signed Michael Angelo Titmarsh, notices of the Academy and Water-colour exhibitions; and reviews of newly collected Essays 15 The Macaulay and Disraeli literary reviews were published anonymously; however, there was some controversy regarding each review which evidently remained in And like the Art Union letters, the notices of the Academy and Water-colour exhibitions were signed Titmarsh, thereby verifying or perhaps stimulating An examination of a run of the Pictorial Times however, reveals an additional contemporaneous, but unsigned, art exhibition review, the April 1, 1843 review of the exhibition of the Society of British Artists (SBA). Thackeray routinely reviewed all four spring contemporary art exhibitions in London, and it is atypical that, having already been brought on as the art critic for the Pictorial Times at an early date (he had a submission in the first issue, on 18 March 1843), he would have skipped this first exhibition and reviewed the other three. Further, none of the other identified staff
207 members of the Pictorial Times are known to have ever been art exhibition reviewers or to have had the appropriate background or skills, and that periodical did not publish any art reviews after Thackeray left its staff. Th ese fact s suggest that Thackeray may, indeed, have written this unattributed review. The Society of British Artists review conformed to the then standard newspaper practice of anonymous reviews; it may only be after this first review was published that it occurred to the editors that the Titmarsh name had sufficient recognition value to attach it to subsequent reviews. Alternatively, since the SBA review was published in the same issue as an art union letter signed by Titmarsh, it may have been regarded as inappropriate to have two Titmarsh articles in the same issue. A detailed examination of the SBA review article supports these speculations. I f this article was not written by Thackeray, it was written by someone deliberately aping and promulgating his artistic values, and doing both quite successfully. The review starts with extended jokes a standard Thackeray ploy in this case suggesting that Italian boys should be massacred to prevent their overuse as models in painting, and that Venice should likewise be destroyed or that artists visiting Venice the creation of yet another Venetian scene. reviews, the first artist discussed is Frederick Hurlstone, and his work is praised while the dark coloring of his paintings is simultaneously deplored. The works of Charles Baxter, Henry mentioned favorably as they are in other Thackeray reviews of the SBA. extreme color in the same fashion as does the reviewer in an 1846 Morning Chronicle article which I have previously attributed to Thackeray. The SBA review includes a
208 teasing reference to a then famous murderer, [William] Burke the same villain Thackeray facetiously named Vanity Fair as wel l A consistent call And critical comment is continually interwoven with humor, in a language which I regard as typical of Thackeray, particularly in the narrative (quoted later in this chapter) suggested to the reviewer by a series of paintings by Prentis. In this last narrative, for example, the reviewer refers to a baked suckling pig in a painting as purring from under a dish cover in an inviting way; this expressive use of metaphor is atypical of most reviews and reviewers of the time but is fully consistent in concept and in language with what one would expect from Thackeray. 16 Although I cannot claim that this attribution is definitive, I do propose that this article was likely written by Thackeray. 5.3 E. Church opined that obly fearless as Hazlitt, and as zealous as Ruskin to promote a taste for everything Church argued that est kind, and by traces of his sagacious, common-sense insight. 17 In 1885 Ephraim Young asserted that essays genius and the unrepressed feelings of his heart. Without claiming that he matched Young does credit Thackeray as
209 intent. 18 More recently, Helene Roberts and Judith Fisher have each sought to assess In general their specific judgments as to the schools and types of art and artists Thackeray favored or disfavored are further supported by the newly attributed articles ; accordingly, Robert s assessments will not be repeated here. In Roberts moves beyond specific judgments to characterize major concerns: (1) the technical excellence of the painting, (2 ) the correspondence of the painting to the real world, and (3) its ability to evoke sentimental responses. She further opines approvingly that, unlike many of his critical colleagues, Thackeray did not little sto 19 In the following I interrogate each of these conclusions with particular consideration less examined nonTitmarsh reviews. According to Roberts, Victorian mid-century art critics based technical excellence finish, handling, execution, and similar technical designations 20 Roberts argues that Thackeray frequently commented on the technical competence of painters and their painting, but did not consider technical execution success. Elizabeth Prettejohn perhaps shifted the balance point of technical excellence as an evaluative consideration even further, 21 centering her analysis on a Thackeray quotation These pictures [by Wilkie and by Eastlake] come straight to the heart, and
210 then all criticism and calculation vanishes at once, for the artist has attained his great end, which is, to strike far deeper than the sight; and we have no business to quarrel about defects in form and colour, which are but little part 22 attributions in particular, I find that Roberts for technical excellence are largely supported, but that the quotation reported by Prettejohn is hyperbolic. Indeed, there are many places in which Thackeray sharply In his cularly criticizes one artist 23 In comparison, in his 1842 review of the Salon Thackeray argues that Charles Moench 24 In his many reviews of Society of British Artists exhibitions Even when Thackeray is attracted by the dramat The Spunge he nevertheless underscores the painting 25 Even Charles Leslie, a Thackeray favorite, is criticized in an predominance of black 26 In the May 10, 1844 review of the Royal Academy, the execution of paintings that Thackeray greatly admires is
211 King Joash In that same article works that Thackeray considers to be inexpertly execu Claverhouse is theatrical in composition and absurdly incorrect in co Mr. Hallain very fine, [but] the drawing and details are not sufficiently complete. 27 In 1848 Thackeray praises Wehnert for a painting of Murillo and his Pupils commenting that the power and depth of tone in this picture are extraordinary . all the accessories are painted with excellent care and precision, and with a richness of color quite remarkable . .the back figures are excellent in dramatic propriety, and the drawing is quite a model for careful and dexterous painting. The contrasts between the gray morning-light and the candle-light are most cleverly managed, and a hundred small details of the picture painted with the greatest skill and truth. 28 In some pictures he might tolerate limitations of execution if other merits were present, but quality of execution was an ever-present significant critical concern. third contention, that Thackeray valued art for its ability to evoke sentimental responses, appears to be so well supported that it is essentially pointless to cite examples they are everywhere in every Thackeray essay on art. With regard to correspondence to nature, Roberts reports frequently repeated injunction to artists to copy nature, suggests s an 1839 Thackeray criticism of Turner as evidence
212 29 s writings, Roberts ich 30 Indeed, Thackeray did often urge artists to draw inspiration from nature. In May of 1843, for example, he match 31 In April of 1844 he similarly praised water color painters: art, and content themselves with depicting nature as they find her, and trusting to the poetry and charms of the scenes which they copy, rather that to their own power of 32 At the same time, there are numerous counter examples that subvert contention regarding Thackeray presumed mandate that art reflect the real world. For example, in a May 8, 1844 Morning Chronicle review Thackeray praises a painting by William Etty tudied obscurity (which leads the eye to suggest forms, and fill them in where wanting). Studied obscurity is not photographic verisimilitude; instead, Thackeray appears to assert a more sophisticated artistic aesthetic which privileges art that allows a viewer to construct meaning. Indeed, moving further away from a limited concept of natural reality, Thac Hesperus and his Daughters three sing about the golden tree for its mystical notion, its indistinct colors, the enchanted plac 33 In the same article Thackeray praises a painting by Daniel Maclise for transcending reality, creating a statuesque composition a parade or tableaux rather than all action. Thackeray views as a positive that the figures in the
213 ok much more alive than the mysterious stone serpents which form the picture its fitting supernatural look. It is a masque, not a play, and the painter has well felt an Forest Scene : A lonely knight winds his way through a wood of great, unheard-of trees, from the Nobody, not the most extensive traveler, can say he has ever seen trees like these. Their trunks are more gnarled and twisted than olives, their leaves are larger than the leaf of a cabbage, they look so old that mammoths must have rested under them, and their branches must have tossed in the storms of ten thousand equinoxes; in a word, they are entirely impossible trees. But so are the giants of Ariosto, and so is Caliban impossible; we give them, however, a poetic credence. A great artist privilege as a poet, and against a number of critics, such as there infallibly will be, and who will object to this tremendous supernatural timber. No person can see such trees as these, certainly, traveler to be a knight riding through a fairy wood, and you are instantly reconciled to the picture. Nor is the thought alone strange and beautiful: the picture is a marvel of manual skill. brush performs wonders of strength, harmony, and rapidity. His work looks as if it
214 were dashed in whilst the artist labored under a sort of poetic fury. The effect of the whole is somber and melancholy. 34 Surely these views do not reflect the limited aesthetic range suggested by the Indeed, I argue that an Like many Victorians, Thackeray valued sincerity of feeling. As Judith Fisher has argued, Thackeray believed 35 In the age-old debate regarding art and nature, I argue that but instead insisted that artistic reality had to be represented with integrity. Similarly, I believe that Roberts s to being a fair representation of the Thackeray of 1839, is insufficiently balanced as a final judgment. (I likewise to be is excessive. 36 ) Rain, Speed, Steam which Christopher Wood argued 37 Yet Thackeray in his May 8, 1844 Morning Chronicle review exuberantly praised this painting extolled Turner for using these 38 Or The Whale Ship. Thackeray
215 Figure 5.1 Joseph Mallord William Turner The Whale Ship 1845. Image The Metropolitan Museum of Art Thackeray adds, Look at the latter [ The Whale Ship ] for a little time, and it begins to affect you too, -to mesmerize you. It is revealed to you; and, as it is said in the East, the magicians make children see the sultans, carpet-bearers, tents, &c., in a spot of ink in their hands; so the magician, Joseph Mallard, makes you see what he likes on a board, that to the first view is merely dabbed over with occasionally streaks of yellow, and flicked here and there with vermillion. The vermillion blotches become little boats full of harpooners and gondolas, with a deal of music going on on board. That is not a smear of purple you see yonder, but a beautiful whale, whose tail has just slapped a half-dozen whale-boats into perdition; and as for
216 what you fancied to be a few zig-zag lines splattered on the canvass at haphazard, look! they turn out to be a ship with all her sails; the captain and his crew -casks getting ready under the superintendence of that man with the red whiskers and the cast in his eye; who is, of course, the chief mate. In a word, I say that Turner is a great and awful mystery to me. 39 It is difficult to know when Thackeray is speaking tonguein -cheek, and the above comments can obviously be read several ways. hat Turner is a mystery to him, his review has, in fact, captured both the essence and its disorienting yet powerful impact on Victorian viewers rather well, and that the operative summary the last being (perhaps!) intended in the positive sense of full of awe. Overall, I suggest that these comments to Lastly, Roberts specifically praised Thackeray for not associating narrative values with art, for not inventing little narratives as suggested by his interpretations of pictures. This assertion is somewhat surprising, as the 1830s and 1840s were the high water mark of English narrative painting. As defined by Raymond Lister in his book, Victorian Narrative Painting a narrative painting is a picture of a story, idea, or anecdote, represented by people in more or less contemporary dress, against a more or less contemporary setting. Usually it had a moral import, extremely pathetic. And almost without exception it was painted with a degree of
217 representational realism as impressive as that of a set-piece from Madame is anecdote; it is, in fact, visual literature, and many of its themes were derived from literary sources. 40 In fact, I find numerous exceptions to s observation Titmarsh essays as well as in his anonymous newspaper reviews. This issue is worth some emphasis; as described in the next section of this chapter, the growth of narrative painting was a key element in the linkage between Victorian literature and Victorian art, and the consequent expansion of British art to the middle class. Thackeray was a central participant in the popularization of narrative art and his role in that regard should not be obscured. Consider, for example, Pictorial Times commentary on A Sponge Defined by Prentis: Then there is a drama in four acts by Mr. Prentis, which, though it will strike no one for its merit as a painting, will amuse every one who looks at it, and calls forth a great deal of delighted attention. Act I. Spunge is seen with an umbrella watching a baked suckl purrs at him from under the tin dish-cover in the most inviting way. Act II. Spunge follows the pig into the house, and light on his friends just as Betsy has removed the tin dish-cover, and Mr. Jones is going to carve. Will Mr. Spunge sit down and dine? Act III. Of course he will; and you see him drinking wine with Mrs. Jones (the rascal has filled his glass up to the very brim), and he has just sent Betsy with his plate for some more pig. Act IV. It is night; or morning rather. The
218 two candles and the whiskey bottle, which may be seen on the side-board in Act III., are now on the dinner-table. The candles are burned out, the whiskey is gone, Mr. Spunge is drunk, and still talking, old Jones quite wearied and frightened, Mrs. Jones in the arm-chair, dead asleep. Betsy is asleep too in the kitchen, but of the history, which is not told with a Hogarthian skill of pencil, but with a rugged Hogarthian humour. 41 As a second example, consider the following extract from Pictorial Times Last Appeal : It is evidently the finish of the history of the two young people who are to be seen in the Water-Colour Exhibition. There the girl is smiling and pleased, and there is some hope still for the pale, earnest young man who loves her with all his might. But between the two pictures, between Pall Mall and Trafalgar Column, sad changes have occurred. The young woman has met a big life-guardsman, probably, who has quite changed her views of things; and you see that the last appeal is made without any hope for the appellant. The girl hides away her pretty face, and we see that all is over. She likes the poor fellow well enough, but it is only as a brother; her heart is with the life-guardsman, who is strutting down the lane at this moment, with his laced cap The whole story is told, without, alas! the possibility of a mistake, and the young fellow in the grey stockings has nothing to do but to jump down the well, at the side of which he has been making his last appeal. 42 As a third representative Morning Chronicle
