Literair-theoretische geschriften. Deel 2. Commentaar

[p. 271]

Summary

Today, Hieronymus van Alphen (1746-1803) is mainly remembered on account of his poetry for children. His contemporaries, however, and many of his nineteenth-century readers, were equally impressed by his writings on art and literature. Van Alphen was generally regarded as the originator of a new era in Dutch literary theory, since he was perceived as having been influenced by the philosophical developments taking place in the surrounding countries during the latter half of the eighteenth century.

Van Alphen's most important essays on poetry, the Introduction to Riedel (1778) and the Poetical treatises (1780), are edited in the first part of this study; the second part contains a general commentary, which introduces the edition, clarifies Van Alphen's text, lists textual corrections and sources, and is rounded off with a bibliography.

The Introduction to Riedel was first published as an introductory essay to Van Alphen's Theory of the arts and sciences, which is an adaptation of Friedrich Just Riedel's aesthetics. Van Alphen argues forcefully in favour of a philosophical approach to literary theory, and comes to a balanced assessment of Dutch poetry and its history. The Poetical treatises consist of two parts, an Introductory treatise on the means of improving Dutch poetry, in which the author investigates the notion of poetical expression in connection with such aspects of poetic form as language, harmony, and blank verse, and a Treatise on the innate in poetry, which is concerned with the poetic disposition and the creative process in general. According to Van Alphen, talent is indispensable. It reveals itself in such gifts as tenderness, sensibility, imagination, enthusiasm, and the crucial ability to express oneself harmoniously and sensually.

Van Alphen firmly rejects Charles Batteux's imitative aesthetics, endorsing instead views put forward more recently in Germany and in England. Following Alexander Baumgarten, Van Alphen makes much of the notion of ‘sensitive beauty’, which according to him, together with ‘expression’ and ‘originality’, make up the core of aesthetics as such. On account of his emphasis on originality, he has been interpreted as a forerunner of the romantic-expressionist poetics of Edward Young. Unlike Young, however, he feels that poetical expression cannot do without the normative control of taste and judgement, which he presents as the combined product of sensory perception and reason. By submitting poetical expression to these

[p. 272]

normative constraints, Van Alphen also reveals himself as being in close agreement with such German authors as Johann Adolf Schlegel and Johann Georg Sulzer.

The publication of the Introduction to Riedel was something of a literary event. Whereas the Poetical treatises and especially the Introductory treatise were soon to become a popular if somewhat unexciting classic, Van Alphen's first book on aesthetics caused quite a stir. In the Dutch Republic, literary theory had been at a low ebb for some time, and Van Alphen's views were widely held to be revolutionary.

Many of his countrymen, however, were taken aback by his harsh judgement on the poetry of his contemporaries. His praise for foreign poets and critics was regarded as somewhat embarrassing, at a time when the quality of Dutch culture in general had become a cause for concern. Although some of Van Alphen's critics resisted his emphasis on the necessity of formulating a philosophical aesthetics, others were of the opinion that his German- and English-style poetics of feeling remained essentially alien to Dutch culture, which they felt was linked historically to the French tradition. Nevertheless, when Van Alphen embarked on a polemic with Willem Emmery de Perponcher, a Dutch exponent of Batteux's aesthetics, both authors continued to refer to many foreign authorities, so that their quarrel took on a truly European stature.

Van Alphen's assimilation of foreign sources reflects a highly eclectical attitude, his aesthetics revealing a classically rhetorical-argumentative structure, in which both arguments and quotations from authorative sources determine the whole tenor of the argumentation.

Van Alphen's sources, diverse though they are, constitute an integral part of his argument. Although he was indeed exceptionally well-informed, an examination of his sources shows that his erudition did not reduce him to servility. He stresses his particular affinity with Henry Kames, whose Elements of Criticism (1762) he praises warmly both for its analytical assessment of poetry, and for its emphasis on the emotional eloquence of literature in general. Another of his favourites is the German popular thinker Johann Georg Sulzer. Many of his arguments, and even his turns of phrase are borrowed from Sulzer's Allgemeine Theorie der schönen Künste (1771-1774).

In general, Van Alphen quotes accurately, and his criticism of Dutch poetry in the Introductory treatise is largely original. On occasion, however, he is not quite so careful. Several passages have been identified, some running to a number of pages, which consist of literal translations from foreign sources and contain no reference to any sources. The result is a mosaic style, which combines personal observations with tacit quotations, even

[p. 273]

when dealing with such general concepts as genius, imagination, and poetical enthusiasm. Van Alphen's eclecticism can hardly be regarded as evidence of a lack of originality, however, for the way in which he develops his argument shows that he has a mind of his own. His literary judgements are decidedly original, and in its application of European literary theory to the Dutch practice of poetry itself, his aesthetics is indeed an enduring achievement.