England emerged from the Middle Ages as a very well organized, well funded, and country under the rule of Queen Elizabeth I. With France suffering from their own problems, the glory of England could only be rivaled by that of Spain. Of course, between increasing military and exploration costs, and inflation caused by a huge influx of New World gold, Spain soon found itself scraping at the bottom of the financial barrel. With neighboring countries in varying degrees of turmoil, England was quite free (despite relatively small scuffles involving Spain, Ireland, Catholicism, etc.) to develop their country and explore new territories for mainly economic and industrial purposes.
One obvious change in English literature of this time is its general content. While early literature was mainly concerned with matters of military and state, and later (including this exact time period) works relied heavily on social and political commentary, this era of English literature saw a great increase in matters of exploration. The governments of this era were much more concerned with the financial and industrious gains that could be made from New World exploration, however the general public was quite enamored with the romance and fantasy of a new untouched world as they were also curious (with much less enthusiasm) about the inhabitants of these foreign lands.
Works like Drayton's "Ode. To the Virginian Voyage" and Donne's "Elegy 19. To His Mistress Going to Bed" seemed to embody the romance that was equated with the exploration of the New World. One interesting new trend is the emphasis on geographical description found in both of these works, which could have possibly been derived from accounts received from explorers of this time. Both poems dwell on the overwhelming emotions involved with traveling to new lands but both also approach the subject from two slightly different angles. Donne describes the exploration of the Americas in a satirical way (lines 27-30), emphasizing in line 29 the importance of the land's precious resources, and also emphasizing its superficial importance as a great addition to the English Empire. Drayton, on the other hand, is very genuine in his admiration. He admires the explorers that colonize these new fantastical worlds in the name of England, just as he is in awe of the great natural beauty of the New World.
Of course, the actual accounts of these explorations written in prose painted a much different, less idealistic portrait of the New World exploration. While the geographical descriptions are quite similar, albeit the accounts in prose are much more concerned with gold than anything else, the prose describe actual encounters with native peoples. The idealistic nakedness of the New World (that is in land and attire) would have been praised by someone like John Donne, however Sir Francis Drake and his crew seem to abhor the nakedness of the natives on arriving in modern-day California. While the natural surroundings are described with great heartfelt accounts in these prose just as they are in the poetry, the actual inhabitants of the natives are described in (to put it lightly) less than flattering ways throughout the accounts.
Great observations on the variant ways that prose and poetry deal with the same topic. Your post made me wonder: should Renaissance maps like the ones depicted in the link below--be considered poetic or prosaic?
ReplyDeletehttp://www2.lib.virginia.edu/exhibits/lewis_clark/novus_orbis.html
I never realized that mapmakers embellished their maps in order to portray a North West passage in order to appease their sponsors and receive more financing for future journeys. Farrer and Munster's maps definitely fall under the category of poetic maps. Small sketches depicting the local flora and fauna and even including a great sea vessel really remind me of how kids will make fake treasure maps and draw in plenty of wonders and dangers along the way. The spot marked "Canibali" on Farrer's map of South America which includes a small sketch of thick jungle with severed limbs strewn about has got to be my favorite part. Sanson's map is much more accurate and less embellished. As it seems much more concerned with actual geography and information rather than to attract attention, I'd say this one is more prosaic. Really cool stuff. It looks like explorers and mapmakers were very concerned with sea creatures.
ReplyDeleteSuch good background information from that era. Not only did you connect it to the readings, but I learned some history too! Makes the readings very clear and interesting.
ReplyDeleteawesome post! it really provided a clear historical context in which to view the readings, and i like your interpretations of the maps professor Calhoun posted. i think this link adds to your rumination a lot, showing both the poetic and practical or prosaic ways in which explorers experienced the new world.
ReplyDeleteGreat post.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the descriptions of the beautiful new lands seem to blend together with words such as untouched, green flora, natural abundances ect, but where the real differences fall between the works is the description of the Native Peoples. From one reading to the next how the voyagers viewed the natives changed drastically. In Frobisher's Voyages to the Artic an Eskimo is captured and used for information because the English viewed them as savage enemies. In the discourse George Best even wrote,"{..}to understand by signs that he had knowledge of the taking of our five men the last year, and confessing the manner of each thing, numbered the five the men upon his fingers and pointed unto a boat in out ship which was like unto that wherein our men were betrayed: and when we made him signs that they were slain and eaten, he earnestly denied, and made signs to the contrary" (932). In comparison, in Hariot's Report of Virginia the natives are painted in a more positive light. He still refers to them as a less people than the English, yet he notes that they are clothed, have traditions, are an "ingenious peoples" and have faith in Gods. Thus, he notes that they are civilization, yet a different one from British society.
Overall I really enjoyed this post and it really helped me to make further observations about the reading.
I think those two viewpoints--wry, ironic detachment vs. genuine fascination/interest--still clash on a regular basis today. I like how you could identify both in 16th century literature!
ReplyDelete