Rolf H Bremmer Jr Thijs Porck Frans Ruiter Usha Wilbers Editors Tracing Paradigms: One Hundred Years of Neophilologus Tracing Paradigms: One Hundred Years of Neophilologus Rolf H Bremmer Jr • Thijs Porck Frans Ruiter • Usha Wilbers Editors Tracing Paradigms: One Hundred Years of Neophilologus Editors Rolf H Bremmer Jr Leiden University Centre for the Arts in Society Leiden University Leiden, The Netherlands Thijs Porck Leiden University Centre for the Arts in Society Leiden University Leiden, The Netherlands Frans Ruiter Research Institute for Cultural Inquiry Utrecht University Utrecht, The Netherlands Usha Wilbers English Department Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands ISBN 978-3-319-33583-4 ISBN 978-3-319-33585-8 DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-33585-8 (eBook) Library of Congress Control Number: 2016953487 © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 This work is subject to copyright All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made Printed on acid-free paper This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland Contents Part I General A Centenary of Neophilologus: Retrospect and Prospect Rolf H Bremmer Jr “For the Time Being, Things Will Remain as They Are.” A Hundred Years of Neophilologus Sjaak Onderdelinden Overview of One Hundred Years of Editors of Neophilologus Thijs Porck Part II 29 Literary Theory Erasmus’ Praise of Folly: Rivalry and Madness J M Coetzee (reprinted from Neophilologus 76 [1992], 1–18) In Praise of the Little Phallus: On J M Coetzee’s Contribution to Neophilologus Frans Ruiter Part III 35 53 French Le Nouveau Recueil Complet Des Fabliaux (NRCF) Nico van den Boogaard (reprinted from Neophilologus 61 [1977], 333–345) Le Nouveau Recueil Complet des Fabliaux: propos d’un article de Nico van den Boogaard dans Neophilologus Roberto Crespo The Term “emblème” in Sixteenth-century France Daniel Russell (reprinted from Neophilologus 59 [1975], 337–351) 63 79 81 v vi Contents L’émergence des études sur lemblốme franỗais: propos dun article de Daniel Russell dans Neophilologus Paul J Smith Part IV 95 Spanish Classical Tragedy and Cervantes’ La Numancia 105 Frederick A de Armas (reprinted from Neophilologus 58 [1974], 34–40) La Numancia within Structural Patterns of Sixteenth-century Spanish Tragedy 113 Edward H Friedman (reprinted from Neophilologus 61 [1977], 74–89) La Numancia de Cervantes en Neophilologus Sobre sendas contribuciones de Armas y de Friedman 129 Rina Walthaus La estética en Ortega 137 José Correa Camiroaga (reprinted from Neophilologus 66 [1982], 559–568) Reading the Frame: Signalling Politics in Nada 147 Fenny Ebels (reprinted from Neophilologus 93 [2009], 619–632) Neophilologus y la literatura española e hispanoamericana posterior a 1800 Sobre sendas contribuciones de Correa Camiroaga y de Ebels 163 Henk Oostendorp Part V German Versuch eines Bildungsgangs des Simplicissimusdichters 171 J H Scholte (reprinted from Neophilologus [1922], 190–207) Die Anfänge der wissenschaftlichen Grimmelshausen-Forschung Zum Beitrag von Jan Hendrik Scholte in Neophilologus 189 Jef Jacobs Der deutsche Briefroman Zum Problem der Polyperspektive im Epischen 199 Karl Robert Mandelkow (reprinted from Neophilologus 44 [1960], 200–207) Die Mädchen aus der Feenwelt – Bemerkungen zu Liebe und Prostitution mit Bezügen zu Raimund, Schnitzler und Horvath 207 W G Sebald (reprinted from Neophilologus 67 [1983], 109–117) Zwei Aufsätze—zwei Extreme Zu den Beiträgen von Karl Robert Mandelkow und W G Sebald in Neophilologus 217 Sjaak Onderdelinden Contents Part VI vii English Beowulf and Literary Criticism 231 J C van Meurs (reprinted from Neophilologus 39 [1955], 114–130) Tolkien and Beowulf: On J C van Meurs’s Contribution to Neophilologus 247 Rolf H Bremmer Jr Ernest Hemingway and The Dial 255 Nicholas Joost (reprinted from Neophilologus 52 [1968], 180–190, 304–313) Periodical Studies avant la lettre: On Nicholas Joost’s Contribution to Neophilologus 275 Usha Wilbers Contributors Asterisks indicate the reprinted articles; the authors’ affiliations refer to the time of the original publication Rolf H Bremmer Jr Leiden University Centre for the Arts in Society, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands *José Correa Camiroaga University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium *J M Coetzee University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa Roberto Crespo Department of Humanities, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy *Frederick A de Armas Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA *Fenny Ebels Willem Lodewijk Gymnasium, Groningen, The Netherlands *Edward H Friedman Kalamazoo College, Kalamazoo, MI, USA Jef Jacobs Leiden University Centre for the Arts in Society, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands *Nicholas Joost Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL, USA *Karl Robert Mandelkow University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany Sjaak Onderdelinden Faculty of Humanities, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands Henk Oostendorp Faculty of Arts, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands Thijs Porck Leiden University Centre for the Arts in Society, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands Frans Ruiter Research Institute for Cultural Inquiry, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands ix 266 N Joost authors Hemingway went on to explain further that as it would cost nearly 300 francs to have the story retyped and as he had not earned that much during the past year by his writing, he trusted Miss Gregory to overlook the disreputable condition of the typescript submitted The pathos of that admission was perhaps somewhat vitiated by the address from which the story was mailed, the Hotel Taube, Schruns, in the Austrian skiing district of the Vorarlberg.22 Hemingway thought of Schruns as a good place to work; he remarked in A Moveable Feast that he did his most difficult job of rewriting there when he revised the first draft of The Sun Also Rises and made it into a novel, at the beginning of 1926 He added that he could not remember what stories he wrote there but that “There were several though that turned out well.”23 Hemingway concluded his letter to Alyse Gregory by congratulating The Dial on making its award to Marianne Moore Again one notes that he was still reading the magazine carefully and promptly: Thayer’s announcement of the Dial Award was placed at the rear of the January 1925 issue, the first of the three installments of the Editor’s eulogy of Miss Moore, and since The Dial was regularly issued about weeks in advance of the month of publication, Hemingway must have written to Miss Gregory shortly after receiving and reading through his copy of the magazine for January 1925 Why he mentioned