FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W202010169> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W202010169 startingPage "173" @default.
• W202010169 abstract "Many critics acknowledge Pope's indebtedness in Eloisa to Abelard (1717) to Ovidian heroic epistle, and indeed poem does owe much to earlier poet's style and imagery.(1) However, as others have not, I see in Eloisa to Abelard a poem that imitates certain Renaissance sonnet conventions. Pope incorporates into his poem both self-reflective language of Petrarch and Shakespearean reinterpretation of Petrarch's language in order to express erotic, ultimately impossible desire of his heroine. I shall argue that this inventive synthesis largely account for disjunctive attitude of poem that readers often note when Popes moves Eloisa back and forth between reality and illusion, a disjunction that Pope attempts to mediate in poem's conclusion. Pope's uneven narrative initiates a Petrarchan ideal, then undercuts this ideal with a suspicion of language reminiscent of Shakespeare's dark lady sonnet cycle. In doing so, Pope not only complicates associations among poet, persona, and object of poetic desire,but transforms writing, itself into a mechanism for reconstructing reality and thus into an object of desire as well. As he adapt and conflates conventions of praise poetry, Pope privileges writing over speech, a convention typical of heroic. epistle. In establishing a hierarchy between two forms of language, he adds a dimension to his poem that neither of earlier poets contemplate. Ultimately, out of Pope's erotic epideictic poem emerges an epistle on nature of language. I agree with James Winn that it is mindless to compare Eloisa in any literal sense to Pope.(2) However, certain similarities between two, evoked by language of poem itself, suggest Pope's empathy with Eloisa, especially in sexual terms.(3) Pope's empathy with historic Heloise seems to stem from a coincidence of circumstances: both were intellectuals and writers, in some aspects secluded from world -- Heloise in her convent, Pope in his garden. Their sexual dilemma invites further comparison; both were sexually functional yet were hindered in their attempts to engage in normal sexual relationships. Heloise cannot stop Abelard's castration, and she ultimately agrees to join a nunnery; Pope's dwarfish physique made marriage and sexual relationships unlikely. The most significant difference between them lies in consummation; Heloise and Abelard did, and Pope apparently did not, speculation to contrary notwithstanding.(4) The sexual imagination at play in Pope's letter to Lady Mary Wortley Montagu and to Blounts no doubt helped him vocalize Eloisa's dilemma in poem.(5) By seeing language as a metonymy for sexual love, Pope imagined his writings as items of barter for -- and thus in some manner equivalent to -- sexual favors of ladies, as he confesses in a 1711 letter to Henry Cromwell: How gladly wou'd I give all I am worth, that is to say, my Pastorals for one of their [the Blounts'] Maidenheads, & my Essay for other?(6) And although he wrote to Martha Blount in 1716 that the Epistle of Eloise grows warm and begins to have some Breathings of Heart in it, which may make posterity think I was in love [Mar 1716]; 1:338), it was to Lady Mary that he practiced his most overtly erotic correspondence: I must be content to show my taste in Life as I do my taste in Painting, by loving to have as little Drapery as possible. Not that I think every body naked, altogether so fine a sight as your self and a few more would be: but because 'tis good to use people to what they must be acquainted with; and there will certainly come some Day of judgment to uncover every Soul of us. (18 August [17161; 1:353). In substituting language for action to express desire, Pope was able to distance himself from real sexual contact, which his physique made problematic, while pretending familiarity with such contact. Pope seemed to find security in distance, for further Lady Mary travelled from England, more emotionally intimate Pope's letters became. …" @default.
• W202010169 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W202010169 creator A5069645407 @default.
• W202010169 date "1995-03-22" @default.
• W202010169 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W202010169 title "Pope, Petrarch, and Shakespeare: Renaissance Influences in 'Eloisa to Abelard.'" @default.
• W202010169 hasPublicationYear "1995" @default.
• W202010169 type Work @default.
• W202010169 sameAs 202010169 @default.
• W202010169 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W202010169 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W202010169 hasAuthorship W202010169A5069645407 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C164913051 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C182306322 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C199033989 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C2775868214 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C2776639384 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C2778734905 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C2780620123 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C2781238097 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C38721330 @default.
• W202010169 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C10138342 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C107038049 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C111472728 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C124952713 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C138885662 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C142362112 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C162324750 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C164913051 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C182306322 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C199033989 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C2775868214 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C2776639384 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C2778734905 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C2780620123 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C2781238097 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C38721330 @default.
• W202010169 hasConceptScore W202010169C41895202 @default.
• W202010169 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W202010169 hasLocation W2020101691 @default.
• W202010169 hasOpenAccess W202010169 @default.
• W202010169 hasPrimaryLocation W2020101691 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W119948293 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W137910191 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W147025379 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W1510874309 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W1518861406 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W1996752666 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2002216436 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2018022657 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2022598962 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2092429634 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2125954095 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W213957460 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2330213209 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2471589307 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W252084681 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2613841506 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2764436298 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W313158140 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W153979935 @default.
• W202010169 hasRelatedWork W2600006169 @default.
• W202010169 hasVolume "74" @default.
• W202010169 isParatext "false" @default.
• W202010169 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W202010169 magId "202010169" @default.
• W202010169 workType "article" @default.