Consciousness, Literature and the Arts
Archive
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2004
Special Issue: Jacques Derrida’s Indian Philosophical Subtext
_______________________________________________________________
Gordon, John, Physiology and the Literary Imagination: Romantic to Modern, Gainesville, University of Florida Press, 2003. 296pp. ISBN: 0-8130-2586-9, hardback: $55.00.
Reviewed by
University of Tulsa
Asserting his interest in “how the idea of the body held by particular writers at particular times affects the way they understand and represent human nature and behavior,” John Gordon provides a sweeping overview of the interplay between physiological and narrative theory that spans nearly 200 years in Physiology and the Literary Imagination: Romantic to Modern (1). Opening with William Wordsworth and the use of leeching and bleeding, Gordon traces the historical development of medicinal practices and anatomical understandings through phrenology, hydrodynamics, electricity, clinical pathology, and Darwinism in the works for Charles Dickens, Gerard Manley Hopkins, T. S. Eliot, James Joyce, Dylan Thomas, and Sylvia Plath. Gordon refers to his methodology as an “inside-out history,” in that he begins each chapter “with a reading of a writer’s governing medical assumptions [. . .] to move outward from this point to seek for the likely origins of those assumptions from among the medical theories and practices current at the time; and to then return to the author’s writings to see if [he] can isolate and track what has been made of what was in the air” (1). The resulting trajectory of each writer’s understanding of medical doctrine presents a convincing and illuminating argument that offers a unique interpretation of the body politic.
Each chapter follows a similar pattern in which Gordon begins by discussing his overall thesis—that medicinal understandings found their way into the works of authors from the Romantics to the Postmoderns—then provides a look back at the writers he has just discussed before launching into his classification of the physiological process underpinning the present chapter. He then breaks down each chapter argument by supplying a brief historical progression of medical theory of the day. From there, he discusses the writer, beginning with his or her earliest work and moving chronologically through their archive to demonstrate the extent to which each was affected by medical theory. By attacking the writer’s canon chronologically, Gordon allows readers to follow the writer’s own struggle and development of physiological understanding through the integration and revision of medical theory into his or her consciousness. Furthermore, Gordon provides solid detail and convincing evidence that each of the writers he has chosen were, in some way, interested or knowledgeable about the common medical practices of their day.
Throughout Physiology and the Literary Imagination, Gordon’s strong knowledge of the historical and biographical contexts of the writers adds validity to his argument that medical doctrine permeated their works. He has a clear understanding of the time periods and literary movements he deals with, despite the large span of time the book covers. Furthermore, Gordon’s logical assessment of medical theory and array of evidence to support its prevalence in the public’s collective consciousness lends credibility to his close readings of each text he deals with. For instance, in the opening chapter, “Doctor Wordsworth,” Gordon sets up an elaborate depiction of the prevalence of leeching and bleeding as the most appropriate remedies to stabilize and balance the body’s fluids. After discussing the references to these remedies in Lyrical Ballads, The Convention, and The Borderers, Gordon goes on to list the use (and overuse—the maid Jane died from being bled) of bleeding and leeching within the Wordsworth family to show that Wordsworth was nearly obsessed with the notion of inflammation (26). Gordon uses this biographical knowledge to aid in his close reading of Wordsworth’s poetical and prose works to argue that Wordsworth’s concern with inflammation is related to “overconcentration,” which also needed to “be leeched away” (35). The implication, then, is that the Romantic imagination is an exercise in mental inflammation that strives for a balance of pressure through the cathartic process of writing.
Chapter
two, “The Interior Dickens,” then, explores how the movement of fluid was
similarly important to Dickens as it was to Wordsworth, but simultaneously
demonstrates how vitalism and the notion of hydrodynamics advanced medical
thought in the Victorian period. According
to Gordon, Dicken’s understanding of the movement of the body’s fluids
through sexual intercourse and the act of blushing permeated Dombey and Sons,
David Copperfield, A Tale of Two Cities, Little Dorrit, and Our
Mutual Friend. Gordon’s close
reading of these texts is particularly satisfying as he not only elucidates
unique interpretations for Dickens’ scholars, but also provides easy-to-follow
descriptions of the novels’ thematic trajectories for those less well-versed
in the Dickens’ archive.
The weakest section, however, is Chapter three, “Hopkins and Eliot, Electrical and Pre-Electrical.” Although Gordon deals with two writers, this chapter is not as long or as detailed as the other chapters. It reads as if he merely wanted to skim through their use of electrical impulses in order to reach Chapter four, “James Joyce, Skinside Out,” which is where Gordon’s knowledge shines. His discussion of Joyce is interesting, extensive, and belies his affinity for Joycean scholarship as he effortlessly accounts for Joyce’s post-Darwinian understanding of the dynamism of the body and mind. However, the trap that Gordon occasionally falls into with Joyce is that he assumes the reader also possesses extensive knowledge of the Joycean canon, particularly Finnegans Wake, and often references incidents and characters within the Wake without the explanation or consideration he utilized in the Dickens chapter. Unless a reader has worked with the Wake, the Joyce chapter may prove to be a bit difficult and confusing. However, Joyceans would find this chapter useful in unpacking Joyce’s understanding of the body, as Gordon returns to the notion of menstruation in regards to Molly Bloom and Anna Livia Plurabelle to explore both its lunar and gestational implications and then explores the impact of the body on the mind by discussing the “Lestrygonians” episode of Ulysses and the opening section of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man.
The final chapter, “Thomas and Plath: Poetry as Mitosis,” catapults Joyce’s understanding of internal functions into a Postmodern world where both Thomas and Plath view the body as “a model not just for the interior world thus revealed but for the creative act that permitted them to become one with the way it worked” (186). Beginning with a discussion of Thomas and then moving on to Plath, Gordon argues that “[e]volution, that is, had become internalized” (193). In other words, the prevalence of endocrinology, cancer, and the use of x-rays shaped the poetry of both Thomas and Plath to such an extent that “[b]oth poets are people sitting in a dark room shining this light inward rather than outward, as if some bright x-raying searchlight transfusing skin and veins had been turned on the whole body” (240).
Gordon’s 22-pages of explanatory notes are comprehensive in providing additional information and related material. Also, the fairly extensive, 12-page selected secondary bibliography at the end is a helpful resource for those wishing to begin a study of physiology in literature. His index is also useful and includes the areas of medicine related to the physiological processes related to the theories Gordon discusses in each chapter.
Throughout the book, Gordon employs clear, direct, easy-to-understand language that prevents his argument from becoming muddled. He is kind to his reader and refrains from literary jargon, thereby making his book accessible to a wide audience. While scholars and critics will find Gordon’s book to be interesting and unique in its presentation of medical doctrine as a significant influence on the development of the literary imagination, an advanced undergraduate could also easily follow his prose. At times, Gordon is cheeky in his presentation, with comments such as “I’ll bet she did” in reference to Mrs. Dombey finding Paris dull (79), “Fortunately for his—well—readers” in regards to Dickens’ presentation of illiterate characters (110), and “I haven’t a clue what that last line means, but the rest is clear enough” when he quotes a passage from Thomas’s “Follow the Fox” (201). These colloquial and conversational slips not only allow Gordon to connect with his reader in a co-conspiracy concerning the arbitrariness of literary study, but they demonstrate both his comfort and confidence in admitting that even he “doesn’t know it all,” thereby making him a likeable and enjoyable critic.