Miss Moore in favorable terms so soon after publishing “The Lady Poets with Foot Notes” is anybody’s guess Certainly a desire to propitiate or to curry favor strikes one as out of character for Hemingway However he tried to please, the story was rejected Alyse Gregory disliked it Both Scofield Thayer and Sibley Watson voted to accept it, nevertheless, and so it was sent to an outside reader for the deciding opinion By one of those ironies that novelists hesitate to employ for fear of being disbelieved, their oracle was none other than – Marianne Moore! “Since you and Mr Thayer have discussed Hemingway, Mr Thayer thought you might be willing to give your judgement of this manuscript which Mr Thayer and Dr Watson and Miss Gregory disagree upon,” wrote a member of The Dial staff to Miss Moore Next day, Marianne Moore replied: “I have read Mr Hemingway’s story with great interest,” but as it stands, “I would say no.”24 Could Miss Moore have been a constant reader of Der Querschnitt? In her letter of rejection on March 10, 1925, Alyse Gregory began by apologizing for tardiness in returning his story to Hemingway and went on to say how much the staff regretted not being able to use it Her reason for rejecting the story was that The Dial was more than ever overburdened with accepted material and that the staff did not see how they could fit in Hemingway’s piece A final unwitting slice of the editorial scalpel was Miss Gregory’s expression of pleasure over Hemingway’s 22 See Baker, p 24, n 45, for the placing of the stay in the Vorarlberg at the beginning of 1925 “There Is Never Any End to Paris,” AMF, p 200 24 As quoted in Wasserstrom, pp 175–76 Dr Watson wrote to Nicholas Joost (February 7, 1967): “about the Hemingway piece that we turned down in 1925,” Miss Gregory “insists that I approved it, but I don’t really recall a thing one way or the other.” The excerpts from Dr Watson’s letter are used in this paper with his permission 23 Ernest Hemingway and The Dial 267 approval of Miss Moore as the recipient of the Dial Award.25 Years later, in a letter of January 5, 1965, Miss Gregory said she feared her dislike of Hemingway’s story was predominantly emotional: she abhorred bullfighting and never could abide this aspect of Hemingway, but wasn’t the real sin that of not having the prescience to bet on the winning horse? And to another correspondent she wrote: “You can blame me for the rejection of the Hemingway story … It was a story about bull fighting I loathe his Death in the Afternoon … However, it is always a mistake, if not a calamity, not to back the winning horse.”26 One guess about the story Hemingway submitted to The Dial in January 1925 is that it was “The Undefeated,” Hemingway’s portrait of the wounded but indomitable toreador Manuel Garcia Perhaps after George Antheil sent a copy of “The Undefeated” to Hans von Wedderkop and, of course, before its appearance as “Stierkampf” in Der Querschnitt for June and July 1925, Ernest Hemingway decided to try his luck for the third and last time with The Dial To accept a story under such circumstances was not unusual for the magazine; Hemingway was following the practice of von Hofmannsthal, Mann, and Proust, all of whom The Dial had republished in translation, at once paying them for republication at reduced rates and introducing their work to a cultivated American readership And had the response of The Dial to “The Undefeated” been favorable, it would have been the first American magazine to publish a Hemingway masterpiece The Dial returned Hemingway’s rejected Spanish story to him at Schruns He came back to Paris in March 1925, and from there on March 27 he mailed a copy of “The Undefeated” to Ernest Walsh, who was then starting with his coeditor Ethel Moorhead the literary magazine This Quarter, named in recognition of its planned periodicity and also in honor of the artists’ quarter, the Quartier Latin It is doubtful that Hemingway’s story sent from The Dial would have reached him in Schruns in weeks or less Dubious about the delay in receiving Alyse Gregory’s verdict, he may have sent Walsh “The Undefeated” in hope of a reward beyond the mere publication of the story; admittedly this reasoning assumes that the second story Hemingway submitted to The Dial was “The Undefeated,” and it may not have been For most of the spring Hemingway expended considerable time and energy helping Walsh and Miss Moorhead with the details of the first issue of This Quarter; Hemingway’s famous Nick Adams story, “Big Two-Hearted River,” appeared in the first issue, for Spring 1925, and “The Undefeated” appeared in the second issue, for the fall and winter of 1925–26.27 25 Used with the permission of the representative of Scofield Thayer, Charles P Williamson, and the custodian, Yale University Library 26 Alyse Gregory to Nicholas Joost (January 5, 1965); Wasserstrom, p 176 27 See Baker, p 24; the only date that This Quarter, I (Spring 1925), bears is that for the season; the second issue bears no seasonal date, only the numbering “I, No 2.” This Quarter appeared irregularly; for all the dash, the excellence of its first two numbers, its coeditors lacked the funds to make a solid success of the venture, and what little money they did have was spent on Walsh’s illness and death, from consumption See This Quarter, I, No 3, passim 268 N Joost “The Man Who Was Marked for Death,” in A Moveable Feast, recounts Hemingway’s association with Walsh and This Quarter.28 The story portrays Walsh as dark, handsome, impecunious, irresistible to gullible women, and “clearly marked for death as a character is marked for death in a motion picture.” Hemingway portrays himself, the narrator, as equally impecunious but also, in his way, as gullible as the women who supported Walsh After first meeting Walsh, Hemingway next heard from Ezra Pound that “he had been bailed out of Claridge’s by some lady admirers of poetry and of young poets who were marked for death, and the next thing, some time after that, was that he had financial backing from another source” – this would have been Ethel Moorhead – “and was going to start a new magazine in the quarter as a co-editor.” Hemingway continues: At the time the Dial, an American literary magazine edited by Scofield Thayer, gave an annual award of, I believe, a thousand [sic] dollars for excellence in the practice of letters by a contributor This was a huge sum for any straight writer to receive in those days, in additon to the prestige, and the award had gone to various people, all deserving, naturally … This quarterly, of which Walsh was one of the editors, was alleged to be going to award a very substantial sum to the contributor whose work should be judged the best at the end of the first four issues If the news was passed around by gossip or rumor, or if it was a matter of personal confidence, cannot be said Let us hope and believe always that it was completely honorable in every way Certain nothing could ever be said or imputed against Walsh’s co-editor [Ethel Moorhead],29 It was not long after Hemingway heard “rumors of this alleged award” that Walsh asked him to lunch day at a restaurant “that was the best and the most expensive in the Boulevard St.