I have a confession. I had a difficult time reading this book so far. I am way out of my element. I do not know the first thing about commenting on periodicals from the 18th century…if you feel you would like to proceed with reading all I ask is that you keep this in mind.
A sentence that stood out to me describes the contradictory cycle of the century was that Addison and Steele “…depend upon the very commercialization and commodification they warn against” (Pg 3). These two tell people not to spend money on frivolous, trivial things but expect them to buy a newspaper centered on telling the public how to live. Well, how they think the public should be living. This brings up “Addison on the Political Upholsterer Addicted to News” (Pg 58). Addison understandably criticizes a man that is unconcerned with his personal life and is consumed by world politics. I took this as a warning that people should concern themselves in moderation with current events. They should be exposed but to a limit. Personal politics of the private sphere are essential to the survival of people. Not to mention, essential to the consumers being able to afford to buy the papers Addison produces.
It is hard to criticize someone for their opinion. Especially, when the opinion was given in the 18th century under the rule of a monarch. I think that it is great that they wanted to reform society but were they better than the monarch that ruled them? They produced two papers under false circumstances, well identities. This is a great idea in the aspect that they are allowed freedom to be “…a spectator of Mankind…a speculative statesman, soldier, merchant and artizan…” (81). To distance themselves through a false identity (or identities) it becomes hard for me to fathom what makes them above the rest of the population. I say ‘above’ because I get the sense that Addison and Steele feel they have the right to critique humankind and make suggestions of improvement. Is it because they are not part of the low or high classes that they can make these remarks?
I stand strong behind my opinion but I have to admit there were some rather interesting sections. One of the sections I found intriguing was “Steele on The Tatler as Antidote for News-Addiction” (Pg 65). Steele brings back his acquaintance the Upholsterer who is in discussion with others over tidbits of information. This observation made by Steele is when affairs are reported from the Courant, he says, “…but the matter was told so distinctly, that these Wanderers thought there was no news in it…” (Pg 68). If a report is made and it consists of facts and evidence it is not up for debate. The men of this society are not interested, perhaps. because it is not entertainment. It cannot be twisted or theorized, the information simply is what it is. If the information is verified and truthful what good is it?
I did notice that The Tatler is of a less personal quality. It has various coffeehouses in charge of the different sections: “All accounts of gallantry, pleasure, and entertainment, shall be under the article of White’s Chocolate-house; Poetry, under that of Will’s Coffee-house; Learning, under the Title of Graecian; Foreign and Domestick News, you will have from St. James’s Coffee-house; and what else I have to offer on any other Subject, shall be dated from my own Apartment” (Pg 50). Steele puts specific places that specialize in certain interests in charge of the news for that section. When The Spectator emerges there is a closer connection. Meaning that Addison puts ‘people’ in charge of the sections that they represent: Sir Roger an old fashioned Tory gentleman, Sir Andrew Freeport the Whig businessman, Captain Sentry the military man, Will Honeycomb a representative of Restoration high life, and a clergyman (Pg 83). With this introduction of these men comes a brief overview of why they are the way they are and their qualifications for reporting. This is the first glimpse of a psychological makeup of characters that I have seen. For example, Sir Roger had his heart broken by a widow a county over. I did not notice this explanation of why people are the way they are in The Tatler.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Renee,
ReplyDeleteI think you were very perceptive to pick up on the point that Steele was making in the "Antidote" essay about the "entertainment" value of news to the predominantly male, 18th-century audience. Today, local TV news stations from all over the country call in "consultants" to help them "package" their news "product" in a way that directly addresses this topic. That's why so much of our local 5:00, 5:30, 6:00, 7:00 and 11:00 local TV news is not, if you really analyze it, "news." (It always amazes me how for example, ads for "Desperate Housewives" are routinely inserted into the middle of TV news broadcasts. Is that really "news?") These consultants are also why you can go from one major local TV market like Detroit to another like Chicago or Atlanta and see the "news" packaged in almost exactly the same way. ("BREAKING NEWS from Channel ___ ACTION NEWS!") That Steele picked up on the necessity of making "news" "entertaining" in order to make people pay attention to it is, I think, really interesting. And it shows once again how, even during the infancy of our modern, commerce- and "product"-centered world, such topics were noticed, noted and discussed!
Ken
I like your idea about the psychological make-up of the members of Spectator Club. They do seem almost, but not quite, like the characters in a novel being introduced.
ReplyDeleteIt's also interesting to think about why Addison and Steele self-nominated themselves as the official arbiters of culture. I suspect the idea for the paper(s) came from conversations among like-minded people in a Coffee House, maybe Will's itself.
One point about the monarch (Anne): while certainly not powerless, the real gov't control in the period came from Parliament.