219 commentary on another of s, The course of true love never did run smooth : Mr. S TONE has one of his little life touching domestic dramas, with mottoes from Horace and Shakspeare, to the effect that true love never did run smooth. This is a case of double cross-purposes. Two lads are in love with one young woman. He who loves hopelessly is looking on at his callous charmer, who is entertained in conversation by the successful swain; while, on the contrary, there sits by them a second pensive young girl, who is breaking her heart for the hopeless lover first named. This story, which is very difficult to tell in print, is most delightfully and clearly narrated by the painter, whose figures are full of sentimental beauty and refined grace. The picture is a very beautiful and delicately painted one. 43 As this type of painting was intended to invoke a narrative response in its viewers, surely it wa s not amiss for reviewers like Thackeray to interpret the story proffered by I submit that his reviews may, in fact, have encouraged readers to ed to the validation of narrative art and narrative art analysis. Narrative art may be an uncertain aesthetic in twenty-first-century art criticism, but in the context of the early Victorian era and with regard to the enduring cultural and literary values of the se reviews erpretations are of obvious significance. Moving from Helene Roberts analyses offered by Judith Fisher, one finds that Fisher centers her discussion of Thackeray In this context
220 Fisher draws much of the support for mediocre 44 from an 1839 Titmarsh article in Magazine (subsequently Paris Sketch Book ) in which Thackeray enthuses about the asures of [artisti of pretty third-rate pictures than I am of your great thundering first45 Much of an morality and emerging middle-class values is unassailable. Fisher makes a strong case for her contention that Thackeray viewed art not just as visual preferences, but as moral choices. assessment regarding the importance of sentiment in Th critical artistic judgment is fully supported both by his Titmarsh articles and by the newly attributed anonymous newspaper art reviews. more problematic. Fisher argues to the sublime because that risked the release of not only false but more importantly unsafe emotions. Fisher further opines tempted viewers to indulge in dangerous passions which would disrupt their social and 46 While it is impossible to determine definitively the sensibility another reasonable aesthetic that implies more of a displacement than of a rejection of the concept of the sublime, and that endorses rather than avoids strong emotion. I further suggest that to
221 Thackeray the real risk of reaching for the sublime was not in releasing strong sentiment, but rather in falling short, overreaching, and becoming pretentious. famous treatise, On the Sublime Burke 47 Burke further argued that this transcendent strong emotion is inspired by dramatic greatness of dimension, overwhelming power or colossal object. Indeed, while Thackeray to ridicule the pretentious, 48 Thackeray does use the word positively in a semi-Burkean context to pay tribute to what he regards as the real thing. s genius of this astonishing master. 49 In an 1844 Morning Chronicle review Thackeray argues that Thomas of a waterfall, A Mountain Torrent, 50 I ackeray praises an Eastlake more sublime In that same article, however, after dismissing essay as being of little practical use, Thackeray asserts s 51 suggest an aesthetic that reflects less a fear of strong emotion and more a remapping of the source of largescale nature to small-scale humanity. To Thackeray, sublimity signified pureness and strength (not weakness) of sentiment. In his The Four Georges Thackeray calls the life of in other words, in
222 its sentiment. 52 In English Humourists of the Eighteenth Century Thackeray similarly d Dunciad precisely because 53 These references to the su blime do not reflect a fear of strong emotion rather, they invoke and endorse strong emotion when the sentiment is innately honest. And the source of transcendent strong emotion does not necessarily lie only in nature; in his recent study of the Victorian romantic sublime, Stephen Hancock argue that, in addition to its Burkean flavoring, interiority connected to the ultimate moral authority associated with the middle-class 54 Although a defense of this idea is beyond the scope of this dissertation, I suggest that a strong sense of, if you will, (and paradoxically commingled reverence and mockery) associated with an elusive, unrealizable, and idealized domestic femininity her labeling of Thackeray as possessing an while correctly capturing part o sensibility and simultaneously having the virtue of taking Thackeray at his own word, in also carries an unfortunate negative nuance. Similarly, I disagree with ainter to renounce both emotional and technical complexity in favor of the easily comprehensible and likeable. 55 As I have shown, although Thackeray could sometimes tolerate technical weaknesses in a painting, he strongly critiqued problems in finish, coloring, drawing, or grouping and favored technical excellence over mediocre execution. Likewise, exploring the various
223 nuances and shades of complex and ambiguous emotion that might be associated with a painting were his special delight. And a rejection of historical painting in favor of domestic painting is a value judgment which, in the twenty-first century, at least, would generally not be considered an endorsement of mediocrity over excellence. Despite Titmarsh, I believe sm is better described today not in terms of mediocrity but rather as supporting an aesthetic of reality of sentiment which is, perhaps, sometimes associated with a domestic sublimity. 5.4 The Early Victorian Conversation on Art repository of comment on early Victorian art. These reviews collectively include critiques of over 250 artists and specific comments on over 600 paintings. All the prominent artists of the period and many artists that are now lost in obscurity are critiqued. Thackeray addressed every aspect of the 1830s-1840s art scene, including historic paintings, literary paintings, domestic paintings, animal paintings, religious paintings, landscapes, portraits, miniatures, and sculptures. Prominent institutions of the time, such as the Royal Academy, come to life in these essays. also supported by other art critics of his era. (However, there was no uniformity of opinion. Other popular reviewers did take positions which fundamentally disagreed with such as arguing for the superiority of historical art versus narrative or genre art, or making negative generalizations regarding artists that Thackeray generally reviewed favorably. 56 ) reviews, therefore, are more notable for their general
224 knowledgeability and sophistication, and their extraordinary expressiveness and readability, than for fundamental leaps of critical insight. t Criticism 1837Prettejohn persuasively argues that early Victorian art criticism was In particular, Prettejohn notes that art criticism of that era sympathy as a middle class artistic and cultural value. Additionally, Prettejohn recognizes that there was advancing the interests and patronage of contemporary British artists. 57 Although Prettejohn positions Thackera y as a leading proponent of sympathy, she does not delineate the cultural or commercial impacts Accordingly, in the following I explore some of both expressed and shaped British middle-class identity and influenced the business of British art. transition occurring in the British art world in the 1830s and 1840s. Following the precepts and values of Joshua Reynolds, late eighteenth-century and early nineteenthcentury British art still had an aristocratic orientation: old masters were highly valued, large-scale portrayals of historic or mythological scenes were much contemporary art was associated with portraiture of aristocrats, and art viewing and art collection were still largely elitist endeavors. As Britain slowly recovered its economic health after its post-Napoleonic war hangover, however, art started to become
225 middle class. In her Art and the Victorian Middle-Class: Money and the Making of Cultural Identity Dianne -class patrons of art were swept to the fore by the current of change in the 1830s and 1840s: political legislation which enfranchised male property owners, social reform which gave rise to the cult of selfimprovement, and a demotic press which advocated wider class participation in the 58 These new collectors, typically industrial or commercial magnates like John Sheepshanks and Robert Vernon, wished to 59 Accordingly, they tended to embellished, morally reinforced, or sometimes even parodied the prevailing concept of 60 Although Macleod designates these new and many of them did have humble origins in actuality most serious collectors were quite wealthy. Indeed, paintings from leading painters fetched high prices: it was not unusual for patrons to spend several hundred guineas or more for a single complex oil painting from a 61 Confirmed art devotees also turned their attention to the specialist art periodical press, such as the Art Union Monthly Journal (founded in 1839), or to prestigious scholarly advocates for specific painters, such as Ruskin, who first argued passionately for Turner and later supported the Pre-Raphaelites. It is my contention, however, that these patrons and their advisors were not Thackeray primary target audience. There is no evidence that Thackeray ever acted as
226 an advisor for rich art patrons, and Thackeray never wrote for specialist art periodicals or wrote specialist art treatises. In stead, Thackeray wrote for mass-market periodicals; his prototypical reader was not the very wealthy already committed collector, but rather the perhaps peripherally interested or even initially uninterested middle-class reader who would, in all probability, never own or purchase a major painting, and who might or might not have ever gone to an art exhibition. I suspect that the great majority of Modern Painters Nevertheless, buoyed by technical advances, in the 1840s this average middle-class reader became a significant secondary participant in the world of early Victorian art. A s Christopher Wood has written, thousand copies from one plate. work began to be published separately and, by this means, a whole secondary market was opened up. Landseer sold The Monarch of the Glen for 88 guineas, but received 500 guineas for the engraving rights. Derby Day sold for ,500, but he retained the engraving rights himself, from which he raised a further 2,250. 62 These engravings were not only separately sold at prices that were well within the comfort level of most middle-class readers, during exhibition season they were also often emblazoned on the pages of periodicals such as the Illustrated London News Engravings brought serious art to the Victorian lower middle class; their opinions and attitudes toward art now mattered, and their buying power now had commercial significance.
227 In addition, Thackeray regularly reviewed not only the prestigious Royal Academy exhibitions but also wrote about and was an advocate for the two major annual water color exhibitions; water color paintings were far more affordable, often selling for less than ten pounds. 63 Lastly, even a one-shilling attendance fee a fee which presumably many middle-class readers could afford becomes a significant financial factor in the world of Victorian art when as many as 350,000 viewers attended a Royal Academy exhibition. 64 I contend that it is through his influence on the artistically uncommitted the newspaper reader who was a prospective engraving or water color purchaser or exhibit attendee that Thackeray shaped attitudes toward art and inculcated artistic appreciation as part of Victorian identity. have been largely independent of his specific critical opinions: attracted the interest of readers to the art world, made art appear familiar and inclusive, and present ed ar t as a middle-class value. Thackeray once wrote regarding his articles in the Morning Chronicle The Chronicle articles are very well liked they relieve the dullness of that estimable paper. 65 articles are still fun to read. Some other reviewers of the time engage in sarcasm, but their comments are often hammer blows rather than targeted scalpel probes, and are thus rarely entertaining. Indeed, Thackeray alone among the popular newspaper art reviewers of the period leavened his reviews with humor and expression, thereby making them interesting to read newspaper art reviews do not and, given their venue probably could not match the
228 flamboyant humor of his Titmarsh articles, most of them retain a distinguishing humorous satiric literary style. outside of the Titmarsh persona consider the following: In satirizing what he saw as the overdone nature of the 1838 Salon and the overabundance of French would-be painters, Thackeray asserted that the gallery in which 66 In his review of the 1842 Salon Thackeray continued in the same -styled artists who . prefer spoiling canvas in an attic to getting themselves a living as the non67 In his 1843 review of the Society of British Artists exhibition Thackeray, in Swiftian fashion, advocates a massacre of all Italian boys and Malays because of their overuse as models by painters, and further criticizes the darkness of certain painters palettes by suggesting that they should instead use pitch 68 Burke and Hare were celebrated murder er s who in 1828 suffocated strangers in pitch plaster. 69 In his 1846 review of the Society of British Artists annual exhibition Thackeray complains about the crowding by noting that takes a dig at Benjamin Haydon, whose large historical paintings he regarded as pretentious and 70 That same year Thackeray me nts Lincoln Inn Hall a catalogue and as poetical as a Court-guide and dismisses Jenkins s Homini Salvator
229 which he felt grammatically should have been Hominum Salvator stating that the picture 71 In 1848 Thackeray opines regarding Monks singing Matins 72 Many newspaper art reviews of the period are relatively devoid of expression; sentences are straightforward and to the point, there is little use of metaphor or simile, and the descriptive language regarding a painting is normally either crisply approving or denunciatory. Up or down comments are rarely nuanced. Some reviews are simply a compilation of brief listings of major paintings, typically organized by and itemized under the exhibition-assigned painting number, with short positive or negative score card type comments and with little explanation. reviews, on the other hand, were typically discursive narratives with highly expressive language. Consider just two of many, many examples: (1) Thackeray wrote that historical paintings, which he deplored, were of canvass from 12 to 30 feet long, representing for the most part personages that never existed . performing actions that never occurred, and dressed in 73 (2) Regarding one of the literary genre painter Charles Leslie Thackeray wrote that Leslie is the only man in this country who translates Shakespeare into form and colour. Old Shallow and Sir Hugh, Slender and his man Simple, pretty Ann Page and the Merry Wives of Windsor, are here joking with the fat knight; who, with a monstrous gravity and profound brazen humour, is narrating some tales of his feats with the wild Prince and Poins. Master Brooke is offering a tankard to Master Slender, who will not drink, forsooth. 74
230 Figure 5.2 Charles Leslie The Principal Figures in the Merry Wives of Windsor 1838. Photo Victoria and Albert Museum, London entertaining and expressive use of language made his reviews more attractive and more readable to art neophytes than those of many of his peers. Unlike many art critics writing in the popular press, Thackeray was very knowledgeable regarding the techniques and schools of painting. Indeed, in an 1840 review Thackeray decried persons calling themselves critics who, in daily, weekly, monthly prints, protrude their nonsense upon the town. What are these men? Are they educated to be painters? No! Have they a taste for painting? No! I know of newspapers in this town, gentlemen, who send their reporters indifferently to a police-office or a
231 picture-gallery, and expect them to describe Correggio or a fire in Fleet Street with equal fidelity. 75 In his own reviews Thackeray did not eschew technical comments, but he also did not overuse them; most criticism is expr Human interest points at the galleries, regarding crowding or the behaviors or misbehaviors of visitors and exhibitors, are engagingly brought into the review and become additional reasons to visit the exhibition not to go is to be left out. Further, in his recurring discussions Thackeray presents the major artists of the day as if they were known friends and shared acquaintances (which, for the most part, they were to him) thereby creating a sense of connection between the reader, the reviewer, and the artist. In a small way these artists, novels, acquire personality and become familiar (and perhaps collectable) brand name entities for readers. Thackeray was not a shill there were many contemporary artists and styles of art which he repeatedly attacked yet he clearly was overall a proponent of the British art establishment of his day and many of its leading artists. A number of the contemporary art reviews in the popular press include rather sweeping negative condemnations of exhibitions, which might the supposedly superior taste of the reviewer, but which would hardly increase reader interest in viewing the exhibition or purchasing works of art; Thackeray never makes such assertions. The works of most of the leading English artists of the first decade of Victorian art men such as William Mulready, Charles Leslie, Daniel Maclise, William Etty, and Edwin Landseer typically received favorable Thackeray reviews. Moreover, nature of the subjects or artistry of British artists, indirectly invoking patriotism to create