-Michel quarter.” Walsh asked, “You know you’re to get the award, don’t you?” And he assured Hemingway, “You’re to get it.” Hemingway sat back and thought, “you man conning me with your con.” He told Walsh, “I dont’t think I deserve it … it would not be ethical,” because of the sameness of the first names both men bore He wrote that he was always very nice to Walsh and to his magazine, “and when he had his hemorrhages and left Paris asking me to see his magazine through the printers, who did not read English, I did that.” One day, much later, Hemingway met Joyce walking along the Boulevard St.-Germain and was asked whether he was promised “that award” by Walsh Hemingway’s reply was “Yes,” and Joyce acknowledged that he too had been promised it; they agreed not to ask Pound the question A Moveable Feast, then, indicates that there was no award But there was an award Or, at any rate, there was an impressive pair of awards promised by the coeditors of This Quarter, all quite frankly premised on two points: the generosity of rich donors and the eager reception of their gifts by This Quarter for dispersal to deserving writers In their joint “Editorial” in the first number, the coeditors announced that “We have received cheques toward the sum of two thousand dollars or five hundred pounds to be given to the contributor publishing the 28 29 Op cit., pp 121–27 Ibid., pp 222–23 Ernest Hemingway and The Dial 269 best work in the first four numbers” of the magazine.30 The second number again sought funds for award-giving; this time the plans were even more expansive, and Walsh and Miss Moorhead solicited backing for an annual award of “five hundred pounds or two thousand five hundred dollars, “plus another “annual prize of two hundred and fifty pounds or twelve hundred dollars to be awarded to a contributor to ‘This Quarter’ with special reference to the youth, of that talent and need which shows promise, as opposed to absolute success, of enriching the civilization of this age.”31 The exemplar of all that largesse was, of course, The Dial The connection between the two journals was tacitly acknowledged in the second number, when the editors used Harriet Monroe’s review of the new magazine, reprinted from her regular column in Poetry: “And from across the sea it clasps hands with The Dial in the effort to slambang the plodding world into appreciation of modern – or more specifically, modernistic – art.”32 But there was a difference: for all its promise, inadequate financing hampered This Quarter Ernest Walsh did what he could for Ernest Hemingway by extravagantly praising the early stories and by printing two of them in This Quarter In one passage Walsh, reviewing In Our Time, wrote of Hemingway: “He is one of the elect He belongs.”33 Besides publishing such opinions, Walsh probably talked to Hemingway about the lesser prize of $ 1,200 – hence Hemingway’s memory of the Dial Award as being for $ 1,000 rather than for twice that sum At the end of his life, Hemingway thus accusingly recalled Walsh’s unfulfilled assurances, the confidence man’s attempt to surpass the real thing, in this case The Dial and its annual award to writers; and thus 35 years later Hemingway compared This Quarter, to its disadvantage, with The Dial Perhaps there was also involved an older man’s pique about the easy gullibility of a hungry, ambitious young writer.34 30 This Quarter, I (Spring 1925), 259–61 Ibid., I, No 2., n p.; printed in the lengthy and unpaginated foreword of the “Musical Supplement” of the issue, which was by George Antheil 32 “‘This Quarter’ Gets Reviewed,” Ibid., I, No 2., p 306 See “News Notes,” Poetry, XXVI (July 1925), 231–32 33 “Mr Hemingway’s Prose,” ibid., I, No 2., p 321 See Baker, p 34: here “Walsh overstated his case.” 34 Wasserstrom, pp 172–77, bases a major portion of his essay on the assumption that Hemingway’s writing in “The Man Who Was Marked for Death” “deliberately blurred” two separate magazines, The Dial and This Quarter The contention is untenable: whatever his feelings about The Dial, Hemingway’s few words about it, quoted in the text, are eminently fair; he did not confuse, deliberately or otherwise, the two magazines; his sole target in “The Man Who Was Marked for Death” is Ernest Walsh; and the case against Hemingway results from Wasserstrom’s misreading of the text One further point Wasserstrom, p 176, says that “even Pound, as that poem [“The Soul of Spain”] shows, Hemingway chose as the butt of excremental verse.” This too is a misreading, for Hemingway wrote the poem explicitly to defend Pound against those who disliked il miglior fabbro, as the text of this paper explains Regarding Walsh, it is proper to echo Ezra Pound’s words to Harriet Monroe (30 November 1926): “Poor Walsh … After all he came down on my head in Poetry … and he more recently annoyed Mr Hemingway, etc … I can’t take it very seriously He had his merits and probably knew his time was short Also in the midst of his farragos he occasion31 270 N Joost After his rise to fame with the publication of The Sun Also Rises in October 1926, Hemingway submitted no work to The Dial He received mixed notices from it, instead Its brief review of his first popular success was placed among the unsigned one-paragraph notices of the “Briefer Mention” in the issue for January 1927, a surprising miscalculation of a novel that set an enduring fashion, perhaps the enduring fashion in modern American fiction of the naturalistic persuasion: If to report correctly and endlessly the vapid talk and indolent thinking of Montparnasse café idlers is to write a novel, Mr Hemingway has written a novel His characters are as shallow as the saucers in which they stack their daily emotions [as much a thrust at The Dial’s old associate, Harold Stearns, as at Hemingway’s intentions], and instead of interpreting his material – or even challenging it – he has been content merely to make a carbon copy of a not particularly significant surface of life in Paris “Mike was a bad drunk Brett was a good drunk Bill was a good drunk Cohn was never drunk.” “I knew I was quite drunk.” “It’s funny what a wonderful gentility you get in the bar of a big hotel.” There are acres of this, until the novel – aside from a few sprints of humour and now and then a “spill” of incident – begins to assume the rhythm, the monotony, and the absence of colour which one associates with a six-day bicycle race.35 The New Republic almost immediately took The Dial to task for such