As our digital text informs us (13): "Romanticism is a complex cultural movement to define". That's putting it mildly. So many ideas and movements, some of them contradictory, coexist within this broad spectrum- this "Janus-faced" phenomenon of focusing on the individual, yet also searching for ways to unify the members of society. I've always considered myself something of a romantic, and these readings have reinforced that to a degree; while also pointing out some of the pitfalls of such a temperament. But there's so many facets of Romanticism that I find intriguing (the music, the "return to folklore", etc.) that it's hard to select just a few here in this forum... maybe I can address some of the others in responses.
I think John Stuart Mill's On Liberty provides a central idea- that "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others" (my italics). This is a simply worded but quite powerful concept. An individual has the liberty to engage in any activity or pursuit whatsoever, even if it is harmful to his or her self (substance abuse, for example). They can believe in God or not; be heterosexual, homosexual, or asexual; they can take care of themselves with proper diet and exercise or choose to be a total hedonist... this individual array of choices was crucial, I think, to the rise of Romanticism.
There's a hint of narcissism in many of the writings. I was impressed with Alexander Pushkin's self-absorbed poem I Loved You:
"I loved you; and perhaps I love you still,
The flame, perhaps, is not extinguished; yet..."
Or Goethe's truly incurable romantic "Young Werther", who has elevated his own ego to the point that a failed love and some idle gossip drive him to suicide. A rich inner emotional life may be a beautiful and sublime state, but it comes at the cost of rationality. But maybe this was the point of Romanticism- it was a reaction to the overly rigid concepts of the Enlightenment (and I too, Professor Dwyer, was reminded of the 1960s and the whole hippie "love and peace" era). Jim Morrison would have been totally in his element in the days of Romanticism.
Professor Dwyer's comment: "You have an interesting interpretation, Mark, of the quote from Mill's On Liberty which you use to springboard further comment of where you are reminded of a celebration of excess in Romantic literature. Indeed, it is not a stretch to imagine Jim Morrison and Lord Byron partying like rock stars together".
@Beth Hall:
I couldn't help remembering, as I read these accounts of the terrible working conditions in Industrial Age Europe, a book that I bet many of us have encountered here in the BLS program- Charles Dickens' Hard Times- For These Times. The novel basically pits "Facts" and "Fancy" against each other, and it has an interesting parallel with the Enlightenment vs. Romanticism theme of this unit.
Similar conditions and class struggles have been going on since ancient times. I think of Egypt in the time of the Pharoahs and their enslavement of workers to build pyramids. The American South and the African slaves on their plantations. Migrant workers during the Depression...
The oppressed always find some form of release, for better or worse. They might develop a belief in a "god" that can deliver them. Or it might be as pedestrian as Flora Tristan's observation of the factory workers who "frequently go from insufficient nourishment to excessive drinking" (65). The resurgence of folk tales and fantasy in literature reflected a need for the lower and middle classes to "escape".
But sometimes, even often, they make art. American slaves came up with "the blues", a music genre that later evolved into jazz and rock and roll (while the original form somehow stayed mostly intact). This is one of the most fascinating aspects of studying the liberal arts for me- seeing how history influences art and vice versa.
@Candace Chilcoat:
Candace- your observations on "fear" are very insightful- it's probably the most primal and instinctual emotion on the planet, and an integral part of all human history (and indeed for most lower organisms- the "food chain"). At the most basic level, it's all about where the next meal comes from, isn't it?
I personally have worked dozens of temp jobs in the past motivated by that same fear- paying my bills, providing food for myself and family... that were very demeaning and "soul-sucking". I remember distinctly several days of loading railroad box-cars with 50-pound sacks of potatoes. (It gets old in about a half-hour, and you realize there's seven and 1/2 more to go).
As long as there are desperate people out there that have mouths to feed, there will be employers that exploit that situation. Centuries ago and now.
icons at the top right corner of the subsection.