232 making art appreciation an affirmative British middle-class value. Consider, for example, his repeated comments on the British realistic landscape painters Thomas Creswick and Frederick Lee: one day you could see the hearty, fresh English landscapes of Lee and Creswick, where you can almost see the dew on the fresh grass, and trace the ripple of the water, and the ; 76 scenes are as beautiful and faithful to nature as ever. The . is, indeed, a noble s ; 77 give the spectator almost the same feeling of pleasure . . Mr. Creswick has, perhaps, an 78 Figure 5.3 Thomas Creswick Summer's Afternoon 1844. Photo Victoria and Albert Museum, London
233 These reviews praise and conflate the artists, and their techniques. Frequently Thackeray favorably compares British art and artists to foreign, especially French, art. have a dozen painters as good as their 12 best; and our second-class artists are far whi 79 exhibitions [Paris Salon and London Royal Academy] ours is the better this year, nd h 80 year shows progress in ; 81 that same year he praised Wi lliam English Claude [Lorrain] 82 s [of religious art] have no call to be afraid of their Fre 83 In 1846 Thackeray further prophesized that Dawn of the Morning may take rank with Claude Lorrain. 84 Perhaps s words that he sought to raise the perceived worth of English contemporary art and art appreciation in the minds of his readers. On the one occasion where Thackeray suggested the superiority of French art, it was in the context of an appeal for better treatment of English artists and better accommodations for art viewing: Thackeray explained that
234 er appreciated, better understood, and generally far better paid [than in England], and that moderate-sized gin85 As scholars such as Roberts and Fisher have previously noted, Thackeray promulgates emerging Victorian values in his art criticism, favoring art which suits the Victorian temperament and fits the Victorian home. Not surprisingly, sexual prudery and religious convention both intrude into his criticism. Thus, while he admired the coloring of William nude female figures coarse, and so naked, as to be unfit for appearance among respectable people at an exhibit 86 His comment regarding the religious paintings of Charles Eastlake, that l things, and the first and highest element of beauty in art, mi ght make uncomfortable reading for a presentday secular art critic. 87 As others have noted, Thackeray frequently urged artists to draw inspiration from nature and praised rural landscapes, perhaps thereby expressing a nostalgic Victorian yearning of urbanized society for an idealized countryside. Thackeray was a strong advocate of genre painting, i.e., small-scale, contemporary and domestic painting of scenes of every day life. He wrote: Bread and butter can be digested by every man; whereas Prometheus on his rock, or Orestes in his straitBritannia, guarded by Religion and Neptune, welcoming General Tomkins in the Temple of Glory the ancient, heroic, allegorical subjects can be supposed
235 deeply to interest very few of the inhabitants of this city or kingdom. We have wisely given up pretending that we were interested in such, and confess a partiality for more simple and homely themes. 88 was towards smaller, more intimate and anecdotal pictures, suitable for the middle-class drawing 89 became the mainstream of Victorian art. Christopher Wood has further noted that Victorian pictures were more widely discussed or written about than paintings are today. In partial explanation, Wood The average businessman in his suburban villa was likely to be well-read, and much of Victorian art is literary in inspiration. Never in art history have art and literature gone so handin 90 Wood scenes from novels] that first taught the Victorian public to equate painting with literature, taught them that a picture was something to be read 91 Indeed, a strong case can be made that this linkage of art to an already popular literature helped establish art as a middle-class value. And Thackeray, through his review commentaries on narrative art as previously discussed in this chapter, and through his many comments on art inspired by great literary works, was at the center of this movement. Pictures drawn from or inspired by the works of Goldsmith, Shakespeare, Cervantes, Smollet, and other literary luminaries filled art exhibitions in the 1830s and 1840s. Thackeray could and did poke fun at the superabundance of paintings inspired by
236 The Vicar of Wakefield and other favorite novels; however, his generally positive and often loving reviews of these paintings presumably contributed to the ir popularity. Consider, for example, Th Charles Roderick Random : And what words are enough to convey the delight and admiration which every His large picture from congratulations of the lawyers, on coming into the entire inheritance, is better than Hogarth, for it is carried up to a higher and more delicate point of humour. The characters are wonderful for their truth and absence of exaggeration. Each acts his part in the most admirable unconscious way there is no attempt at a pose or a tableau as in almost all pictures of figures where the actors are grouping themselves with an eye to the public, and, as it were, attitudinizing for our applause. In this noble picture everybody is busied, and perfectly naturally, with the scene, at which the spectator is admitted to look. Every single performer is a character and a comedy in himself, the minutiae of which are somehow revealed to the looker-on by each countenance; and you acknowledge the effect of the whole by a reply of laughter. It is that charming navet and unconsciousness which makes Sancho so delightfully ludicrous: you have a ridiculous sympathy, and jocular regard for the honest humourist; and Mr. Leslie (who is the finest commentator upon Cervantes, and on some parts of Shakspeare that ever lived) has seized and understood this point of their art perfectly; he ties you to all these grotesque ways by a certain lurking human kindness; and there is always felt
237 (though not intended) in the midst of the fun a feeling of friendliness and beauty. His is surely the perfection of pictorial comedy. What would you have more than pathos, beauty, wit, wonderful aptness and ingenuity, and the most perfect and generous good-breeding? 92 and some artists, most notably Charles Redgrave, followed by William Powell Frith, turned to pictures of social activism. considerable favorable attention for their illumination of the plight of the poor. 93 But Thackeray despite being a self-declared radical, and a did not go along with general opinion. H s were maudlin an opinion he occasionally had about some of Dickens s writings. Morning Chronicle review of Sempstress is representative of his reaction to such works: Mr. Redgrave Sempstress (227) and Wedding Morning the Departure (238), will be relished by all lovers of bourgeois pathos. In the former the poor sempstress has been at work all night long, the candle is nearly out, the grey morning is breaking over the opposite house, where another poor sempstress is very likely working too; it is a carefully painted picture of extreme physical discomfort. But Mr. Redgrave has flung into his canvas none of that terror and dreadful humour which the great poet who wrote the song gave to his lyric; and only has succeeded in exciting (as we think) a very feeble sentiment of pity for a sickly-looking young needlewoman. 94
238 Indeed, the sarcasm positively drips off the page as Thackeray mercilessly critiques The Governess : Figure 5.4 Richard Redgrave The Governess 1845. Photo Victoria and Albert Museum, London Of the latter sort [namby-pamby pictures] there are some illustrious examples; and as it is the fashion for critics to award prizes, I would for my part cheerfully award the prize of a new silver teaspoon to Mr. Redgrave, that champion of suffering female innocence, for are at play in the garden, she sits sadly in the schoolroom, there she sits, poor dear! -book. She sits and thinks of that dear place, with a sheet of black-edged note-paper in her hand. They have brought her her tea and bread and butter on a tray. She has drunk the tea, she has not tasted the bread and
239 butter! There is pathos for you! there is art! This is, indeed, a love for lollypops with a vengeance, a regular babyhood of taste, about which a man with a manly stomach may be allowed to protest a little peevishly, and implore the public to give up such puling food. 95 Thackeray was sensitive to the role of art in mythologizing and constructing national history and national identity. He often mocked the repetitious painting by British artists of the cultural historic landmark scenes which Roy Strong has argued were crucial a Whig view of history and English identity. 96 Nevertheless, it was easier to maintain objectivity and insight into the social purposes of art when viewing art as an outsider, i.e. reviewing French rather than English art. Thackeray had no difficulty, for example, in seeing the national myth-making behind the 97 la glorie Franais 98 In more battle-pieces will be painted. They have used up all their victories, and Versailles is Further, he was astute enough to directly connect the many portraits of seain which English vessels are hauling down their colours before the invincible tri99 A defeated nation had a great need to create a victorious heritage. Men a 100
240 On the other hand, seeing with the eyes of an Englishman blinded him to some to the subtle implications of some French art. For example, Opening of the Legislature and Proclamation of the Constitutional Charter, 4 June 1814, prominently exhibited in the 1842 Salon, portrays the returned Bourbon monarch Louis XVIII giving a Charter to the Chambers as a royal favo r. As noted by Michael Marrinan, 101 Rather than a celebration of the power of the legislature, the picture emblematically served as a reminder of the externally supported suppression of popular rule, and as a comparative endorsement of Louis-Phillipe. In his review of the 1842 Salon Thackeray noted the central position and prominence given to the painting -rate merit, it attracts much attention However, he failed to see its political impor any other kind of interest. A number of persons, seated in rows, one behind the other, 102 As an apparently widely-read popularizer of contemporary British art, Thackeray clearly advanced the commercial and financial interests of British artists. I suggest that Thackeray played a leading role in bringing art discussion, and consequent art exhibition attendance and / or acquisition of low-cost watercolors or engraved prints, to the middleclass masses. ; for British artists it brought increased visibility, respectability, and income; for the British middle class it made art appreciation a value and a marker of class identity.
241 Not es 1 Dianne Sachko Macleod, Art and the Victorian Middle Class: Money and the M aking of Cultural Identity (Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1996), 1. 2 Jeremy Maas, Victorian Pa inters ( ), 7. 3 David Robertson, Sir Charles Eastlake and the Victorian Art World (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton UP, 1978). 4 Martin Hardie, W ater-colour Painting in Britian. III. The Victorian Period ( New York: Barnes and Noble, 1968). 5 Christopher Wood, Victorian Painting (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1999), 34. 6 Roy Strong, Painting the Past: The Victorian Painter and British History (London: Pimlico, 2004), 84. 7 Studi es in the Novel 13 (1981): 22. 8 Vi ctorian Studies 26, no.1 (1982): 67. 9 a lization of Victorian Art Criticism, 1837Journal of Victorian Culture 2, no. 1 (1997): 74, 81. 10 This comment is included in a letter written by Thackeray in January of 1851 upon visiting the Exhibition of Pictures at the Palais Royal. See Gordon Ray, The Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray. 4 Volumes (Boston: Harvard UP, 1945-6): 2:730. 11 In addition to the major contemporary exhibition reviews discussed in this c hapter Thackeray also wrote a review of traditional French ar December 1839); three articles originally published in Westminster Review April orge Cruikshank, W estminster Review June 1840; L eech, Quarterly Review December 1854); several articles on annual gift book which include extensive comments on engravings; and the text for Louis Marvy Sketches after English Landscape Painters 1850. Art reviews in the 1833 N ational Standard may also ha ve been written by Thackeray. 12 Ray, Letters 1:351. 13 Ray, Letters 2:730. 14 Henry Vizetelly, Glanc es Back Through Seventy Years: Autobiographical and Other Reminisces, Volume 1 (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trbner & Co., 1893), 244.
242 15 Vizetelly, Glances 251. 16 The Pictorial Times April 1, 1843. 17 W. E. ray as an Artist and Art-Critic, On the G enius of George Cruikshank. By William Thackeray (London: George Redway, 1884), i-xvi. 18 Ephraim Young, Critic, Atlantic Monthly 56 (1885): 688, 693. 19 Sentiment of Reality, 35. 20 Roberts, 26. 21 Prettejohn, Aesthetic Value, 81. 22 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Second Lecture on the Fine Arts, June 1839, 745. 23 at Times (London), Apr il 5, 1838 24 M orning Chronicle (London), April 1, 1842. 25 26 Morning Chronicle (London), May 8, 1844. 27 M orning Chronicle (London), May 10, 1844. 28 in Water Colours, Pa ll-Mall], Morning Chronicle (London), April 17, 1848. 29 Roberts, 27. 30 Ibid., 21-39. 31 [William Makepeace Thackeray] Pictorial Times Ma y 13, 1843. 32 [William Makepeace Thackeray] y of Painters in Morning Chronicle (London), April 29, 1844. 33 M orning Chronicle (London), May 8, 1844. 34 [William Makepeace Thackeray] Water C olour Painters, Morning Chronicle (London), April 27, 1846. 35 Fisher, 71.
243 36 NineteenthCentury Literature 47 (June 1992): 81. 37 Wood, Victorian Painting 16. 38 [Willia Morning Chronicle (London), May 8, 1844. 39 June 1845, 720. 40 Raymond Lister, Victor ian Narrative Painting (New York: Clarkson N. P otter, 1966), 9-10, 15. 41 42 Pictorial Times May 13, 1843. 43 M orning Chronicle (London), May 8, 1844. 44 Fisher, 65 -66. 45 [William Makepeace Thackeray], On the French School of Painting, 46 66. 47 Edmund Burke, Philo sophical Inquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful (London: J. F. Dove, 1827), 33-34. 48 Note See [William Makepeace Thackeray], P icture Gossip Magazine June 1845. 49 William Makepeace Thackeray, The Oxford Thackeray, George Saintsbury, ed ., 17 vols. (London, Oxford University Press, 1909), 2:661. 50 [Will Morning Chronicle (London), May 8, 1844. 51 Magazine June 1840, 724-26. 52 Thackeray, Oxford Thackeray 14:805. 53 Thackeray, Oxford Thackeray 14:620. 54 Stephen Hancock, The Romantic Sublime and Middle-Class Subjectivity in the Victorian N ovel (New York: Routledge, 2005), 1. 55 56 See the variety of reviews and opinions in the critical essays originally publi shed in the Athenaeum Westminster Review Edinburgh Review, Blackwoods
244 Edinburgh Magazine, the British and Foreign Review, New Monthly Magazine, and other periodicals collected by Olmstead. John Olmstead, Victorian Painting Essays and Re views, Volume one: 1832-1848 (New York, Garland, 1980). 57 71, 81, 82. 58 Macleod, Art and the Victorian Middle Class 20. 59 Ibid., 1. 60 Ibid., 2. 61 Ibid., 40. 62 Wood, Victorian Painting 14. 63 See the listed sales prices for water color paintings listed in T he Royal Watercolour Society: The First Fifty Years 1805-1855 (Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique ). 64 Wood, Victorian Painting 9. 65 Ray, Letters 2:216. 66 [William Makepeace Thackeray], n at Paris. 67 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Morning Chronicle (London), April 1, 1842. 68 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Street Exhibition, Pictorial Times April 1, 1843. 69 Leonard A. Parry and Willard H. White, Some Famous Medical Trials (New Yor k: Charles Scribner, 1928), 260. 70 [William Makepeace Thackeray], itish Artists in SuffolkMorning Chronicle (London), March 30, 1846. 71 [William Makepeace Thackeray] f the Societies of Water Colour Painters. 72 [William Makepeace Thackeray] in Water Colours, PallMorning Chronicle (London), April 17, 1848. 73 [Thackeray] The Exhibition in Paris. 74 [William Makepea Magazine June 1838. 75 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Magazine June 1840. 76 Magazine, July 1842. 77 [Wi Morning Chronicle (London), May 10, 1844.