ossification of taste Its column “A Number of Things,” in the issue of January 5, 1927, complimented The Dial for awarding William Carlos Williams the Dial Award for 1926 and praised the consistently satisfactory level of the awards; then it went on to less pleasant matters All the writers who had received the Dial Award “were represented in the Dial during the first year of its present phase, 1920 – as were most of its other important contributors And it is almost impossible to think of any interesting new American writer who has appeared since that time whom the Dial has encouraged Yet, the supply of these charter contributors will presently become exhausted: with all respect to Doctor Williams, one is not sure that the prize-winning material of the Dial is not already beginning to run thin.” What would The Dial do, asked The New Republic, “for deserving writers after another or years, if it continues as implacably as in the past to decline to interest itself in the original work of new artists?”36 Behind these rather general strictures Hemingway’s shadow bulked large Sibley Watson – Thayer was hors de combat – took his time about replying to The New Republic, but reply he did His editorial “Comment” for September 1927 attempted to define what constituted an “interesting new writer,” and he declared The Dial’s lack of interest in encouraging Anita Loos or John Erskine – though it had published “when he was a new writer” the work of Michael Arlen “I have,” said Dr Watson, “great admiration for the healthy talent of Gordon Young whose meloally said something amusing Tout 5a a une valeur.” See The Letters of Ezra Pound, ed D D Paige (New York, 1950), p 204 35 “Briefer Mention,” The Dial, LXXXII (January 1927), 73 Although the review was unsigned, the records in the Dial Papers reveal that the author was Lisle Bell 36 “A Number of Things,” The New Republic, XLIX (January 5, 1927), 192; see letter defending The Dial, by Gilbert Seldes, “The Dial and New Writers” (in “Correspondence”), ibid., XLIX (February 9, 1927), 332 Ernest Hemingway and The Dial 271 dramas in the Adventure magazine have been improving steadily for some years And what could The Dial for him?” Then, as Dr Watson recently explained, “I apologized covertly to Hemingway … having just finished reading The Sun Also Rises It seemed so good in the twenties – a well of uninhibited masculine sentiment”; and so there followed, in this “Comment,” Dr Watson’s amende honorable for The Dial’s rejection of Hemingway’s work and for that dismaying “Briefer Mention” of Hemingway’s novel: “Ernest Hemingway is another matter His book, The Sun Also Rises, has more warmth in it than one is accustomed to find in a dozen American successes all together Fortunately he has reached a level from which he can kick encouragement downstairs.” In closing, Dr Watson asked everyone to remember “that it is impossible in the world of letters to act or to refuse to act without stirring up a hurricane of catcalls, of which The New Republic’s are not always the merriest Lists of interesting new American writers of the past years will be gratefully received.”37 The New Republic refused to let The Dial get away with Dr Watson’s unsigned apologia In its “New York Diary,” under the title “The Decline of the Dial,” The New Republic for October 12, 1927, replied at length and cited distinguished American writers who had emerged since 1920 whom The Dial had not encouraged, except to review their books favorably; in prose John Dos Passos, Ernest Hemingway, and Lewis Mumford were named Miss Moore, said The New Republic, was not responsible for the recent policy of The Dial; from all that could be seen by a tolerably assiduous reader of the magazine, it was not a whit different under her editorship from what it was under Scofield Thayer’s The only difference appeared to be what was a genuine misfortune for its readers – that, now that Miss Moore had become editor of The Dial, she no longer published any poetry in it In any case, The Dial needed somebody’s attention; it was no longer serious.38 Whoever wrote this attack on The Dial must have had some inkling of the facts of the Hemingway-Dial relationship in order to make his point about the consistency of editorial policy at the magazine, though there he was accurate only in the limited sense that Miss Moore was bound by the extremely detailed editorial directives left by Scofield Thayer for her to follow After all, Thayer changed his judgment of Hemingway’s work; he printed Edmund Wilson’s praise of in our time and urged the acceptance of Hemingway’s story about bullfighting It was Miss Moore who decided against acceptance of the story and who printed the disparaging paragraph about The Sun Also Rises The final notice Hemingway received in The Dial appeared in the issue for April 1928 – N L Rothman’s review, three pages long, of Men without Women Rothman’s review constitutes a reversal by The Dial of its attitude toward Hemingway It also 37 [James Sibley Watson, Jr.,] “Comment,” The Dial, LXXXIII (September 1927), 269–70; James Sibley Watson, Jr., to Nicholas Joost (February 7, 1967) See STATD, p 247, for the ascription to Dr Watson of this “Comment,” confirmed in his letter of February 7, 1967; for the controversy with The New Republic, see pp 246–54 38 “The Decline of the Dial” (in “A New York Diary”), The New Republic, LII (October 12, 1927), 211 272 N Joost sets forth the standard period interpretation of Hemingway’s work: Hemingway had fashioned his “essentially courageous stoicism into as tragic and unforgettable a mould as one can find anywhere in American writing”; “there is no hope and no suspense in any of Hemingway’s work”; there must be “no squealing, no quitting Men must play at being undefeated Consider Hemingway’s short story of that title … one of his finest”; “The Killers” constituted “high tragedy, and high art”; as for the drinking (“How they drink!”), the reviewer found “nothing so moving and tragic in its implications as that tired, almost mechanical ritual of intoxication,” the only surcease for the characters of The Sun Also Rises, “a temporary staving off of consciousness,” which itself meant “squarely facing an empty and purposeless existence.” In the last analysis, the closest one can get to Hemingway is that “life is very much of a mess; that nothing can be done about it; that we had best not talk about how badly things are really going; that the only escape is in triviality that will consume time, laughing or drinking, prize-fights or bull-fights.” These one may glean as probable of Hemingway’s stoicism “He refuses to sympathize with his characters, and strips his stories of non-essential detail … he could write a great tragedy He remains … our outstanding realist.”39 The compliment was great, but it came too late to help the cause of Hemingway or that