<1> Amy
Garnai’s work focuses on three radical writers of the
revolutionary decade in France: Charlotte Smith, Mary Robinson,
and Elizabeth Inchbald. The primary argument of the work is not
wholly unsurprising: Garnai asserts that through their novels,
poems, plays, and essays, Smith, Robinson, and Inchbald
contributed to the formation of a political discourse regarding
social and political reform in the 1790s and that their efforts
in this respect spanned the decade. That Garnai’s analysis of
these three writers runs across genres is still a relatively
unique feature in studies of radical writing by women of the
1790s. Revolutionary Imaginings includes some important reflections on the
traditional association of political writing with the novel, a
fact that Garnai rightly identifies as creating a critical blind
spot when it comes to the politics of plays and poems written by
radical women writers.
<2> Garnai’s study examines Smith’s long poem The Emigrants (1793)
as well as four of her novels:
Desmond (1792) and
The Banished Man
(1794), The Young
Philosopher (1798), and
Letters of a Solitary
Wanderer (1800). She explores Robinson’s early and often
overlooked poem, Ainsi Va Le Monde (1790), and her political prose and poems that
demonstrate sympathy for Marie Antoinette, including
Impartial Reflections on the Present Situation of the Queen of France,
“Marie Antoinette’s Lamentation,” and “Monody to the Memory of
the Late Queen of France,” as well as her sonnet sequence
Sappho and Phaon,
Hubert de Sevrac, and
Walsingham, published
in 1797, works that Garnai argues demonstrate the various
aspects of Robinson’s “radical positioning” in the latter half
of the decade. Inchbald’s two novels, A Simple Story (1791)
Nature and Art (1796),
as well as a fascinating examination of Inchbald’s plays, which
place the theater of the 1790s in the same political context as
the novels of the period, complete the content of Garnai’s
analysis.
<3> A
primary problem in Garnai’s study is her desire to demonstrate
that contrary to critical opinion, Smith, Robinson, and Inchbald
write works that evince revolutionary sympathies throughout the
decade, not merely (in the case of Smith and Inchbald) during
the first half of the decade, or, in Robinson’s case, during the
last. I am not convinced that this opinion is widespread in
studies of the revolutionary decade. Garnai’s basis for the
commonality of this belief seems to be the remarks of E.P.
Thompson in his landmark The Making of the English Working Class
(1963),
which, though an important study, is now more than forty years
old. Although Garnai stipulates in her introduction that the
problem she is responding to is primarily one evident in
historical studies of the period and that literary studies are
much more cognizant of the breadth of middle-class women’s
writing during the revolutionary decade, she provides no
examples beyond Thompson’s work and Albert Goodwin’s The Friends of Liberty:
The English Democratic Movement in the Age of the French
Revolution (1979) as evidence of historiographies that
“marginalize, if not erase women’s participation in the debate”
(2); subsequent references to such exclusionary historiography
seem to be based primarily upon Thompson’s work.
<4> A
related and similarly problematic claim in
Revolutionary Imaginings is that “middle-class, intellectual support of the French
Revolution in Britain had begun to waver in 1792, and had
virtually disappeared by mid-decade” (2). This claim, along with
the one discussed above, provide the grounds for Garnai’s
isolation of Smith, Robinson, and Inchbald from other reformist
writers of the 1790s. Like her previous claim, Garnai’s
assertion that British intellectual support for the revolution
was diminished in 1792 and gone by the end of the decade is
based primarily upon Thompson’s book. The substantial body of
recent research on Inchbald that presents her Nature and Art,
published in 1796, as more radical than her
A Simple Story,
published in 1791, shows that critical understandings of the
period have progressed since Thompson’s work was published;
though it references some of these more recent studies, Garnai’s
primary argument seems based to a large degree on older
criticism such as Goodwin’s and Thompson’s. Throughout Garnai’s
work, then, there seems to be a heavy reliance upon Thompson in
particular as representative of a mode of thought about women’s
writing of the 1790s and its situation with respect to a public
political debate during the period.
<5> The
value of Garnai’s study is in her thought-provoking selection of
texts by the writers she chose for this study as well as in the
careful readings of these works by Smith, Robinson, and
Inchbald. Not only did Garnai select texts that do not receive
frequent critical attention, but her juxtaposition of these
texts with others by the same writer— Smith’s The Emigrants with
The Banished Man and
Letters of a Solitary
Wanderer, Robinson’s Ainsi Va Le Monde with her prose tracts on the death of
Marie Antoinette, and Inchbald’s A Simple Story and Nature and
Art with her dramatic texts—highlights provocative patterns,
themes, and modes of thought. For example, she provides
important readings of Smith’s lesser-known
The Banished Man and
Letters of a Solitary
Wanderer, arguing against interpretations of
the former as a work in
which Smith renounces the revolutionary sympathy displayed in
Desmond. Rather,
Garnai points to indications of continuing support for the
values that prompted the revolution and her dismay, certainly
one shared by a number of so-called English Jacobins, over the
bloody turn taken by that revolution and analyzes such
indications. In conjunction with a nuanced reading of Smith’s
poem The Emigrants, often read as corroboration of a “volte
face” on Smith’s part, Garnai’s analysis of The Banished Man lends
support to her argument that Smith’s radical sympathies were
sustained over the course of the decade. The power of selections
and readings such as these make Garnai’s Revolutionary Imaginings
an important read for students and scholars of women’s writing
of the 1790s.