245 78 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Morning Chronicle (London), May 11, 1846. 79 The Exhibition in Paris. 80 81 Pictorial Times May 13, 1843. 82 Pi ctorial Times May 27, 1843. 83 Morning Chronicle (London), May 8, 1844. 84 Morning Chronicle (London), May 5, 1846. 85 [William Makepeace Thackeray], 86 [William Makepeace Thackeray], 87 [William Makepeace Thackeray], 88 [William Makepeace Thackeray] 89 Wood, Victorian Painting 24. 90 Ibid., 15. 91 Ibid., 30. 92 Morning Chronicle (London), May 5, 1846. 93 Ibid., 50. 94 M orning Chronicle (London), May 8, 1844. 95 [Thackeray] 96 Strong, Painting the P ast, 113-161. 97 [Thackeray] The Exhibition in Paris. 98 Ibid 99 [Thackeray] The Exhibition of the Louvre. 100 [William Makepeace Thackeray] On Men and Pictures Fraser s M agazine July 1841. 101 Michael Marrinan, Painting Politics for Louis-Philippe: Art and Ideology in Orl anist France, 1830-1848 (New Haven, Yale UP: 1988 ), 124. 102
246 Chapter 6 The proceeds of th at : The Tradesman of Literature from Critic to Novelist satiric literary criticism to the late novels which were so admired by his Victorian contemporaries. mature novelist was long in years his first critical articles were published in 1833, and serial publication of Vanity Fair did not begin until 1847 but, I submit, short in essence. Without denying Thacker over those years, an essential unity connects his early and late writings. As a selfperceived honest literary tradesman, Thackeray similarly his critical reviews and his later novels. These early and late writings both bear the impressions of comparable journalistic shaping pressures and processes. Further, these works are unified by a consistent world view, a shared ethos of economic and social realism, common textual and stylistic features, and consistently expressed ideas regarding literature and life. Thackeray presented his views on the literary profession in a published in the Morning Chronicle in 1850. 1 In these articles he argued for the inherent value and dignity of the that provided the broad range of literary goods consumed by the nation.
247 downright information; this one, as an editor, abuses Sir Robert Peel ; in essence, Thackeray saw no inherent scale of respectability separating these writers and famous novelists. While as a critic Thackeray recognized that one work of literature might have more me (meaning sincerely written with the intent to convey truth) literary labors, and thus rejected, if you will, the pejorative connotation As he saw it, a literary man wrote, in the implying at least a moral equivalency among various works written to that end. 2 Indeed, both early and late, Thackeray avowedly wr ote for money, not for pleasure or for the aesthetic value of literary creation. He often nakedly posed the financial equation between writing and getting paid, as in his self-mocking request to upon stipend for a monthly number of one of his serialized novels. 3 He wrote so that he and his children could have a warm fire, a good meal, and financial security. Further, his motives for writing carried over to the content and the style of his writings. Both his critical writings and his novels are antiromantic in their recognition and celebration of the self-interested middle-class values just cited. Created in the crucible of similar journalistic and economic pressures, ks also share a common set of literary stylistic techniques, as well as a kernel of literary and social concept s. Yet few scholars have addressed this underlying unity Instead, as suggested by the t -volume literary biography of Thackeray ( Thackeray the Writer: From Journalism to Vanity Fair and Thackeray the
248 Writer: From Pendennis to Denis Duval ), 4 critics have regarded as traversing an arc from critic to novelist. Many investigators ha ve examined facets of that arc and examined the merits or interpretations of individual critical or fictional A few scholars early-arc literary criticism ; among the more significant studies of this type are the works of Donald Hawes, Charles Mauskopf, and Lidm 5 Other scholars, perhaps most notably John Carey and D. J. Taylor, fiction perceived as more vital than the later novels. 6 However, most standard monographs on Thackeray including those by Richard Colby, Barbara Hardy, John Loofborrow, Michael Lund, John Rawlings, and Geoffrey Tillotson, critical writings as a period of apprenticeship and explicitly privilege Thackeray s latearc mature works. 7 Only a few generalists, including George Saintsbury and Gordon Ray, have, in a balanced fashion, addressed the totality of writings. 8 Thus, to date, emphasis has been given to differences between T early and late writings rather than similarities connecting them. As a result: (1) The common role of pecuniary and journalistic factors in shaping and his mature writings has received little attention; (2) the defining stylistic, textual, and thematic facets have not been traced back to their roots in his literary criticism; and (3) many potentially insightful pathways between the ideas and expressions of well-known aspects o f his novels remain untraced. This chapter address es those deficiencies.
249 6.1 The Economics of Literature Thackeray father made a fortune in India. Accordingly, Thackeray had a youth of privilege, attended private schools and Cambridge, and spent time in Europe on his grand tour. Thackeray came into approximately 17,000 when he reached his majority in 1833. The rapid dissipation of that inheritance partly profligacy, but mostly through the failure of Indian banks dramatically changed the course of his life and art. Until his rise in his profession with the advent of Vanity Fair -scrabble journalism were an almost unremitting chase for money. An 1839 letter he wrote to James Fraser typically notes that h wanted money. 9 complained about his financial distress and bragged about his financial victories. Thackeray did not endure real poverty he never faced starvation, never lived on the street, and never performed manual labor but he was often at the edge of genteel poverty. In some ways he never escaped that phase of his life ; he was always, as he declared at a Royal Literary Fund dinner literary man of no other profession than that, getting on as best I could. 10 Indeed, the themes of his late novels reflect the concerns of his years of penury as a journalist: Thackeray repeatedly wrote about the fall from upper-middle-class wealth into poverty. Despite the many memorable satiric scenes in Vanity Fair arguably the most empathetic and wrenching part of the story deals with the slow decline of the Sedley family from moderate wealth to poverty, a decline that culminates with Amelia giving up her son so that he can realize a better life. Bildungsroman The History of Pendennis ; in this novel the Thackeray-figure, Arthur Pendennis, lives a life of
250 bohemian poverty writing articles for various periodicals, encountering fictional editors and publishers drawn to mimic the figures that Thackeray himself dealt with as a periodical journalist until, like Thackeray, Pendennis is buoyed by his own Vanity Fair the fictional novel within a novel, Walter Lorraine. In The Newcomes the protagonist and would-be artist, young Clive Newcome, is thrust into poverty when he loses his fortune through the failure of Indian banks. In The Virginians George Warrington loses parental support and desperately tries to support his young family as a dramatist. In The Adventures of Philip Philip Firman earns a precarious living as a journalist and editor after his familial inheritance is stolen. In Lovel the Widower experience as failed owner-editor of The Museum The National Standard Over and over again Thackeray replays the fall into poverty and the journalistic struggles of his youth in his mature novels. The life and art of his early years of journalism unmistakably feed his mature writings. Moreover, many of the same pecuniary concerns which shaped his periodical writings also factored into the development of novels. Peter Shillingsburg has documented book publishers. 11 As Shillingsburg makes clear, although Thackeray took pride in the aesthetic values of his fi ction, he saw himself as an honest tradesman rather than as a romantically inspired author. Just as a tradesman values his goods at so much per yard, Thackeray also sold his literary goods quantitatively at so much per word or per sheet. For example, in 1843 Thackeray complained to Chapman and Hall, the publishers of his Irish Sketch Book find I am done out of no less than 50 pages by the size of the type &c. I bargained for 25 12 Eleven years later, in a letter of
251 complaint to Mark Lemon about rate of pay, Thackeray once more resorted to the same sort of arithmetic of literary production, as he compared the pay rates and number of characters per line and numbers of lines per page of Blackwood Punch, and his current serialized novel, The Newcomes 13 In essence, Thackeray implied that the critically important pay per unit of output transcended the other differences between literary magazine, humor magazine, and novel. As a periodical journalist Thackeray was subject to a variety of pecuniary forces the requirement to satisfy multiple, irregular, and frequently short-term assignments with specific deadlines; the need to produce specific volumes of copy; the need to write succinctly to capture reader interest quickly in a small space; and the conflicting financial need to fill all allotted (or potentially allotted) space to maximize revenue. Without doubt these factors shaped his critical writings. Speculatively, the need to write both quickly and irregularly might favor on-the-spot improvisation rather than long careful planning; the need to fill a certain volume of space would favor discursive writing in which it would be easy to make last-minute additions or subtractions; the need to catch and retain reader interest quickly voice; and the spatial limitations of a periodical column might privilege micro-writing brilliant sentences, epigrams, humorous lines, contrasts and reversals as compared to large-scale textual macrostructures. With the exception of Henry Esmond all novels were first published serially, either in magazines or as separately purchased numbers. Moreover, as demonstrated by Edgar Harden, Thackeray rarely wrote each monthly number or serial as it was due. 14 Accordingly, his novels faced the
252 same kinds of journalistic and pecuniary pressures as did his critical articles: each segment had to be quickly put together in the face of competing priorities, had to be done by a specific date, had to fill a specified number of pages, and had to capture and retain reader interest within its own relatively short length. Of course, other Victorian serial novelists faced the same pressures, and each addressed these pressures in his own way. Anthony Trollope, for example, is famous for the almost metronomic regularity of his writing. His early novels were not serialized; however, starting with Framley Parsonage all his novels were serialized. Trollope had the discipline (and a supporting outside income) to almost always complete his novels before they were serialized, and thus avoided many of the potential issues of serialization. 15 Dickens, by way of contrast, published all his major fiction serially. Dickens did need the regular income that serialization provided, and he generally (sometimes stressfully) wrote each part or number just before it was due. However, his fictions . .From Chuzzlewit 16 With these number plans he placed major turning points and structural hinges at pre-planned parts of the manuscript: in the case of Dombey and Son for example, the Dombey family gains or loses a family member in parts 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20. Thus, Dickens artfully created a macrostructure framework to house and guide individual numbers. Thackeray differed in both situation and temperament from Trollope and Dickens. Edgar Harden and John Sutherland have each studied the production of serial fiction, and each arrived at surprisingly different conclusions regarding the
253 his writings. 17 Without taking sides in that literary dispute, I contend that, to respond to the pressures of novel serialization, Thackeray resorted to the same tools he had already been using as a critical journalist for a decade: discursive and companionable narrators whose comments could be expanded or truncated upon need; improvised and well-executed segments of text that sometimes ignored over-arching plans; and an emphasis on the authorial skills that I have dubbed as micro-writing. In summary, similar literary production pressures facing the critic and the novelist le d to similar writing approaches and styles. In the following I expand upon the stylistic and thematic unities and demonstrate the connections between his critical journalism and his novels. 6.2 Unity of Theme, Sub ject, and Style Geoffrey Tillotson declared that the goal of his book, Thackeray the Novelist was which distinguishes his work from that of all other writers. 18 Tillotson found of materials, form and manner, authorial persona, o philosophy six long novels : Vanity Fair, Pendennis, Henry Esmond, The Newcomes, The Adventures of Philip, and The Virginians. Additionally, without demonstrating the case, he suggested that there was a unity or essays, lectures, sketches (literary and pictorial), stories, nouvelles novels, verses, and 19
254 In the following I demonstrate that there is, indeed, a Thackerayan oneness a set of consistencies in theme, subject, focus and style which encompass es both his early critical journalism and his late mature novels and essays. In their excellences, their weaknesses, their expressed ideas, and their stylistic idiosyncrasies these early and late works are more alike than different. Moreover, evidence suggests that these unities were forged as part of the life and art of Thackeray the critic; in essence, the critic constructed the novelist. While I have profitably read and from similar ideas expressed by Richard Colby 20 in his book Humanity the specific set of thematic and stylistic unities proposed below are my own. Viewed against the background of the mid-Victorian novel, are both bound together and distinguished from the works of other writers by : 1) A unified class-conscious world view that crosses the boundaries of individual literary works and even literary genres. There is a remarkable consistency of cultural allusions, social perspective, and even a cross-utilization of character writings. By way of comparison; Dickens memorable characters live in their separate domains: Ebeneezer Scrooge does not casually employ Peggotty, Oliver Twist is not mistreated by Silas Wegg, Joe Gargary does not befriend Jenny Wren. Moreover, these various characters do not inhabit the same clubs, know the same people, or have the same so cio-economic perspectives. however, all the major characters are from the same class, share similar concerns, know each other (or at least 21 2) A delight in characterization which eschews exaggeration and cheerfully admixes real and fictional characters. With regard to the unusual sense of reality of
255 -like characters; they are mere people. We feel them to be near to us, and that we may meet them any 22 Saints character out of nature or unfurnished with life. He is in this respect almost unique; certainly, I think, unique among novelists. 23 And, to a degree which I submit is greater than that of any other Victorian novelist, Thackeray routinely placed real characters, sometimes with and sometimes without name changes, in his supposedly fictional works. 3) An extraordinary emphasis on the thought, role and personality of the narrator. Some level of narratorial commentary was, of course, the rule rather than the exception in the early and mid-Victorian eras, but no other major Victorian writer inserted extended, musing, narratorial interjections into the flow of their novels as frequently and as luxuriantly as did Thackeray. 4) A unique prose style that reviewers found to be simultaneously restrained, clear, elegant and fluid. Returning to my contention regarding that Robert Colby coined the to refer to the word paintings of human character which are strewn t Nevertheless ; this phrase also metaphorically conveys the essential unity of worldview in ritings. Indeed, although some authors of fertile imagination are adept in creating distinctive and individual worlds with each of their literary creations, I suggest that Thackeray literary creations are instead connected panels on a single canvass portraying a unified greater world. The lines of connection between literary panels are established through extensive allusion
256 reference shared with his readers and by a cross-mingling of characters, events, and references between literary works. The se unities of worldview in form all of major novels. His novels, and even his early short stories, are so interlaced with common characters and familial connections that, Vanity Fair, Pendennis, The Newcomes, and Philip are in one sense all one novel. 24 Tillotson notes that familial connections extend that Pangaean novel backward in time to include Henry Esmond and The Virginians and argues that the lack of edged shape and sharply defined endings of these novels creates a sense of continuity spanning them as an entirety. 25 Moreover, a consistency not only of inhabitants but of tone, interests, concerns, and even subject, runs through these works. 26 and certainly the subjects of morals and manners undergird all these works. With respect to morals, ors reflect (and generally endorse) masculine middle-class bourgeois English cultural values. Thackeray writes about educated middle-class Englishmen who are literary and artistic, who struggle with the socio-economic forces of life, and who encounter indeterminate situations and largely unresolved life experiences. Even a supposed footman such as Yellowplush comically presents middle-class rather than lower-class ideas, and a supposed Irish rogue such as Barry Lyndon is rather an English conceptualization of an Irish rogue. Despite all his various authorial personas, Thackeray never could (or, at least, never did) present the world as seen through an outside (i.e. feminine, or lower-class, or non-English) perspective. Partly through the spirit of his narrators, all his novels share a common cultural environment: they refer to a common English literary and social consciousness,
257 invoke the same cultural images and rites of passage, and to similar degrees mix comedy, satire, and sentiment. Further, as discussed previously, are grounded in socio-economic concerns. The pursuit of money, the pain of penury, the pleasures of sufficiency, and the fear of a fall into poverty run as common threads through his works. Tr avel writings such as The Irish Sketch Book or From Cornhill to Grand Cairo easily fit ; these works employ the same cultural allusions and contexts and are written with the same viewpoints and mindsets as his novels. Further, lines of contrast between novels such as Henry Esmond or The Virginians and essays such as Eighteenth Century Humorists and The Four Georges blur almost to the point of non-existence. Manners and morals dominate ; just as in his novels, Thackeray stated that the goal of The Four Georges 27 Similarities in the introduction of cultural references, utilization of ironic humor, satire of society combined with the promulgation of conventional values, and overall use of language transcend genre boundaries. I contend that this unity of world view extends to and perhaps originates from The nominal range of subjects journalism is extraordinary. Thackeray critiqued travel books; books of history, religion, and philosophy; biographies and books of letters of authors, philosophers, cultural figures, political figures, and royalty; major British, American, and French novels of the 1830s and ks of drama, poetry, and painting; books on health issues and on cooking; and the general topics of politics, art, and current events. But in this diversity there is a unity; the totality of these writings represents no less than a construction of the Victorian world. And in the vast majority of
258 these writings, almost independent of nominal topic, manners and morals ubiquitously surface as sub-textual subjects. Thackeray regularly introduces into his critical writings digressions on the little humanistic details of Victorian life, as well as ruminations on human failings and vicissitudes. And in his more discursive critical essays he refers to shared (and typically sentimentalized) aspects of Victorian life, such as the pleasures of tarts as enjoyed by small children, or the triumphs and travails of school. Further, Thackeray brings to his critical essays the same attitudes and worldview that he later invoked for his novels, a world view that stresses an English masculine middle-class perspective and that interconnects his diverse nominal subjects with unifying cultural allusions and common references. Lastly, Thackeray frequently inserts into his fictional world references drawn from his critical world; for example, drawing upon his own critical reviews of Ra History of the Popes Thackeray wrote in Pendennis that his youthful protagonist which he lashed that Order with tremendous severity, and warned his Protestant fellow-countrymen of their 28 Although Thackeray obviously common and connecting references in his early critical journalism, he did repeatedly refer to various fictional and real characters drawn from the heritage he shared with his readers. His cr itical journalism is studded with references to the fictional creations of Goldsmith, Byron, and Cervantes, and to literary icons such as Fielding, Dr. Johnson, and Swift, and to various political and social celebrities or historic figures. These reference s are almost independent of the nominal subject of the critical article; they are introduced, I contend, to create a common world view and to bond author and readers.