of The Dial Despite the apology of Dr Watson, despite the ensuing compliment of N L Rothman, Hemingway regarded The Dial unkindly for years Dr Watson himself noted “the recriminations that followed and still pursue us.” There is the story, its source unspecified, that once during the 1930s at a party given by Paul Rosenfeld, Hemingway telephoned Miss Moore and offered to send a cab to Brooklyn if she would come along and explain why The Dial had rejected his writing He had heard she was responsible; she did not go.40 A major source of these recriminations was Hemingway himself In 1934 he charged that when Gilbert Seldes was Editor of The Dial, Seldes turned down the chapters of the Paris edition of in our time, the 18 Imagist vignettes comprising the 32 pages of the pamphlet Seldes’ advice, according to Hemingway, was that he should stick to newspaper work and not have any illusions about writing Hemingway alleged, moreover, that he had kept Seldes’ letter; and he displayed an arrived author’s contempt for all those twerps who had turned sanctimonious as hell and were praising his work, because the cash would always be on the side of mealymouthed mediocrity and all they were praising was a Trend The accusation and the alleged letter constitute one of those tall tales concocted by Ernest Hemingway such as have found a temporary resting place in A E Hotchner’s ineffable Papa Hemingway In fact, the chronology implied by Hemingway’s tale and the chronol- 39 N L Rothman, “Hemingway Whistles in the Dark,” The Dial, LXXXIV (October 1928), 336– 38 “Notes on Contributors” for the issue identified Rothman as “born in 1904 in New York City He was graduated from the College of the City of New York in 1927, being senior prize essayist of that year, and is studying at Columbia toward a Master’s degree.” As with the title of Wilson’s review, this title is misleading; but in commissioning Rothman’s review, at least the Editor was encouraging new writers 40 James Sibley Watson, Jr., to Nicholas Joost (February 7, 1967) Wasserstrom, p 176 Ernest Hemingway and The Dial 273 ogy of events not agree Six of the 18 vignettes were evidently written between December 1922, when Hemingway’s early work was lost in Paris, and the date when this initial in our time material was published in the “Exiles Number” of The Little Review, for Spring 1923 The remaining 12 vignettes were written prior to the middle of July 1923, when Hemingway delivered the manuscript of in our time to William Bird At the beginning of 1923, Gilbert Seldes left the Dial office for a stay in Europe and on January 9, 1923, sailed on the Manchuria for England Once on the Continent, he worked for Thayer, helping to compile the folio of pictures, Living Art, and living on his stipend from The Dial for that chore, Seldes wrote The Seven Lively Arts When he returned to America in September 1923, he resigned his post as Managing Editor, not Editor, of The Dial Incidentally, the Editor, Thayer, preceded Seldes back to New York – and work at The Dial – in August 1923 Gilbert Seldes thus has been justified in denying to Donald Gallup and others that he ever wrote such a letter as Hemingway described, indeed that he corresponded at all with Hemingway in the period 1921–23.41 In his last days Hemingway wrote more generously about The Dial and spoke of its award as conferring prestige and as having “gone to various people, all deserving, naturally.” So the bitterness did not hold after all As for The Dial, in not publishing Hemingway’s early work, it committed at worst a sin of omission, surely a rather venial one in comparison to the major achievement of the magazine that published and courageously advocated the work of T S Eliot, Ezra Pound, Sherwood Anderson, E E Cummings, William Carlos Williams, Marianne Moore, Van Wyck Brooks, and Kenneth Burke, Dial laureates all Looking back over the story of Ernest Hemingway and The Dial brings to mind Dr Watson’s admonition that it is impossible in the world of letters to act or to refuse to act without stirring up a hurricane of catcalls For both Ernest Hemingway and The Dial the hurricane of catcalls has subsided, and the record now stands clear in its essentials, ready for the judgments and evaluations of posterity 41 Gilbert Seldes to Nicholas Joost, in conversation (1957); to Nicholas Joost (n.d [March 1967]; to Donald C Gallup (March 4, 1952); used with permission of Messrs Gallup and Seldes See Fenton, pp 225–41; n 13, p 285, especially, for the chronology of in our time See STATD, pp 75–76, 232, for Gilbert Seldes’ work for The Dial in 1923 For a view of A E Hotchner, Papa Hemingway (New York, 1966), see Philip Young, “On Dismembering Hemingway,” The Atlantic Monthly, CCXVIII (August 1966), 45–49; e.g., “both partners in Hemhotch are tellers of really tall tales.” Periodical Studies avant la lettre: On Nicholas Joost’s Contribution to Neophilologus Usha Wilbers As even a cursory browse through back issues will demonstrate, the centennial of Neophilologus covers a period in which English literary studies experienced various seismic transformations The rise of cultural studies, for instance, brought with it a stronger focus on theory, as can be seen in the many postcolonial and gender-driven interpretations of classical literary texts that entered the pages of the journal in the last two decades or so This period also witnessed the birth—or rather, growth spurt—of a young academic discipline: periodical studies In the twentieth century, periodicals had increasingly become the object of academic research as opposed to predominantly being used as sources Yet, the development of periodical studies as an independent discipline, instead of as a subdivision of sociological, historical or biographical research, did not start until the latter half of the century From the American perspective, the publication of Frank Luther Mott’s A History of American Magazines in 1939 can be seen as an early historical marker, as are surveys on little magazines such as Ian Hamilton’s The Little Magazines (1976) and Elliott Anderson and Mary Kinzie’s The Little Magazine in America (1978) The growth of British periodical studies can be placed in a similar time frame: as the renowned periodical scholar Rosemary T VanArsdel pointed out in 2010, “serious and systematic research into Victorian periodicals belongs to the second half of the twentieth century” (VanArsdel 2010) She credits The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals, 1824–1900 with revolutionizing periodical studies, as it gave unprecedented access to research data.1 From the mid-twentieth century on numerous works appeared which consisted predominantly of historically and biographically driven monographs on individual magazines Increasingly, these monographs addressed more specialized topics, such as the role that