The Binary Oppositions In Robert Southey’s Epics

Being one of the prominent representatives of the Lake Poets, Robert Southeyhas made indelible contribution to English Romantic literature of the nineteenthcentury. His epics have a great value to be researched on. His epics are traditionallywell arranged in structure and sublime in spirit, and original in exotic touch, colonialcolor and psychological description. His epics are created from1793to1814, aturbulent period during which England was experiencing the coexistence andintensification of numerous social crises. From the perspectives of Post-Colonial andPsychoanalytic theories, this dissertation, taking the binary oppositions of three epicsas subject, aims to explore the formation, development and consequence of thedichotomies in the three epics, and demonstrate the sequence of Southey‘s ideologicaltransformation from radicalism to conservativism.This dissertation considers Southey‘s epics as the core of his poetical art.Southey‘s success in epics comes from his unique arrangement in both structure andcontent. Analyzing the structure, the dissertation discovers that the epics are full ofbinary oppositions, the conflicts and antagonism of which coordinate with theirreconcilable social contradictions of England during that period. Probing the content,the dissertation excavates that Southey exploits the heroic figures in European historyto be the models of his epic heroes, through portraying their circumstances andactions, the poet reflects the living condition, emotion and aspiration of the Englishpeople of all social strata in the Romantic period. Southey utilizes history to mirrorreality. He successfully employs the art of binary opposition to represent thecomplicated contradictions in English society of his time: for example, contradictionsbetween republicanism and autocracy, war and peace, virtue and evil etc. Thedissertation assumes that the dichotomies in the epics reveal Southey‘s ideologicaltendency in the background of the collision of ideas and confrontation betweendifferent social forces. The first chapter expounds the three groups of political binary oppositions inJoan of Arc. The first dichotomy shows the conflicts between French people‘sstruggle for national independence and English illegal invasion of French territory. Toillustrate this point, this part makes a detailed and thorough-going analysis of thestruggle between the war-makers and the war victims, the sharp contrast betweenpeople‘s hatred for war and love of peace and the confrontation between French justresistance and English evil aggression. This group of binary opposition finallydissolves after the just struggle of French people conquers the unjust invasion madeby England. The second dichotomy demonstrates the sharp contrast between thealtruism of French people represented by Joan of Arc and the egoism of French rulingclass represented by Charles VII. To support this argument, this part thoroughlyanalyzes the conflicts between nationalism and individualism, the comparisonbetween the great effort and sacrifice made by the people and the rich benefit obtainedby the ruling class who accomplish nothing. It also points out the inevitable existenceof this unfair relationship between the two poles of the binary opposition. The thirddichotomy presents the opposition between male domination and femalesubordination in political affairs. To provide evidences for the argument, this partelaborates the contradiction between females‘existence as secondary citizens in thesocial reality. The above three groups of binary oppositions strongly indicate thatthere exist many domestic contradictions in France when French people defend theirmotherland against English invasion. They also embody Southey‘s radical ideas, forhe supports the struggle for national independence, advocates republicanism andappeals equal human rights.The second chapter dissects the three groups of cultural binary oppositions inMadoc. The first group projects the confrontation between European―civilization‖and American―barbarity‖. This part points out that, with the development ofmaterialism in Europe, the Europeans become spiritually degenerated and hypocritical.For private interest, the European Whites take internecine strife and husband and wifebecome strange bedfellows. On the contrary, the native Americans are sincere innature. They are of one heart and one mind in doing things and could share weal and woe together. The European colonists‘chauvinism and race superiority are the originof the binary opposition. The second group presents the opposition between ChristianGod and American fetish. In order to dominate American people‘s spiritual world, theEuropean Christians manage to suppress the American fetishists, who fightdauntlessly against the Europeans‘suppression to defend their religious culture. Thedichotomy reveals the Europeans‘wild ambition to conquer America and display thenative Americans‘resolution to defend their cultural heritage. The third groupdemonstrates the differences between European patriarchy and American matriarchy.Analyses and discussions of this part are made mainly on the contrast between males‘dominative position signified by their right of speech in patriarchal European societyand the females‘subordination signified by their collective aphasia; the comparisonbetween American women‘s high social position and European women‘s humble state;European women‘s advance in thinking under the influence of American feministculture, they become independent and realize the dream of gender equality. Insummary, the three dichotomies expose how the self-serving European colonists carryout their cultural aggression in America. The native Americans‘refusal to acceptEuropeans‘compelling cultural identity signifies Southey‘s disillusionment of settingup a Pantisocracy in America. Southey expresses his admiration and praise for therulers who have made achievements in state affairs, which reflects his sliding toconservatism in thinking.The third chapter inquires into the three moral dichotomies in Roderick, the Lastof the Goths. The first binary opposition demonstrates the contrast between loyaltyand betrayal during Spanish people‘s resistance against the Moor‘s invasion. Itstresses the importance of rightly managing collective and individual relationship inthe struggle for national unification, and points out that individual action must besubordinate to the national interests. The second one focuses on the contrast betweenthe hermit‘s benevolence and the king‘s malevolence. A discussion about the goodand evil in human nature as well as their dialectical relationship is followed. Finallythis part employs Freudian psychoanalysis to conclude that good comes from thesublimation of personality and evil is caused by the desire of id. The third one expounds the clashes between female virtue and male evil. With noble sentiment, thefemale who has achieved sublimation of personality in predicaments, forgives andrescues the disappointed males who have fallen into the abyss of despair and revenge.In the struggle between good and evil, the invaders inferior tactics and ugly acts arefully brought to light. The Spaniards‘successful compelling of the Moor‘s invasionproves that the national well-being is the premise of individual happiness, and justiceis bound to triumph over injustice. Southey takes the triumph of virtue over evil as thetheme of the epic, which indicates that Southey‘s concern for morality surpasses theinterest in social reform. It is an evidence of his conservative tendency. Thesedichotomies not only reflect Southey‘s criticism of Napoleonic aggressive wars inEurope, but also reveal the formation of the poet‘s conservative thoughts.The dissertation concludes that the multiple binary oppositions in Southey‘sepics comprehensively demonstrate the struggles between subjugation andanti-subjugation, justice and injustice in politics, culture and morality. Southey‘s epicsnarrate anecdotes of the past in alluding to the present, embody a concentratedreflection of multitudinous social contradictions during Romantic period, and interpretSouthey‘s transformation from a radical to a conservative. These dichotomies arecontradictive and correlative with each other, amplify Southey‘s pilgrimage inthinking: from his approval of French Revolution at the beginning, and his laterescape from revolution, to his suggestion of molding people‘s mind instead ofreforming the society in the end. As the classics of Romantic literature, Southey‘sepics embody the unique features of Romantic poetry, which stress imagination andemotion. With the poetical art of binary opposition, Southey describes the epicalcharacters‘mental conflicts and probes the obscure consciousness. Southey developsthe poetic art of Romanticism. Without any doubt, the technique of binary oppositionenhances the effect of expressing the poet‘s feelings and ideas. Moreover, it enablesthe readers to be excited and responsive in reading, and bestows eternal artistic charmto Southey‘s epics.