259 ironic tone that pokes at presumed human this understanding, let us laugh together at Bulwer, or Lardner, or at whatever author or fictional or historic character Thackeray target ed or sometimes at the reviewer himself. Frequently these critical reviews introduce presumably reader-shared subjects of Victorian sentiment children, mothers, innocence and goodness. And while the typical scope of critical reviews does not allow Thackeray to address stories of financial distress or the difficult economics of Victorian journalism as he was to do in his novels, these reviews frequently reflect a sharp awareness of financial reality as it impacts authors, their fictional creations, and public figures. As discussed previously in this dissertation, Thackeray often raises considerations of class, race, nationality and history in his critical reviews. -world in some ways panoramic and in is inhabited by people who share his attitudes, concerns, prejudices, and interests. novels and essays celebrate and embellish a vision of the world originally developed in his critical journalism. A oneness of characterizat critical writings. S characterizations; Joan Garrettilluminating critical studies have argued persuasively that his characterization is both 29 invoked character whereas other novelists provided caricature For example, G. H. Lewe s opined Thackeray has two
260 great qualities which embalm a reputation truth and style. . Thackeray . sees all human feelings, all the motives, high and low, simple and complicated, which make it [human life] what it is. . he seizes characters where other writers seize only characteristics 30 Indeed, perusing Geoffrey Thackeray: The Critical Heritage, one finds that many Victorian reviewers used the word In fact, Tillotson himself suggested that a an aspect of the Thackerayan oneness. 31 Thackeray himself declared in his preface to Pendennis you to believe that this person writing strives to tell the truth. If there is not that, there is nothing (emphasis added). 32 This aesthetic commitment to a perception of truth in character is rooted in His early criticisms of the Silver-Fork and Newgate novels stressed their failure (as Thackeray saw it) to portray human character accurately. criticism, as expressed in the exaggeration of a man, as his name is of a name. It is delightful and makes me laugh; but it is no more a real man than my friend Punch is: and in so far I protest against him . holding that the Art of Novels is to represent nature. 33 Of course, vanity is first among the tr aits which Thackeray saw as an essential element of character. All his works of fiction incorporate his perception of human vanity ; Vanity Fair is the name, not of one, but of all of Mr. Thac 34
261 representation of artfully constructed characters both encompasses and transcends the genre of novel. For instance, historical figures inhabit his works of fiction (and often in more than cameo roles) in much the same fashion as they appear in his opinionated but supposedly non-fictional essays. No doubt this is partially due to the 35 But I suspect that Thackeray took great delight in endowing real historical figures with personalities and, in a sense, fictionalizing them. The supposed frailties, vanities, eccentricities, and nobilities of his fictionalized-from-real creations probably interested him as much as did those of his purely fictional figures. After all, both sets of characters allowed Thackeray to display the manners and morals of the times and to convey what he saw as the sometimes endearing but always absurd nature of the human condition. Further, there is a precedent for this mixing of real and fictional personages in As a critic and commentator on novels, biographies, ed comments on real and s novels, for example, would interpose comments on the real figures (the authors) with comments regarding the contained observations both on the (real) artists and the (fictional) presences portrayed in various paintings. His comments on biographies and histories typically dealt with historical figures, but Thackeray often took liberties by attributing personalities to these characters which went beyond strict historical records, and thus, in a sense, fictionalized s in word painting human character, and treating real and fictional characters on the same basis, flowed from his criticism to his later novels.
262 of narrative personas, there is a great deal of merit in the supposition that the leading character in, for example, Vanity Fair is not Becky Sharp, Amelia Sedley, or William Dobbin, but is rather the unnamed narrator, just as the leading character in Tha leading character of his Times and Morning Chronicle literary reviews is the unnamed critic. As external social data with the inner structural device of the narrative persona who is a 36 Indeed, perhaps more than any other Victorian writer, Thackeray made the narrator a central presence in his writings. His stories are as much a described events as they are about the events themselves reactions to foreign locales than about those locales themselves reaction to a work of art or literature than about the work itself. Nineteenth-century normally companionable, frequently eccentric, and often designedly rambling narrators. And twentiethand twentyfirst-century scholarship stresses the psychological and artistic subtlety and sophistication of ical techniques. 37 I contend that the central narratorial be understood as an outgrowth of T As a critic Thackeray interposed his critical assessment skills and writing personality between his readers and the narrative world created by an author. Presumably readers read reviews to opinions ; the actual plot and characters of the reviewed work of literature are, in a sense, secondary. persona of the critic played
263 the essential role, in essence acting as the protagonist, of the review. For more than ten years Thackeray exercised this skill, this style of interpositional writing, on essentially a weekly basis. Although many authors have also written critical reviews, few have had such an extended career writing reviews prior to creating their own mature fiction. To make his reviews more interesting Thackeray endowed his critical voice with personality, effectively creating personas. T -known narrative presences, James Yellowplush and Michael Angelo Titmarsh, were first created as fictional critical presences to bring life to critical reviews of books and paintings. Thus, the narrative voice in critical essays, his musing, often digressive, contemplative and companionable presence, forms a continuum with the distinctive and central narrative voice of his novels. Both narrative voices muse on the significance, artistic quality, and perhaps level of human truth contained within a work of literature. This musing is, perhaps, normally associated more with an essayist than a novelist, but, as I have observed, Thackeray never really separated these roles. Lastly, one should note that t universally praised by his contemporaries. Returning once again to G. H. Lewis, in 1850 he wrote: First let us mention the beauty of his style. For clearness, strength, idiomatic ease, delicacy, and variety, there is no one since Goldsmith to compare with him. It is not a style in the vulgar sense of the word; that is to say, it is not a trick It is the flowing garment which robes his thoughts, and moves with every movement of his mind into different and appropriate shapes, simple in narrative, terse and glittering in epigram, playful in conversation and digression, rising into rhythmic
264 periods when the mood is of more sustained seriousness, and becoming indescribably affecting in its simplicity when it utters pathetic or solemn thoughts. 38 Seventy-five years later Arthur Quiller-Couch, not a particular fan of Thackeray, ul that it moves one so frequently to envy, and not 39 Ti llotson made similar favorable comments. Lewes, Quiller-Couch, Tillotson, and other commentators drew their assessments of However, the lovely phrase-making, the sharpness of nuance and tone, the light touch which surprises with its effectiveness, and the use of ironic juxtaposition and memorable epigrammatic writing also adorn al journalism. Indeed, I contend that all of the micro-writing aspects of style which these and other critics have praised were became key parts of Thac a novelist. It is not difficult to find For example, commenting on a fashionable novel by Charlotte Bury entitled Love Thackeray Love was too dull to be dangerous and too entirely vapid and insignificant to be 40 Attacking a Harriet Martineau treatise entitled How to Observe pages, thinking to catch a thought, but in vain; one is left panting after a pursuit through a 41 Critiquing the then popular trend of glorifying supposed historical events through elaborate paintings as exemplified in the works of Benjamin Haydon Thackeray
265 existed (at least in such shape), performing actions that never occurred, and dressed in 42 Responding to a religious attack on Spectator picture, the reading of a fine poem, or of a kind Christian Essay in this very Spectator may lead a man to turn toward Heaven . as much as any sermon. . We can praise 43 On the supposed American rejection introduction into the States is forbidden by the laws of the union, the people do with this commodity as with others they smuggle it, and use it, in fact, if not by name. . The Americans respect rank as much as we, only they are a free people, and do not like to say 44 al journalism includes many examples some so admired in his mature novels. In this, as in other respects, an essential unity connects Thackeray the critic with Thackeray the novelist. 6.3 Literary Pathways of course, been subject to extensive critical scrutiny over many decades. In the course of literally hundreds of critical reviews scholars have often invoked presumed authorial intent, or sought anecdotal support to better understand metaphors, themes, or stylistic devices. Yet
266 surprisingly few of these critical assessments have drawn upon the very foundation of This neglect may be partially due to attribution difficulties; however have often been dismissed simply as and thus unworthy of serious scholarly attention. To the contrary, Thackeray developed his literary values and ideas over the course of many years of critical journalism. Thackeray once wrote to Edward Fitzgerald lism] that one is always thinking of making good 45 better appreciated by tracing them back to ideas originating in his critical writings. 6.3.1 From Critic to the Narrator of Catherine C Catherine: A Story Critics such as Frederick Cabot, Richard Colby, and Keith Hollingsworth have considered this a flawed but still interesting anti-Newgate novel. 46 So -called Newgate novels of the 1830s and 1840s by Bulwer, Ainsworth, Dickens and others featured criminals as protagonists and arguably placed these figures in favorable lights. Thackeray openly opposed the Newgate school, arguing, as below, that ro gu es should be portrayed as ro gu es Accordingly, the narrator of Catherine one Ikey Solomons, Jr., satirically attacks both public taste and Newgate authors while acknowledging the financial necessity of writing works that will sell declaring: The public will hear of nothing but rogues; and the only way in which poor authors, who must live, can act honestly by the public and themselves, is to paint such thieves as they are; not dandy, poetical, rose-water thieves; but real
267 downright scoundrels, leading scoundrelly lives, drunken, profligate, dissolute, low, as scoundrels will be. 47 Despite this narratorial interjection, critics have generally argued that the novel is at least a partial failure due to an inconsistency of tone; in particular, the treatment of the eponymous and nominally villainous Catherine Hayes is inconsistent, in that at times she emerges as a likeable sufferer who is more victim than villain. Frederick Cabot has characterization and realistic depiction came into conflict with his satirical and moralistic 48 But, as has been pointed out by John Kleis, 49 the picture becomes more complex if one attaches intentional dramatic irony to the statements of Catherine s narrator. The narrator is always an important presence and often serves complex functions. To that end, Judith Fisher has recently argued that narrators were subtly crafted and endowed with calculated ambiguities and contradictions in order to deliberately stimulate reader skepticism. 50 Thackeray identified the narrator of Catherine Ikey Solomons, Jr. presumably because that name was associated with a then famous criminal, Ikey Solomon or Solomons. As Hollingsworth has noted, Isaac (or Catherine ] must have thought of 51 Thus, Thackeray chose to present his novel through the lens of a Jonathan Wild, or a Mr. Peachum. It is, however, not entirely clear what effect Thackeray sought to achieve with this narrative identity. might 52 His own criminality would
268 suggest he possesses a true understanding of fellow criminals (which Thackeray elsewhere argued that Newgate authors Ainsworth, Bulwer, and Dickens did not possess 53 ). Sheldon Goldfarb speculated that a Bell s Life article in 1838 had brought that Isaac Solomon to Tha 54 and opined that perhaps this was simply a If Thackeray had a more specific intent it has remained obscure. critical writings, however, shed light on his understanding of Ikey Solomon and accordingly offer new insight into the novel. Indeed, in an 1837 critical review in the Times well preceding the Bell s Life article Thackeray specifically commented on Ikey Solomons as follows: We dare swear, for instance, that Mr. Isaac Solomons (if that remarkable gentleman be still alive) would speak with a great deal of contempt of the character of the once great Mr. Wild. Mr. W., he would say, was only a paltry shopman, a pitiful dealer in stolen goods, with a few mean notions on shop-lifting and picking pockets, and not a single idea of the far higher system of public plunder. Yes, we venture to assert that Mr. Solomons is a public character; he feels deeply that the aristocracy made laws for the poor; he speaks eloquently of a class mighty, intelligent, and oppressed enslaved, insulted, ROBBED (he says it with tears in his eyes) by the dastardly few, the infamous monopolizers of the wealth of the country Thus, in the course of a century, does civilization advance Mr. Wild was but a pickpocket; Mr. Solomons, forsooth, is a politician. 55
269 Based on this comment, I submit that Thackeray intended to associate the narrator of Catherine not just with a criminal, but also with an unscrupulous and hypocritical politician. And, then and now, the comments of such a politician are presumed to be insincere and misleading. it appears that Thackeray may have chosen a narrative voice with the intent of stimulating skepticism on the part of his readers. rjections, and perhaps even his reporting of events, cannot be taken at face value; some of the apparent inconsistencies in Catherine may reflect intended but previously not fully appreciated dramatic irony and deliberately incorporated uncertainty. Furthe s as a politician, along with his coupling of that personality with Jonathan Wild, suggests that there may be an overlooked political subtext in Catherine Jonathan Wild is critically recognized as both a criminal novel and a political satire; Catherine has never been viewed in that same joint light, but perhaps it should be. Along those lines, one wonders if Count Gustavus Galgenstein a philandering German adventurer who is estranged from his father, who seduces and abandons Catherine Hayes and rejects his bastard son, who gambles and falls prey to drunkenness and glutto ny was drawn as a literary counterpart of the contemporaneous George II. Lieutenant M acs hane, an Irish rogue with a quixotic sense of honor, similarly have a nonliterary eighteenth-century (or nineteenth-century) equivalent? Perhaps a comparative exploration of the characters and events of Catherine with regard to the political personalities and events of the early Hanoverian era might add a new dimension to our nominally anti-Newgate novel.