women play in print culture and the The Wellesley Index was originally published by the University of Toronto Press, in volumes between 1965 and 1988 U Wilbers (*) English Department, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands e-mail: U.Wilbers@let.ru.nl © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 R H Bremmer Jr et al (eds.), Tracing Paradigms: One Hundred Years of Neophilologus, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-33585-8_24 275 276 U Wilbers professionalization of periodical criticism However, the maturation of periodical studies as a full-fledged, autonomous discipline was slow This tardiness can partly be attributed to its interdisciplinary and inherently complex nature, as the cultural, political, linguistic and academic contexts that periodical researchers work in vary from nation to nation.2 Another complicating aspect may be the fact that scholars who use periodicals as a source for historical or sociological research will not necessarily identify themselves as periodical researchers In retrospect, it can be argued that periodical studies became more organized through the foundation of various research groups, such as the Research Society for Victorian Periodicals in 1968, the Research Society for American Periodicals in 1991 and their European counterpart, ESPRit: European Society for Periodical Research, in 2009 Through their conferences, expert meetings, listservs and journals, the highly disparate “field” of periodical studies has become gradually more coherent As scholars became more united, the methodological obstacles inherent to periodical research were openly debated and the call for a shared methodology became more urgent Which methodological approaches serve the multidisciplinary character of a periodical best? How can boundaries posed by geographical borders, languages, national cultures and research traditions be overcome to produce and benefit from comparative research? How to deal with the digitized age, which comes with opportunities—in terms of accessibility and searchability of archival sources—as well as challenges, such as the destruction of print issues and journal supplements?3 Contemporary periodical scholars have increasingly incorporated and combined theoretical concepts from various disciplines to address these questions, such as Pierre Bourdieu’s field of cultural studies, Pascale Casanova’s world republic of letters and Bruno Latour’s interpretation of Actor-Network Theory The following brief—and by no means exhaustive—overview of landmark publications in this respect underlines how multifarious and consciously theoretical periodical studies has become over the last two decades An important first step towards conceiving a theoretical framework for periodical studies was the research conducted by David Abrahamson in the 1990s, which produced works such as The American Magazine (1995) and the 2002 essay “Beyond the Mirror-Metaphor.” Abrahamson’s research emphasized the active role that periodicals play in the literary field as gatekeepers and distributors of culture, thus countering the previously held notion that periodical issues merely mirror cultural developments Margaret Beetham’s seminal A Magazine of Her Own? (1996) remains a key study on the impact that woman’s magazines had on conceptualisations of femininity in the long nineteenth century Another leading periodical scholar Marianne Van Remoortel of Ghent University elaborated on the pitfalls—and possibilities—of European periodical research in her keynote lecture “European Periodical Studies: The Women Editors’ Perspective” which she delivered on 11 September 2015 during the fourth ESPRit conference In his 2014 essay “Problems and possibilities of digital newspaper and periodical archives”, Thomas Smits listed some of these challenges (Smits 2014) In a 2012 issue of Victorian Periodicals Review, Jim Mussel highlighted the possibilities that the digitization revolution offers for teaching on periodicals Periodical Studies avant la lettre 277 who actively engages himself with theory is Matthew Philpotts, Professor of Modern Languages at the University of Liverpool Together with Stephen Parkers he published Sinn und Form (2009), in which the authors explicitly challenged the conservative nature of the periodical research that preceded theirs In his 2012 essay “The Role of the Periodical Editor,” Philpotts proposed a typology of periodical editors by elaborating on Pierre Bourdieu’s notion of habitus In doing so, he was the first to seriously conceptualise the qualities and strategies which periodical editors employ to function in, and profit from, the literary market Bourdieu’s field theory was also a key concept in Reassembling Modernism (2012) by the Belgian scholar Birgit Van Puymbroeck Van Puymbroeck combined the theory with social network analysis and Actor- Network theory to trace connections between a selection of international periodicals and authors Recent conferences and special issues of journals have focused increasingly on so-called “backroom issues,” shedding light on the production of journals and the historically marginalized actors involved in the processes of periodical production Laurel Brake and Julie F Coddell’s collection Encounters in the Victorian Press (2004) is an example of this development, as is Marianne Van Remoortel’s research project “Agents of Change: Women Editors and Socio-Cultural Transformation in Europe,” which is funded by the European Research Council and will run from 2015 to 2020 The development of periodical studies, as sketched here in a necessarily brief way, has virtually left no trace in Neophilologus The handful of studies on magazines that have appeared in the journal—of which Oskar Wellens’ essays on The Critical Review (1981), The London Review (1985) and The Athenaeum (2001) should be mentioned for their ubiquity alone—are predominantly “traditional” literary-historical studies of journals, as they not raise questions about the methodology used or explicitly address the complexities inherent to periodical research One example of such an early, seemingly non-theoretical, contribution is Nicholas Joost’s study of the American periodical The Dial (focussing on the years 1920– 1929, the Modernist phase of the journal) This essay, “Ernest Hemingway and The Dial,” was published in two parts in the October 1968 issue of Neophilologus The date of the publication not only coincides with the foundation of the Research Society for Victorian Periodicals, but also with the publication of Ger Janssens study of American literary periodicals, entitled The American Literary Review (1968) Janssens was affiliated with the Catholic University Nijmegen in The Netherlands and would become the first Dutch professor to hold a chair in American literature His research on American