Curran, John E., Jr.

English

epublications@Marquette

Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette English Faculty Research and Publications English, Department of 8-2018 Review of Conscience in Early Modern English Literature by Abraham Stoll John E. Curran Jr. Marquette University, john.curran@marquette.edu Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.marquette.edu/english_fac  Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Curran, John E. Jr., "Review of Conscience in Early Modern English Literature by Abraham Stoll" (2018). English Faculty Research and Publications. 512. https://epublications.marquette.edu/english_fac/512 BOOK REV IEWConscience in Early Modern English Literature. Abraham Stoll. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2017. Pp. ix1216.Illuminating in a number of speciﬁc ways, and well worth the reader’s timefor them, Abraham Stoll’s Conscience in Early Modern English Literature is dis-appointing in a number of more general respects. The title promises themagisterial, as does the identity of the author, whose impressive record ofscholarship eminently qualiﬁes him to offer a perspective both unique andauthoritative on this massively important topic. In its overall design and ar-gument, however, it strikes me as thin, having many of the quirks of a ﬁrstbook: obligatory chapters on Spenser, Shakespeare, and Milton, as thoughto cover the bases desirable for academic job candidacy; large portions al-ready published as articles, including inModern Philology; the theme ratherloosely tying together the various discrete sections, with connecting ideashere and there superimposed repetitively; claims beating the old dead horseof subjectivity that are at once overreaching, referencing sweeping general-izations about phenomenological history, and bland, guarding against say-ing anything contrary to conventional wisdom (as: “The early modern con-science does not create early modern subjectivity, but it does provide auniquely detailed way to observe how subjectivity works” [17]; or, “LadyMacbeth does not become a saint or an ascetic. Rather, she becomes a sub-ject in Butler’s sense” [103]).To the extent there is a thesis, it involves tracing the ways in which the“destructuring” of the conscience, in the wake of the Reformation, affectedEngland’s religious and political psychology through the Civil War. Re-liance on this notion of “destructuring” as a unifying principle is one ofthe book’s main ﬂaws, for it is highly questionable—or, more precisely,it is highly oversimpliﬁed, capturing only half of the dynamic. Certainly,Modern Philology, volume 116, number 1. Published online March 23, 2018For permission to reuse, please contact journalpermissions@press.uchicago.edu.E37This content downloaded from 134.048.159.082 on June 24, 2019 08:35:30 AMAll use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).there would have been a huge impact on paradigms of conscience from thedismantling of the legalistic, externalized, systematized apparatus of Catho-lic tradition, an impact describable as a “destructuring” effect; but too, muchevidence points to a counteracting force in boilerplate Protestant doctrinesof assurance and regeneration. Though he consults such authorities as Ken-dall and Slights who navigate this complexity, Stoll posits a Protestant con-science generative of only “inchoate,” nebulous, solipsistic thought. Dis-cussing Perkins, Stoll has it that “without synderesis, the ability to think ofconscience functioning as a structured process becomes impossible”(41). But what writer of this period thinks, and models thinking, in morestructured a way than Perkins? Leaving out or marginalizing foundationalconcepts such as the “practical syllogism,” and frameworks such as Ramistlogic, Stoll greatly underestimates how a Protestant-styled conscience couldreinforce certainty and clarity. This oversight leads to a number of peculiar,and quite disputable, suggestions, among the most serious of which, for itsligatures to the book’s story arc, is that Perkins was an anticasuist casuist, anantecedent for antinomianism (121). But some of the more self-containedreadings are similarly vulnerable, an example being the take on Macbeth.Stoll would locate something akin to the Freudian “uncanny” in the expe-rience of the Macbeths, the “destructured,” protomodern conscience en-counteringaftershocks of the obsolete “animist” world; but couldn’t it ratherbe that the invisible truth they try, and fail, to live with or ignore strikesthem as it does because of its terrifying simplicity and starkness? That wouldexplain readily the dagger speech that so puzzles Stoll (86): consciencerings out so emphatically and unmistakably that Macbeth already feelslike Tarquin, already feels punished and destroyed by the crime even be-fore committing it.With these problems noted, however, the book more than compensatesfor them with its wealth of incisive, persuasive, thought-provoking points,which appear more frequently the deeper into the seventeenth century itventures. In the early going, St. German is well handled, and the accountof the Cave of Despaire in The Faerie Queene contains many ﬁne insights,particularly those applying the ﬁgure of catachresis to the representationof Redcrosse’s afﬂiction (56). The book gains momentum as Stoll relateshis distinction between casuistical and antinomian concepts of conscienceto matters of politics and toleration. He is very strong on the Levellers andthen on Hobbes, with the latter’s ambiguities of public and private con-science and will sorted out clearly and crisply. Then we move on to Milton,and to some truly excellent analysis. On the De doctrina, Stoll deftly observesthe antinomian overtones of Milton’s suspicions about the reliability ofthe biblical text: “In a remarkable example of Milton’s eclectic theology,scholarship itself becomes proof of an antinomian Spirit” (175). There-after, as Miltonists of all stripes should recognize, Stoll’s examination of AE38 M O D E R N P H I L O L O G YThis content downloaded from 134.048.159.082 on June 24, 2019 08:35:30 AMAll use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).Treatise of Civil Power makes an invaluable contribution, surely being oneof the most nuanced and suggestive ever. For Stoll, in this work Milton’santinomianism turns back on itself, though not to undermine, but to bol-ster the case for toleration: “Humans have a hard time knowing when theyare inspired. No one can rely on the Spirit to be consistently present, au-thorizing every biblical interpretation. . . . Then, precisely from this spaceof uncertainty, follows Milton’s claim for liberty of conscience. . . . Whatprevents forcing, in Milton’s argument, is this limit to the communicabilityof inspired knowledge” (180). As the author proceeds to point out, such aview would seem to have negative consequences for Milton’s Samson andhis notorious rousing motions; but as he also points out, such is the meansby which Milton’s drama poses a challenge to us to reafﬁrm Civil Power’spremises: “Precisely because we cannot fully understand Samson’s experi-ence of conscience, his inward persuasion and ﬁnal action must be admittedinto public toleration” (195). In all, Stoll lays out economically and help-fully how a focus on Milton’s concepts of conscience can shed light on,though not resolve, the heart of the matter for Milton studies, the tensionbetween reason and inspiration (182).While they are most heavily concentrated in the Milton chapter, bright mo-ments can be found throughout the book. I recommend it happily, thoughwith the caveat that the reader should keep expectations low for a fresh ad-dress to broader issues.John E. Curran Jr.Marquette UniversityBook Review E39This content downloaded from 134.048.159.082 on June 24, 2019 08:35:30 AMAll use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Review of \u3cem\u3eConscience in Early Modern English Literature\u3c/em\u3e by Abraham Stoll

https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1514&amp;context=english_fac

Review of \u3cem\u3eConscience in Early Modern English Literature\u3c/em\u3e by Abraham Stoll

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

epublications@Marquette