270 6.3.2 From Critic to the Showman of Vanity Fair Catherine is admittedly a relatively minor part of the Thackeray canon, but uncertainties Vanity Fair. One of the most commented on aspects of that novel is its frame a invokes and the novel Vanitas Vanitatum! which of us is happy in this world? Which of us has his desire? or, having it, is satisfied? --come, children, let us shut up the box and the puppets, for our play is pla Analysis of this frame as Vanity Fair scholarship and commentary. 56 Yet scholars disagree about the origin and the significance of this metaphor. John Sutherland attests to the importance of the frame and suggests that Thackeray likely drew the image in imitation of the theatrical manager Alfred Bunn, Sutherland notes that Thackeray had previously satirized Bunn and argues that he would have been The Stage, Before and Behind the Curtain 57 Without commenting on its origin, Roger Wilkenfeld ties the language of the frame to the illustrations Thackeray provided for the novel and 58 Joan Stevens points out that preface was added after the serialization of the novel and further notes that a similar theatrical analogy was used by Charles Dickens in a January 1837 number of Pickwick
271 Papers and in a June 1837 commentary as editor of Nevertheless, Stevens attributes much significance to the differences in language between Dickens and s scenery (i.e. illustrations provided by Cruikshank) becomes s simple end-of-season thank you and immersion in his multi-level commentary, coming from above the action, which presents Vanity Fair as a puppet show within a greater Vanity Fair of life. of his story. His authorial role is no simple affair of stage management. He moves 59 Yet Myron Taube takes a contrary position; after quoting an anecdote reported by Eyre Crowe suggesting -hand comment made to him in June of 1848, Taube concludes that the frame is an afterthought that is inconsistent with the representation within the novel of the author as preacher rather than manager of the performance. 60 his showman metaphor. The participants in the scholarly debate on the Vanity Fair preface were presumably all unaware that Thackeray had invoked a skeletal form of the manager of performance metaphor roughly ten years before the publication of Vanity Fair In a September 1837 Times largely unfavorable Earnest Maltravers, Th ackeray notes that the author peeping over the barrier, like that of the proprietor of the show, in the comedy of Mr. Punch 61
272 A comparison of timelines suggests that Thackeray did s initial use of the stage manager analogy. anecdote is correct and that Thackeray was reminded of this analogy in 1848, it should now also be evident nd. Moreover, however much one might agree with Sutherland, Wilkenfeld, Stevens, and others as to the aptness of this analogy for Vanity Fair or the appropriateness of the complexities with which Thackeray embellished the core idea, it is also clear that Thackeray considered this metaphor of authorship, with the supra-positioning of the author as a puppet-master and his characters as puppets, as a generally valid concept, applicable to other authors besides himself, and certainly applicable to novels other than Vanity Fair. Indeed, in this and other respects, Vanity Fair should be considered more as the fruit of seeds long planted and slowly nurtured over a prior decade of journalism than as an independent product of the late 1840s. 6.3.3 From Critic to Commentator on Jesuitism in Henry Esmond also serve as explanatory sources for intriguing or unusual positions taken in his novels. For example, Thackeray normally depicted religion as a submerged force, offering a general, even formulaic, religious belief that proceeds along nominally Anglican lines. Decency and secular morality, rather than religion, normally expressed virtue and marked good character. However, some have suggested that Henry Esmond written during the general anti-Catholicism associated with the sois 62
273 Henry Esmond John Peck tion of the possibilities of Catholicism, for he [Thackeray] 63 Peck views Henry Esmond as a struggle between the past, the comforting faith and certainty of Catholicism, and the future, a skeptical and uncertain Anglic an ism. Further, Peck suggests that through the character of the Jesuit Father Holt 64 and eve Henry Esmond in its condemnation of individualism, seems close to a work of Catholic 65 In in Esmond the Jesuit Father Holt is initially cast as a powerful, charismatic, and somewhat sympathetic figure. He offers comfort and apparent affection to the friendless orphan and is a model of dedication and selflessness. Holt paints an appealing romantic picture of Catholicism and the Jesuit order, as he tells young Esmond: of its martyrs and heroes, of its Brethren converting the heathen by myriads, traversing the desert, facing the stake, ruling the courts and councils, or braving the tortures of kings; so that Harry Esmond thought to belong to the Jesuits was the greatest prize of life and the bravest end of ambition; the greatest career here, and in heaven the surest reward; and began to long for the day, not only when he should enter into the one Church and receive his first communion, but when he might join that wonderful brotherhood, which was present throughout world, and
274 which numbered the wisest, the bravest, the highest born, the most eloquent of men among its members. 66 Of course, Thackeray is an anti-romantic satirist, and this excerpt should be read in that light. Indeed, over the course of the novel Henry Esmond moves away from Catholicism to Anglicanism, and Father Holt is revealed to be less than he initially seemed to be. nciliatory tone toward Jesuits, so evident in Henry Esmond in reaction against anti67 It is a matter of interpretation, however, whether Thackeray sympathizes with Holt the man or Holt the Jesuit, and whether, following Peck, this sympathy extends to the Jesuits as an order and to Catholicism as a religion. It is not always easy to disentangle s blend of satire and truth. Richard Colby quoted Morning Chronicle The Novitiate in his analysis of this issue. 68 I suggest that Times History of the Popes articles then presumably unknown to Colby (and to Peck) offer surer guidance. 69 In these articles Thackeray does express an admiration or at least a respec t for the energy, dedication, and skill of the Jesuits, ing Thackeray endows Father Holt with all these virtues, and accordingly one cannot but feel that Thackeray conceived Holt as emblematic of his order. But the tone of the Times reviews and, I submit, the tone of Henry Esmond is not that of offering unstinting praise but rather that of giving a formidable enemy his due. For in both the novel and, as I will show, the critical reviews, Thackeray also portrays the
275 Jesuits as scheming, manipulative, and treacherous. Thus, Henry Esmond honors the tenacity and sacrifice of the Jesuits without necessarily conciliating them. Catholic absolutes, I argue that Thackeray does recognize and portrays the supposed attractiveness of Catholic absolutism to the unsophisticated and inexperienced, without himself falling prey to that weakness. Indeed, in one of his reviews of History of the Popes Thackeray offers a countervailing view: That creed [Catholicism] must be the true one, they say, in which there is seen such wonderful unity, which has endured so long and been victorious so often. May we not say, on the contrary, that this very unity is one of the proofs of falsehood! It is but a huge conspiracy. It is folly to say that every man who entered it was endowed by nature with exactly the same opinions, had precisely the same degree and quality of intellect, had gone through the same processes of thought and experience, which led him to behold the truth precisely as his fellowconspirator beheld it. To subscribe as each man did to every tittle of the faith of the mother church for the time being as she thought fit to expound, or to modify, or to expunge it every single man had sacrificed some portion of the truth as it appeared to his own judgment . this much-boasted unity is brought about at the expense of truth, and on the condition of slavish submission; the triumph resulting from it is a political success, not a religious one; and, however much we may admire the skill and pertinacity of the individuals who gained it, let us remember that every one of them has had to sacrifice some one or more of his convictions to the claims of the imperious society of which he was a member. 70
276 In fact 1840 critical commentaries on the Jesuits projects to a remarkable degree (but with a bit less sympathy) the ultimate failure and exile of Father Holt as presented in Henry Esmond a dozen years later in 1852: to suppose that this old, mean, exploded, soul-debasing system of Jesuithood can ever take a serious hold upon free and honest men. It may act on a weak imagination, and dazzle or frighten it for a while; it may accommodate itself to a popular prejudice or feeling, and so fancy that it achieves a momentary triumph; but it is the feeling that triumphs here, not the priest, who is only the fly that goads the horse and rides on the wheel. And it is curious to examine the history of this restless, busy, sly, Jesuit race how they have, with their wonderful cleverness, taken a hold in almost every nation of the world, and with their wonderful cleverness been thrown over. They are kicked out of Spain, they are kicked out of Portugal, out of France, out of England, out of China, and the mummery of intrigue. Was ever fate more merited, or excessive cleverness and dexterity better repaid? 71 To consider Henry Esmond same error made by those who regard Satan as the hero of Paradise Lost ; Father Holt is made attractive in the novel because he must initially attract young Henry Esmond, but in the end his scheming and his humanity are inextricably comingled. He is, in a strange fashion, honorable in his intrigues, but he is also very dangerous. His duplicity cannot be sanctioned; his cause must be defeated, not conciliated. in this case as in others, aids in the novels.
277 6.3.4 From Critic to Advocate of Sexual Realism in Pendennis To offer one last example of a supporting historical and biographical context, consider the oftThe History of Pendennis that permitted to depict to his utmost power a M AN. We must drape him, and give him a certain conventional simper. 72 In the context of the novel, in which the protagonist is tempted into a sexual liaison with the working class Fanny Bolton, a liaison which Thackeray with some awkwardness suggests was never consummated, this introductory comment has been generally interpreted as advocating a more open literary expression of human sexuality. Yet, despite his frequently expressed admiration for Fielding, Tha and indications that Thackeray was conflicted about the literary expression of sexuality. In an 1840 Times The world does not tolerate now such satire as that of Hogarth and Fielding, and the world is no doubt right in a great part of its squeamishness [regarding presentations of debauchery]; for it is good to pretend to the virtue of chastity even though we do not p 73 After indirectly referring to eighteenth-century harlotry, Thackeray continues: ld be as prudish as it is; that writers should be forced to chasten their humour, and when it would play with points of life and character which are essentially immoral, that
278 they should be compelled, by the general outcry of incensed public propriety, to be silent altogether. 74 human nature to make an accurate portrait? . .This is such a hard question, that, think And, indeed, Thackeray never really answers his own question. He wanted the freedom that Hogarth and Fielding had to display human sexuality, but his adherence to the Grundian standards of his age was not entirely reluctant he was a product of Victorian sensibility as well as its critic. With the exception of Vanity Fair now rarely read. Literary fashions and trends do change over time; however, it is not clear if massive novels that the Victorians valued so highly will ever come back into favor. From that perspective, perhaps, one could argue that an assessment and explication of even less frequently read critical journalism is of little moment. Yet Thackeray was indisputably an essential shaper of the Victorian literary era. Before writing his oft-studied novels he was a prominent journalist and an influential literature and art critic. gain a fuller understanding of the practices and dynamics of early Victorian journalism as wide-ranging Times and Morning Chronicle articles not only reveal the tenor of the man, they Calcutta Star correspondence with James Hume constitutes a unique and culturally rich cosmopolitan-
279 br ings back to life cultural and social aspects of the early Victorian art world, a world whic h has become perhaps unfairly overshadowed by subsequent Pre-Raphaelitism. And I contend that any understanding of early Victorian journalism in general or of overall contribution to our li terary heritage that neglects his critical journalism is unbalanced and necessarily incomplete. Moreover, for those who a mixture of se nse and sentiment, a recognition of the ludicrous in human nature and human activity, an attack on pomposity and pretense, the deft handling of a witty subversive phrase or an insightful contrast, and an underlying affection for honesty and the search for truth nalism is an essential part of his writings, both for its own excellences and for the insights it brings to his other works. Not es 1 [William Makepeace Thackeray], a Magazine March 1846, 332-42; William Makepeace Dignity of Morning Chronicle (London), January 12, 1850. 2 A Brothe r of the Press 3 Presumably this undated request referred to a number of either Vanit y Fair or P endennis See Gordon Ray, ed, The Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1945-6), 4:325. 4 Edgar Harden, T hackeray the Writer: From Journalism to Vanity Fair (New Yor k: Palgrave Macmillan, 1998); Thackeray the Writer: From Pendennis to Denis Duv al (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000). 5 Donald Hawes, als, Ariel 7 (1976): 3-31; eray Review of English Studies 23 (1972): 35Studies in the Novel 13 (1981): 5-20; Charles Mauskopf , Nineteenth-Century Fiction 21 (1966): 21, Philological Quarterly 50