periodicals laid the foundation for a strong tradition of periodical studies in the Nijmegen English department, which produced dissertations on The Kenyon Review, Poetry: A Magazine of Verse, The Paris Review, The Reporter and Evergreen Review This tradition had in fact been sparked by a former editor of Neophilologus, T.A Birrell, who served as Professor of English and American Literature at Radboud University from 1951 to 1984 While Janssens was a student in the English department, Birrell held a competition about the renowned British periodical Scrutiny: A Quarterly Review (1932–1953) Janssens won, and subsequently wrote his doctoral thesis on the topic, which can be seen as the starting point of periodical studies in Nijmegen In the academic year 1963–1964 Janssens 278 U Wilbers conducted research in the United States and Joost replaced him by becoming Fulbright Lecturer at Radboud University They were most likely aware of each other’s research on American literary journals, since both were in contact with Birrell during that period From the perspective of contemporary periodical research, with its increased focus on the role that editors play, Nicholas T Joost (1916–1980) would be a worthwhile object of study himself Apart from writing about American periodicals, Joost also served as an editor of the renowned journal Poetry: A Magazine of Verse (1912–) and as Professor of English at Southern Illinois University In Bourdieusean terms, he was an active agent in the literary field who wore various guises, similar to the object of his essay, Ernest Hemingway Joost’s first publication was his 1964 study Scofield Thayer and The Dial, on the Dial editor and proprietor (a role Thayer shared with Sibley Watson) Thayer also features heavily in the 1968 essay on Hemingway, which testifies to the wealth of knowledge that Joost had gained by then about Thayer’s strategies, literary tastes and practice as an editor He would continue to publish on Thayer and The Dial throughout the 1960s and early 1970s Although his article in Neophilologus stems from a period in which periodical research was still in its infant stage, I argue here that his seemingly “traditional” historical research addresses, and raises, issues which are highly relevant to the discipline today Despite a lack of overt engagement with theory and methodology, and notwithstanding its generic title, the essay generates a plethora of insights in the mechanics of cultural production in a broad sense, and specifically in the role that periodicals and their networks play in this process Joost ([1968] 2016) himself proclaims that his aim is to “[set] the historical and literary records straight, [throw] some light on the background of Hemingway’s early career, and [exemplify] the development of literary fashion in the 1920s” (256) By investigating the production processes of the periodical, he is able to reconstruct the role that various actors, events and broader cultural developments played in Hemingway’s budding career Interpreted from the perspective of Bruno Latour’s Actor-Network Theory, The Dial acted as a cultural mediator of translated works to a “cultivated American readership” (306) Although Joost wrote his article over three decades before Latour published his seminal text Reassembling the Social (2005), his research can serve as a concrete illustration of Latour’s theoretical conceptualisation of the black box In his study Science in Action, Latour (1987) described the black box as follows: “[It] is used by cyberneticians whenever a piece of machinery or a set of commands is too complex In its place they draw a little box of which they need to know nothing but its input and output” (2–3) Viewed from the light of a cultural product like a periodical, this metaphorical box contains information about the often complex processes involved in creating the end product; in this case the periodical issue By reconstructing the roles that mediators such as editors, literary agents, illustrators, advertisers and published played during the “input” and “output” stages, we get a unique view on the various factors that shape a literary product Joost’s research is evidence of how fruitful this approach can be: instead of focusing on the production output—the issues published by The Dial—he uncovers a chapter in Hemingway’s career which would perhaps have been at most a footnote in traditional literary Periodical Studies avant la lettre 279 historiography His study is grounded in close attention to detail and “behind-thescenes” information which he retrieved from the Dial papers and the Hemingway correspondence Joost’s focus on fact and detail had been criticised by The American Historical Review’s Milton Cantor, who reviewed his book Years of Transition: The Dial, 1912–1920 in 1968 Cantor (1968) disapproved of Joost’s “need to set down the name of every contributor and the title of every article—[endowing] all the authors and all the events with a tiresome likeness” (319–320) However, I argue that Joost’s thorough research and focus on seemingly marginal or practical information is one of the strengths of his research, not in the least because his account of Hemingway’s early career serves as a more factual counterpoint to the author’s own impressionistic memoirs A Moveable Feast (1964) Detailed reconstructions of the editors’ actions, such as the following on page 256, give a glimpse of the literary practice from behind the scenes: “During the third week of October 1921, Sherwood Anderson accepted the proffered award from the Managing Editor of The Dial, Gilbert Seldes, and it was understood that Paul Rosenfeld, who was close to and sympathetic with Anderson, would write the eulogy for the occasion, the January 22 issue of The Dial” (Joost [1968] 2016, 256) Occasionally, Joost’s detailed analysis borders on literary gossip, as in the following quote: “… once during the 1930s at a party given by Paul Rosenfeld, Hemingway telephoned Miss Moore and offered to send a cab to Brooklyn if she would come along and explain why The Dial had rejected his writing He had heard she was responsible; she did not go” (272) However, it can be argued that literary gossip is tightly caught up with literary history, as, for instance, Nicholas Martin has demonstrated in a 2014 special issue of Forum For Modern Language Studies To ignore it would be to overlook a vital aspect of The Dial’s concrete literary practice, and in this case Hemingway’s dealings with its editors Joost’s portrayal of Hemingway’s early career affirms that periodicals can serve a key function as platforms for original literary material: although The Dial rejected his early poems, the author saw them published in renowned little magazines, such as The Double Dealer, The Little Review and Poetry Yet ultimately the value of Joost’s article lies perhaps