Introduction:
Is Sterne's Yorick a man of benevolence or of solipsistic, self-gratifying
feeling? Can we
leave Clarissa feeling benevolence for James Harlowe? Benevolence
is often the quintessential attribute, the cardinal virtue, that the
literature of sensibility posits for its characters and its readers. The
efficacy of benevolence emanates from its public dimension; more so than
sympathy or empathy, benevolence radiates outward, touching and
transforming. For this reason it animates a central, inescapable conflict in
this literature between public
and private, active and passive sensibility. If sensibility isn't
public, if it doesn't make possible a benevolent community, how
worthwhile an ethic is it? With this in mind, we must ask -- and
the novels and the theorists of the day themselves often ask --
questions about the success of benevolence and sensibility: Mustn't we
and the novel's
characters forgive James Harlowe if we feel the glow of Clarissa's
sensibility? Is the private, virtuous sensibility we often see in the
poetry self-absorbed and perverted because it isn't linked to a public
realm?
Around the issue of benevolence orbit a number of other
questions
that the passages below begin to explore. Is benevolence intuitive and
innate or a learned competency? If intuitive, what are the problems of
this innateness? If taught, how do readers learn from this literature?
Where does reason and the rational rest in relation to a benevolence
founded primarily in the sensibilious? Is this virtue gendered in the
works of sensibility, and what might
this mean? And finally, in the late eighteenth century, how is this
literature of benevolence similar to and different from the Christian
ethics of benevolence it so often calls upon?
a dictionary of sensibility
term list
source
bibliography
critical bibliography