280 (1971): 239-252; thetic Views of W. M. Thackeray, Brno Studies in English 6 (1966): 7and Critic of French Literature, Brno Studies in English 9 (1970): 37, Br no Studi es in English 10-11 (1972): 7e Morning Chronicle (1844 1848), Brno Studies in English 2 (1960): 79-105. 6 John Carey, (London: Faber & Faber, 1977); D. J. Taylor, Thackeray: The Life of a Literary Man (New York: Carroll & Graf, 1999). 7 Robert A. Colby, (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1979); Barbara Hardy, T he Exposure of Luxury: Radical Themes in Thackeray (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1972); J ohn Loofbourow, Thackeray and the Form of Fiction (Princ eton: Princeton University Press, 1964); Michael Lund, Reading Thackeray (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1988); John Rawlins, Thacker (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974); and Geoffrey Tillotson, Thackeray the Novelist (London: C ambridge University Press, 1954; London: Methuen & Co., 1963 ). 8 George Saintsbury, A C onsideration of Thackeray (1931, reprinted New York: R ussell & Russell, 1968); Gordon N. Ray, Thackeray: The Uses of Adversity 1811-1846 ( New York: McGraw-Hill, 1955). 9 Ray, Letters 1:387. 10 Lewis Melville, William Makepeace Thackeray: A Biography Including Hitherto Uncollected Letters and Speeches and a Bibliography of 1,300 items (London, 1910), 2:117. 11 Peter Shillingsburg, Pe gasus in Harness: Victorian Publishing and W. M. Thackeray (Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia, 1992). 12 Ray, Letters 2:98. 13 Edgar Harden, T he Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray. A Supplement (New York; London: Garland. 1994), 1:667. 14 Edgar Harden, (Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press, 1979). 15 R. C. Terry, ed. (Oxford: Oxford Unive rsity Press, 1999), 207. 16 Paul Schlicke, ed., (Oxford: Oxford Unive rsity Press, 1999), 516. 17 Edgar F. Harden, ion; John Sutherland, Thackeray at Work (London: The Athlone Press, 1974). 18 Geoffrey Tillotson, T hackeray the Novelist 1. 19 Tillotson, Thackeray the Novelist 3. 20 Colby, Error! Main Document Only. : An
281 Author and His Public. 21 Of course there are common characters in Victorian novel sequences such as crossing between different novel sequences or into unrelated novels. 22 N ational Review 2 (1856): 183. 23 George Saintsbury, A C onsideration of Thackeray 1931 (New York: Russell & Russell, 1968), 248. 24 G. K. Chesterton; quotation drawn from the introduction to the Everyman Edwin Drood & and reprinted in Tillotson, Thackeray the Novelist 6. 25 Tillotson, Thackeray the Novelist 5-24. 26 Sybil ay 13, 1845. 27 William Makepeace Thackeray, T he Oxford Thackeray, George Saintsbury, ed. (London, Oxford University Press, 1909), 13:700. 28 William Makepeace Thackeray, T he History of Pendennis, edited by Peter Shillingsburg (New York: Garland, 1991), 26 29 Joan GarrettVictorian Studies 22, no 2 (Winter 1979): 173-192. 30 [George H. Lewes], L eader December 21, 1850, 929-930; reprinted in T hackeray: The Critical Heritage edited by Geoffrey Tillotson and Donald Hawes (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1968), 107. 31 Tillotson, Thackeray the Novelist 115. 32 William Makepeace Thackeray, Pe ndennis, xvi. 33 Ray, Letters 2:772-3. 34 N ational Review 2 (1856): 192. 35 Harden, Thackeray the Writer: From Pendennis to Dennis Duval 125. 36 C atherine : The Function of Ike Victorian Newsletter 33 (1968): 50. 37 Judith Fisher, Authorship (Aldershot and Burlington: Ashgate, 2002). 38 [George H. Lewes], L eader December 21, 1850, 929-930; reprinted in Thackeray: The Critical Heritage edited by Geoffrey Tillotson and Donald Hawes (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1968), 106. 39 Arthur Quiller-Couch, C harles Dickens and Other Victorians (Cambridge:
282 Cambridge University Press, 1925), 151. 40 [William Makepeace Thackeray], ive to George IV and Queen Caroline, Times (London), January 11, 1838. 41 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), Oc tober 9, 1838. 42 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), April 5, 1838. 43 [William Makepeace Thackeray], f Selina Countess of Huntingdon, Times (London), August 21, 1840. 44 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Ev e Effingham by Fenimore Cooper, Esq., Times (London), December 19, 1838. 45 Ray, Letters 1:349. 46 F Catherine NineteenthCentury Fiction 28, no. 4 (1974): 404Catherine Review of English Studies ns., 15, no. 60 (1964): 381-396; Keith Hollingsworth, T he Newgate Novel: 1830-1847 (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1963). 47 William Makepeace Thackeray, C atherine: A Story, edited by Sheldon Goldf arb (Ann Arbor: U of Michigan Press, 1999), 30. 48 Cabot, The Two Voices 404. 49 Kleis, Dramatic Irony, 50-53. 50 Judith Fisher, 51 Hollingsworth, The Newgate Novel 112. 52 James H. Wheatley, (Cambridge, Massa chusetts: MIT Press, 1969), 42. 53 [William Makepeace azine, Apr il 1839, 408. 54 C atherine: A Story, by W illiam Thackeray (Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1999), 143. 55 [William Makepeace Thackeray], The Convicts, Times (London), September 26, 1837. 56 See, for example, Edgar F. Harden, Fair, A Novel without a Hero (New York: Twayne Publishers, 1995), 21, 119; Catherine P eters. orlds of Imagination and Reality (New York: Oxford UP, 1987), 146; Juliet McMaster, Thackeray: The Major Novels 13 -16. 57 N otes and Queries 19 (1 972): 408-9. 58 Roger B. Wilkenfeld, Vanit y Fair Nineteenth-
283 Century Fiction 26 (1971): 307, 310. 59 Joan Stevens, N ineteenth-Century Fiction 22 (1968): 391-397. 60 Vanit y Fair English Language Notes (1968 ): 40-42. 61 [William Makepeace Thackeray], nest Maltravers by the Author of R ienzi, Eugene Aram, &c, Times (London), September 30, 1837. 62 The reestablishment of a Roman Catholic religious hierarchy in England; see in Re ligion in Victorian Britain: Volume 4: Interpretations ed. Gerald Parsons (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988): 115-134. 63 John Peck, H enry Esmond English 40, no. 168 (1991): 228. 64 keray and Religion 219. 65 Peck 224. 66 William Makepeace Thackeray, The History of Henry Esmond edited by Edgar Harden (New York: Garland, 1989), 25. 67 Colby, 342. 68 [William Makepeace Thackeray], ia te, or a Year Among the Morning Chronicle (London), April 11, 1846. 69 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), June 10, 1840; August 11, 1840; August 18, 1840. 70 Ibid. 71 Ibid. 72 William Makepeace Thackeray, T he History of Pendennis xvi. 73 [William Makepeace Thackeray], Times (London), September 2, 1840. 74 ne Volume with a Times (London), September 2, 1840.
284 Bibliography Times (London), March 30, 1843. 5 (January-December 1847). London: Wm. H. Allen and Co., 1847. en-CA Altick, Richard D. Punch: the Lively Youth of a British Institution, 1841-1851. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio St. University Press, 1997. Asiatic Journal and Monthly Register n.s., 31 (June 1840). London: Wm. H. Allen & Co, 1840. Asiatic Journal and Monthly Miscellany Ser. 3, III and IV. London: Wm. H. Allen & Co, 1844 and 1845. Auchard, John, ed. The Portable Henry James New York: Penguin, 2004. Blanchard, Sidney Laman. Yesterday and Today in India London: William H Allen and Co, 1867 Bloom, Harold, ed. Modern Critical Views: William Makepeace Thackeray New York: Chelsea House, 1987. Bourne, Henry Richard Fox. British Newspapers: Chapters in the History of Journalism Vol. 2. London: Chatto and Windus, 1887. Irish Sketch Book Papers on Language and Literature 29, no.3 (1993): 259-283. Burke, Edmund. Philosophical Inquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful London: J. F. Dove, 1827. First published in 1757. Burton, Reginald George. The Book of the Tiger. London: Hutchinson & Co., 1933. Cabot Catherine Nineteenth-Century Fiction 28, no. 4 (1974): 404-416. Calcutta Monthly Journal and General Register of Occurrences for the Year 1839 Calcutta: Samuel Smith & Co., 1840. Carey, John. Thackeray: Prodigal Genius London: Faber & Faber, 1977. Chanda, Mrinal Kanti. History of the English Press in Bengal 1780 to 1857. Calcutta: D P Bagchi & Co, 1987. Choudhury, Ranabir Ray. Calcutta A Hundred Year Ago Bombay: The Statesman Commercial Press, 1987. On the Genius of George Cruikshank By William Thackeray. London: George Redway, 1884. i-xvi. The Sewanee Review Quarterly 38 (1930): 286-300.
285 Morning Chronicle London Times Literary Supplement December 19, 1942, 619. Thackeray Newsletter 48 (1998): 1-3. --Thackeray Newsletter 49 (1999): 7. --Catherine Review of English Studies ns., 15, no. 60 (1964): 381-396 ---. Th An Author and His Public Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1979. ---. Review of W. M. Thackeray and the Mediated Text by Richard Pearson. Victorian Periodicals Review 34 (2001): 391-394. --Dickens Studies Annual 31 (2002): 365-396. --Thackeray Newsletter 42 (1995): 11-12. Colonial Magazine and Foreign Miscellany 8 (June 1846): 381-88. Crowe, Joseph Archer. Reminisces of Thirty-Five Years of My Life London: John Murray, 1895. Dasent, Arthur. Murray, 1908. Dickens, Charles. Sketches by Boz. Philadelphia: Carey, Lea and Blanchard, 1837. First published in 1836. The Critic 631 (1894): 205-6. Duncan, Francis. The English in Spain; or, The Story of the War of Succession Between 1834 and 1840 London: John Murray, 1877. Edwards, H. Sutherland. Personal Recollections London: Cassell and Company, 1900. Ellis, S. M. William Harrison Ainsworth and His Friends Vol 2. London: John Lane, 1911. Elwin, Malcolm. Thackeray A Personality New York: Russell & Russell, 1966. First published in 1932. Ennis, Lambert. Thackeray: The Sentimental Cynic New York: AMS Press, 1950. Enzinger, Ph The Quarterly Journal, University of North Dakota 20, no. 4 (1930): 318-333; 21, no. 1 (1931): 52-65; 21, no. 2 (1931): 145-160. Nineteenth-Century Li terature 47, no. 1 (1992): 72-90. The Life of John Sterling Victorian Literature and Culture (1999): 307-314.
286 In Annotations for the Selected Works of William Makepeace Thackeray edited by Edgar F. Harden, Vol. 1., 112-266. New York: Garland, 1990. --Victorian Studies 26 (1981): 65-82. --Nineteenth-Century Fiction 39 (1985): 392-415. ---. Aldershot and Burlington: Ashgate, 2002. The Quarterly Journal, University of North Dakota 22 (1931): 191-203. Joseph Foster, Men-at-the-bar: a Biographical Hand-List of the Various Members of the Inns at Court 2nd ed London: Hazel, Watson, and Viney, 1885. Foster, Margaret. Introduction. In Drawn From Life: The Journalism of William Makepeace Thackeray London: The Folio Society, 1984, vii-xxiv. Frith, W. G. C. The Royal Calcutta Turf Club: Some Notes on its Foundation, History, and Development Calcutta: The Royal Calcutta Turf Club, 1976. Garnett, Robert, ed. The New Sketch Book London: Alston Rivers, Ltd., 1906. Grant, James. The Great Metropolis Vol. 2. London: Saunders & Otley, 1837. Garrett-Goodyear, Joan. Characterization in Thackeray. Victorian Studies 22, no 2 (Winter 1979): 173192. Etudes Anglais 28 (1975): 203-212. Gulliver, Harold. Valdosta, GA: privately printed, 1934. Hampson, Robert. The Yearbook of English Studies 34 (2004): 214-229. Hancock, Stephen. The Romantic Sublime and Middle-Class Subjectivity in the Victorian Novel New York: Routledge, 2005. Harden, Edgar, comp. A Checklist of Contributions by William Makepeace Thackeray to Newspapers, Periodicals, Books, and Serial Part Issues 1828-1864. Victoria, Canada: U of Victoria P, 1996. ---. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press, 1979. ---. In By William Thackeray. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan Press, 2005. ---, ed. The Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray. A Supplement
287 2 vols. New York; London: Garland. 1994. --Thackeray Newsletter 49 (1999): 1-4. ---. Thackeray the Writer: From Journalism to Vanity Fair. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1998. ---. Thackeray the Writer: From Pendennis to Denis Duval New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. ---. Newark, Delaware: University of Delaware Press, 1985. --Thackeray Newsletter 50 (1999): 8. ---. New York: Twayne Publishers, 1995. Hardie, Martin, Dudley Snelgrove, Jonathan Mayne, and Basil Tayor. Water-colour Painting in Britain. II The Romantic Period. New York: Barnes & Noble, 1967. ---. Water-colour Painting in Britain. III The Victorian Period New York: Barnes & Noble, 1968. Hardy, Barbara. The Exposure of Luxury. Radical Themes in Thackeray University of Pittsburgh Press, 1972. Notes and Queries (March, 2002): 64. --Ariel 7 (1976): 3-31. --Review of English Studies 23 (1972): 3551. --Studies in the Novel 13 (1981): 520. ---. Review of A Checklist of contributions by William Makepeace Thackeray to Newspapers, Periodicals, Books, and Serial Part Issues, 1828-1864, comp. by Edgar Harden. Analytical and Enumerative Bibliography 10 (1999): 113-116. ---. Review of W. M. Thackeray as a Critic of Literature Review of English Studies ns 24 (1973): 361-363. In John Ruskin and the Victorian Eye, edited by Harriet Whelchel, 28-51. Phoenix: Harry N. Abrams, 1993. Hollingsworth, Keith. The Newgate Novel: 1830-1847 Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1963. Beyond Arthurian Romances: The Reach of Victorian Medievalism New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. Houghton, Walter E. The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals 1824-1900. 5 vols. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 1966-1989.