not in what he uncovers regarding the young Hemingway, but in the meta-insights we gain about the positions that periodicals and the networks in their orbit hold in the literary field For instance, one of the essay’s most salient topics is the strained publication history of “The Waste Land” and what it reveals about the dynamics between a periodical’s editor-in-chief and its foreign advisor, in this case Ezra Pound Pound was another famous American in Paris who served as a literary scout for The Dial Joost’s description of the manner in which Pound introduced Hemingway’s poetry to the magazine counters the author’s own impressionistic description of the relationship with clear facts What emerges from his reconstruction is that Pound was a shadow figure of sorts in the career of Hemingway, and of The Dial itself Pound befriended Hemingway, but seems to have had a fractured relationship with Thayer Indeed, although the young Hemingway is the main topic of the essay, Ezra Pound is perhaps the most interesting figure His companionship with Hemingway, the fraught relationship with Thayer and his role as a literary agent and scout, Paris Correspondent and contact 280 U Wilbers man warrant further investigation from the perspective of Latour’s mediators and intermediaries or Bourdieu’s model of the mechanics of cultural production The same goes for the all too brief mention of the Bel Esprit group and a range of other topics that the essay alludes to: Natalie Barney’s involvement as a patron; the rivalry between The Dial and its German counterpart, Der Querschnitt; the importance of literary prizes and literary criticism for the advancement of literary careers The essay also touches on gender issues—though mainly implicitly—, since Joost highlights the ambivalence that Hemingway felt towards female writers, including Amy Lowell, Edna St Vincent Millay, Aline Kilmer, Sara Teasdale, Zoe Atkins, and Lola Ridge Indeed, by shedding light on the production and editorial processes of The Dial, Joost demonstrates how a seemingly minor footnote in literary history is linked to various significant cultural moments and events In conclusion, Joost ([1968] 2016) does much more than unravelling the relationship between Hemingway and The Dial The single event of Hemingway’s early attempts to get published in the American journal provides a springboard to address multiple issues which are also essential for twenty-first century periodical scholars Although it could be tempting to label Joost’s research as mainly historical and perhaps traditional in this sense, his article highlights what numerous other studies from the mid-twentieth century have demonstrated: the theoretical complexity that marks periodical research, but also the wealth of knowledge that is to be gained from it Joost ends the article with the following statement: “For both Ernest Hemingway and The Dial the hurricane of catcalls has subsided, and the record now stands clear in its essentials, ready for the judgments and evaluations of posterity” (Joost [1968] 2016, 273) As his essay shows, there is much more to be gained from this research than mere fact clearing The results of his investigation testify to the versatility needed by the periodical scholar and transcend the period in which they were produced, despite a lack of explicit dialogue with theory Literature Abrahamson, David 1995 The American Magazine: Research perspectives and prospects Ames: Iowa State University Press Abrahamson, David 2002 Beyond the mirror-metaphor: Magazine exceptionalism and sociocultural change Journal of Magazine and New Media Research 4: Anderson, Elliott, and Mary Kinzie 1978 The little magazine in America: A modern documentary history Yonkers: Pushcart Book Press Beetham, Margaret 1996 A magazine of her own? Domesticity and desire in the woman’s magazine, 1800–1914 London: Routledge Brake, Laurel, and Julie F Coddell 2004 Encounters in the Victorian press Editors, authors, readers London: Palgrave Macmillan Cantor, Milton 1968 Years of transition: The Dial, 1912–1920 Review The American Historical Review 74: 319–320 Hamilton, Ian 1976 The little magazines: A study of six editors London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson Hemingway, Ernest 1964 A moveable feast New York City: Scribner Periodical Studies avant la lettre 281 Janssens, G A M 1968 The American Literary Review: A critical history 1920–1950 The Hague: Mouton Joost, Nicholas 1964 Scofield Thayer and The Dial: An illustrated history Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press Joost, Nicholas (1968) 2016 Ernest Hemingway and The Dial In Tracing paradigms: One hundred years of Neophilologus, ed Rolf H Bremmer Jr, Thijs Porck, Frans Ruiter and Usha Wilbers, 255–273 Dordrecht: Springer Latour, Bruno 1987 Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society Cambridge: Harvard University Press Latour, Bruno 2005 Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory Oxford: Oxford University Press Martin, Nicholas 2014 Literature and gossip Forum for Modern Language Studies 50(2): 135–141 Mott, Frank Luther 1939 A history of American magazines 1741–1850 Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press Parker, Stephen, and Matthew Philpotts 2009 Sinn und Form: The anatomy of a literary journal Berlin: de Gruyter Philpotts, Matthew 2012 The role of the periodical editor: Literary journals and editorial habitus Modern Language Review 107(1): 39–64 Smits, Thomas 2014 Problems and possibilities of digital newspaper and periodical archives Tijdschrift voor Tijdschriftstudies 36: 139–146 VanArsdel, Rosemary T 2010 Victorian periodicals Aids to research: A selected bibliography The Victorian Research Web http://victorianresearch.org/periodicals.html Accessed Feb 2016 Van Puymbroeck, Birgit 2012 Reassembling modernism: Anglo-French networks, periodicals, literary analysis Ghent: Ghent University Wellens, Oskar 1981 The Critical Review: 1805–1808 Neophilologus 65: 148–159 Wellens, Oskar 1985 The London Review (1809) Neophilologus 69: 452–463 Wellens, Oskar 2001 The brief and brilliant life of The Athenaeum under Mr Middleton Murry (T.S Eliot) Neophilologus 85: 137–152 .. .Tracing Paradigms: One Hundred Years of Neophilologus Rolf H Bremmer Jr • Thijs Porck Frans Ruiter • Usha Wilbers Editors Tracing Paradigms: One Hundred Years of Neophilologus Editors... (eds.), Tracing Paradigms: One Hundred Years of Neophilologus, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-33585-8_1 R H Bremmer Jr pally of fellow-countrymen and -women: “Aankondigingen van eigen werk” (Notices of [one s]... (eds.), Tracing Paradigms: One Hundred Years of Neophilologus, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-33585-8_2 10 S Onderdelinden information for anyone who wants or has to busy themselves with the history of Neophilologus