288 Hudson, Derek. Thomas Barnes of the Times Cambridge: University Press, 1944. [Hume, James]. Letters to Friends at Home from June, 1842 to May, 1843 Calcutta: Star Press, 1843; Letters to Friends at Home from June, 1843 to May, 1844 Calcutta: Star Press, 1844 ; Letters to Friends at Home from June, 1844 to May, 1845 Calcutta: Star Press, 1845. ---. A Selection of the Writings, Prose and Poetical, of the Late Henry W. Torrens, with a Biographical Memoir 2 vols. London: R. C. Lepage & Co., 1854. Johnson, Charles Plumptre. The Early Writings of William Makepeace Thackeray London: Elliot Stock, 1888. Catherine : The Function of Victorian Newletter 33 (1968): 50-53. PhD diss. Michigan State University, 1974. In John Ruskin and the Victorian Eye edited by Harriet Whelchel, 28-51. Phoenix: Harry N. Abrams, 1993. Laurie, cal Literature in India, The Dark Blue John C. Freund, ed III, (March-August 1872 ): 628-649, 642. Layard, George. Shirley Brooks of Punch: His Life, Letters, and Diary New York: Henry Holt, 1907. and the Literary Life, 1830Victorian Periodicals Review 27, no. 2 (1994): 105-126. Lister, Raymond. Victorian Narrative Painting New York: Clarkson N. Potter, 1966. Loofbourow, John. Thackeray and the Form of Fiction Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964. 7 (London: Yates and Alexander, 1863): 1-3. Lund, Michael. Reading Thackeray Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1988. Maas, Jeremy. Victorian Painters New Ma ckay, Charles. Forty Years Recollection of Life, Literature, and Public Affairs from 1830-1870. Vol 2. London, Chapman and Hall, 1877. ---. Through the Long Day, or, Memorials of a Literary Life During Half a Century Vol 1. London: W. C. Allen, 1887. Macleod, Dianne Sachko. Art and the Victorian Middle Class: Money and the Making of Cultural Identity Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996. Marrinan, Michael. Painting Politics for Louis-Philippe: Art and Ideology in Orlanist France, 1830-1848. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1988. Nineteenth-
289 Century Fiction 21 (1966): 21-33. --Philological Quarterly 50 (1971): 239-252. --PhD diss., New York University, 1964. McAuliffe, John. Irish Studies Review 9, no. 1 (2001): 25-40. McMaster, Juliet. Thackeray: The Major Novels Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1971. McMaster, R. D. London: Macmillan, 1991. Mei, JiangAn Analytical PhD diss., University of Toronto, 1993. Melville, Lewis. William Makepeace Thackeray: A Biography 2 vols, London: John Lane, 1909. --Fortnightly Review ns 74 (1903): 836845. --In Some Aspects of Thackeray, 259-270. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1911. Metzdorf, Robert. Review of William Makepeace Thackeray: Contributions to the Morning Chronicle edited by Gordon Ray. The Journal of English and Germanic Philology 55, no. 2 (1956): 335-37. Murdoch, John, ed. The Indian Year Book for 1862 Madras: Graves, Cookson and Co., 1863. Newall, Christopher. Victorian Watercolours London: Phaidon Press, 1987. Nicolay, Claire. The Anxiety of Mosaic Influence: Thackeray, Disraeli, and AngloJewish Assimilation in the 1840s. Nineteenth Century Contexts 25 (2003): 119145. Olmstead, John. Victorian Painting Essays and Reviews, Volume one: 1832-1848 New York, Garland, 1980. PMLA 60, no.2 (1945): 606-11. Brno Studies in English 6 (1966): 7-74. --Brno Studies in English 9 (1970): 37-126. --Brno Studies in English 10-11. (1972): 7-447. --Brno
290 Studies in English 2 (1960): 79-105. Parry, Leonard A. and Willard H. White. Some Famous Medical Trials New York: Charles Scribner, 1928. Constitutional (1836Notes and Queries 238, no.4 (1993): 474-7. ---. Review of A Checklist of Contributions by William Makepeace Thackeray to Newspapers, Periodicals, Books, and Serial Part Issues 1828-1864, comp. by Edgar Harden. Victorian Periodicals Review 30, no. 3 (1997): 295-295. ---. W. M. Thackeray and the Mediated Text: Writing for Periodicals in the MidNineteenth Century Burlington, USA: Ashgate, 2000. Peck, John. Henry Esmond. Oxford Journals: English 40, no. 168 (1991): 217-235. Peters, Catherine. : Shifting Worlds of Imagination and Reality New York: Oxford University Press, 1987. Prager, Arthur. The Mahogany Tree: An Informal History of Punch New York: Hawthorn Books, 1979. Prawer, S. S. Oxford: European Humanities Research Center, 1997. Criticism, 1837Journal of Victorian Culture 2, no. 1 (1997): 71-94. Price, Richard. A History of Punch London: Collins, 1957. ceedings of the Madras Literary Society, June 4, 1850, The Madras Journal of Literature and Science 16 (1850): 448-455. Times (London), December 21, 1843. Quiller-Couch, Arthur. Charles Dickens and Other Victorians Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1925. Ralls, W. -Catholicism. Religion in Victorian Britain: Volume 4: Interpretations ed. Gerald Parsons. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988, 115-134. Ra wlins, Jack P. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974. Ray, Gordon N. Thackeray: The Uses of Adversity 1811-1846. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1955. ---, ed. The Letters and Private Papers of William Makepeace Thackeray 4 vols. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard U P, 1945-6. --The Times Literary Supplement January 1, 1949: 16. ---, ed. William Makepeace Thackeray: Contributions to the Morning Chronicle Urbana:
291 University of Illinois Press, 1955. Reed, John R. Dickens and Thackeray: Punishment and Forgiveness Athens, Ohio: Ohio UP, 1995. Ritchie, Leitch. The British World in the East London: Wm. H. Allen & Co., 1846. Studies in the Novel 13 (1981): 21-39. Robertson, David. Sir Charles Eastlake and the Victorian Art World Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1978. Rosa, Matthew Whiting. The Silver Fork School: Novels of Fashion Preceding Vanity Fair New York: Columbia UP, 1936. National Review 2 (1856): 177-213. The Royal Watercolour Society: The First Fifty Years 1805-1855. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Antique Said, Edward. Orientalism New York: Pantheon, 1978 Saintsbury, George. A Consideration of Thackeray 1931. New York: Russell & Russell, 1968. Salmon, Steph. http://boards.ancestry.com.au/surnames.hume/188.8.131.52/mb.ashx Sanders, Andrew. Review of W.M. Thackeray and the Mediated Text: Writing for the Periodicals in the Mid-Nineteenth Century by Richard Pearson. Victorian Studies 45, no. 2 (2003): 348-50. --Journal of Newspaper and Periodical History 7 (1991): 17-24. Sanyal, Ram Gopal. Reminiscences and Anecdotes of Great Men of India, Both Official and Non-Official for the Last One Hundred Years Calcutta: Herald Printing Works, 1894. Schlicke, Paul, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. PMLA 57 (1941): 589-592. Victorian Newsletter 57 (1980): 22-27. Siegel, Jennifer. Endgame: Britain, Russia, and the Final Struggle for Central Asia London: I. B. Taurus and Co., 2002. Shepherd, Richard Herne, comp. The Bibliography of Thackeray. A Bibliographical List Arranged in Chronological Order London: Elliot Stock, 1880. Shillingsburg, Peter L. Pegasus in Harness: Victorian Publishing and W. M. Thackeray Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1992.
292 ---. William Makepeace Thackeray: A Literary Life New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001. Times Victorian Periodicals Review 40, no. 4 (2007): 332-354. Smith, Shelia M. Review of W. M. Thackeray as a Critic of Literature, by Lidmila Modern Language Review 69 (1974): 157-8. Asian Library and Research Notes Newspaper holdings of the National Library, Calcutta. The Quarterly Review of Historical Studies 7 (1968): 133-138. Spencer, W. T. ed. Constitutional. Spielmann, Marion H. The History of Punch. London: Cassell and Co., 1895. ---. The Hitherto Unidentified Contributions of W. M. Thackeray to Punch. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1900. Stevens, Joan. Century Fiction 22 (1968): 391-397. Stevenson, Lionel. Review of William Makepeace Thackeray: Contributions to the Morning Chronicle edited by Gordon N. Ray. Modern Philology. 54, no. 3 (1957): 205-207. Stocquelor, Joachim Hayward. The Memoirs of a Journalist Bombay, 1873. Fraser's MagazineNineteenth-Century Fiction 22 (1968): 281-288. Strong, Roy. Painting the Past: The Victorian Painter and British History London: Pimlico, 2004. Sullivan, Alvin. British Literary Magazines 4 vols. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1983-1986. tters from a Club ArmNineteenth-Century Fiction 18 (1964): 205-233. Notes and Queries 19 (1072): 408-9. --Notes and Queries 231, no. 2 (1986): 166-167. ---. Thackeray at Work London: Athlone Press, 1974. Taube, Myron. Vanity Fair English Language Notes (1968): 4042. Taylor, D. J. Thackeray: The Life of a Literary Man New York: Carroll & Graf, 1999. Terry, R. C., ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. New York Times January 22, 1922.
293 iterary Magazine March 1846, 332-342. [ ---]. Westminster Review April 1839, 282-305. ---. Catherine: A Story, edited by Sheldon Goldfarb. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan Press, 1999. [ ---]. Morning Chronicle (London), December 31, 1845. [ ---]. Times (London), August 30, 1838. [ ---]. Ti mes (London), November 27, 1838. [ ---]. Times (London), October 21, 1839. [ --Times (London), January 11, 1838. ---, Morning Chronicle (London), January 12, 1850. [ ---]. by the Author of Rienzi, Eugene Aram, &c. Times (London), September 30, 1837. [ ---]. Eve Effingham Times (London), December 19, 1838. [ ---]. at Paris. Times (London), April 5, 1838. [ --, July 1842, 319-22. [ ---]. -Street. Morning Chronicle (London), March 30, 1846. [ ---]. the Louvre. Morning Chronicle (London), April 1, 1842. [ ---]. ty of Painters in Water Colours. Pall-Mall. Morning Chronicle (London), April 17, 1848. [ --Morning Chronicle (London), May 8 & 10, 1844. [ --Morning Chronicle (London), May 5, 7, 11, 1846. [ --Morning Chronicle (London), March 30, 1846. [ ---]. of Painters in Water Colours. Morning Chronicle (London), April 29, 1844. [ ---]. Morning Chronicle (London), April 27, 1846. [ --Times (London), September 2, 1840.
294 [ ---]. Times (London), November 16, 1838. [ ---]. Times (London), September 18, 1837. ---. The History of Henry Esmond edited by Edgar Hard en New York: Garland, 1989. ---. The History of Pendennis, edited by Peter Shillingsburg. New York: Garland, 1991. [ --, April 1839, 407-424. [ ---]. Times (London), October 9, 1838. [ ---]. Times (London), March 5, 1840. [ ---]. Times (London), December 20, 1837. [ ---]. Times (London), August 21, 1840. [ ---]. -Riofrey. Morning Chronicle (London), July 24, 1845. [ --, June 1844, 700-16. [ ---]. tate Translated by Fortuanto Prandi. Times (London), August 15, 1840. [ ---]. The Times of Sept. 26.) The Colonist Dr. Lang on Transportation and Colonization. Times (London), October 16, 1837. [ ---]. s The Convicts. Times (London), September 26, 1837. [ ---]. Morning Chronicle (London), April 11, 1846. [ ---]. December 1839, 679-88. [ ---] On Men and Pictures. July 1841, 98-111. ---. The Oxford Thackeray 18 vols. George Saintsbury, ed. London: Oxford UP, 1908. [ ---]. June 1840, 720-32. [ --Fraser July 1840, 112-26. [ ---]. June 1845, 713-24. [ ---]. -6. By Mrs. Romer. Morning Chronicle (London), September 4, 1846. [ ---]. Times (London), June 10, 1840. [ ---]. Time (London), August 11, 1840. [ ---]. Times (London), August 18, 1840.
295 [ ---]. Westminster Review June 1840, 1-60. ---. Quarterly Review December 1854, 75-86. [ ---]. Pictorial Times May 13, 1843, 136-137; May 27, 1843, 169-170.. [ ---]. June 1839, 743-50. ---. Sketches after English Landscape Painters. 1850. [ ---]. carlett. Times (London), February 6, 1838. [ ---]. Morning Chronicle (London), June 26, 1845. [ ---]. Times (London), November 8, 1838. [ ---] British and Foreign Review April 1839, 490-539. [ ---]. June 1838, 758-64. [ ---]. Pictorial Times April 1, 1843. [ ---]. Sybil 5. [ ---]. Times (London), March 16, 1840. [ ---]. Times (London), November 12, 1838. [ ---]. -1400. Times (London), October 19, 1838. [ ---]. Times (London), October 25, 1838. Thomas, Deborah. Thackeray and Slavery Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1993. Thrall, M. and Carlyle New York: Columbia University Press, 1934. Tillotson, Geoffrey and Donald Hawes. Thackeray: The Critical Heritage London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1968. Tillotson, Geoffrey. Thackeray: the Novelist Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954; London: Methuen & Co., 1963. Van Duzer, Henry Sayre. A Thackeray Library. New York, Burt Franklin, 1919. Furman University Bulletin 34, no. 7 (1951): 30-45. Vine, Sandra http://boards.ancestry.com.au/surnames.hume/85.115.168/mb.ashx ; of Montrose 1736http:/genforum.genealogy.com/hume/messages/629.htmp.
296 Vizetelly, Henry. Glances Back Through Seventy Years: Autobiographical and Other Reminisces, Vol. 1. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trbner & Co., 1893. Atlantic Monthly 56 (1885): 685-693. Li Victorian Periodicals Review 39, no.2 (2006): 158-178. Welsh, Alexander. ed. Thackeray: A Collection of Critical Essays Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1968. Wheatley, James H. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1969. Whelchel, Harriet, ed. John Ruskin and the Victorian Eye. Phoenix: Harry N. Abrams, 1993. Studies in Bibliography 19 (1966): 67-84. Wilkenfeld, Roger B. Vanity Fair. Nineteenth-Century Fiction 26 (1971): 307-318. Wilson, A. N. The Victorians London: Arrow Books, 2003. Winegarner, Leila British and Foreign Review Journal of English and German Philology 47 (1948): 237-245. Wood, Christopher. Victorian Painting Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1999.
About the Author Gary Simons received a B.S. Degree in Chemistry from Clarkson University in 1967 and a Ph.D. in Chemistry from the John Hopkins University in 1971. During the 1970s he was first an assistant professor and subsequently a tenured associate professor in the Chemistry Department at Wichita State University; during this period he held grants from national and international organizations, supervised graduate students, and authored over 30 peer-reviewed publications. After leaving academia he spent twentyfive years in the private sector, taking on roles in technology assessment and development, marketing, strategic planning, program management, and senior management. He has held vice-presidential positions in two Fortune 500 companies and one professional services consulting firm, and for a number of years was president of a small networking and software development business. Dr. Simons returned to academia as a graduate student in 2006. His primary interest areas are eighteenth and nineteenth cen tury British literature. He has published on William Thackeray and on Jane Austen and has presented papers at regional, national, and international conferences.