Ian Watt's "The Rise of the Novel"

 

In 1957, Ian Watt published "The Rise of the Novel," which marked a departure from the prevailing New Critical viewpoint of the time. Although initially perceived as a challenge to New Critical principles, it was more of an adjustment than a complete rejection of formalism. Watt rejected the notion of the work as an independent entity, asserting that ideas and novels are intertwined and that artists are products of their social and moral environment. In his book, Watt blends historical criticism with formal criticism, illustrating how changes in the intellectual and social landscape of the eighteenth century influenced the development of the novel. Watt links the unique literary characteristics of the novel to the society in which it emerged, showing how factors such as the rise of economic individualism and Protestantism shaped the form and content of major works by authors like Defoe, Richardson, and Fielding. He argues that biographical, sociological, and historical knowledge is essential for understanding the meaning of literary works, enabling readers to grasp both the text's intended message and broader cultural contexts.

 

Watt's methodological approach, offers a framework for interpreting novels beyond their surface content, viewing them as reflections of authors, cultures, and literary histories. He emphasizes the importance of contextualizing each work within the evolution of the art form while preserving the integrity of formal analysis. Watt's extensive knowledge of seventeenth and eighteenth-century culture allows him to demonstrate how works by Defoe, Fielding, and Richardson are shaped by their historical milieu. In contrast to contemporary trends that prioritize reader response or focus solely on the text's formal qualities, Watt's insistence on understanding literature within its historical context remains a valuable corrective. He challenges the notion of the reader as the sole creator of meaning and emphasizes the role of criticism in elucidating the historical conditions that inform a text's production and reception.

 

Ian Watt, alongside influential critics like Leavis, Booth, and Van Ghent, significantly altered the way novels were perceived in both England and America. The importance of Watt's study can be attributed to several key factors:

 

Watt highlights how middle-class writers like Defoe and Richardson challenged Augustan values through their novels, situating this challenge within its historical context. The "rise" of the novel is portrayed as a revolutionary act against traditional class structures, aristocratic dominance, and established literary conventions.

 

By emphasizing the relationship between culture and society, Watt liberated novel criticism from the confines of New Criticism, which had become somewhat stagnant in its search for patterns and unity even in lesser-quality texts.

 

Through a blend of historical scholarship and insightful reading, Watt contributed to establishing the canon of the English novel in the eighteenth century. He notably challenged prevailing views, such as those held by the Chicago Aristotelians, that placed Fielding above Richardson.

 

Watt anticipated the work of later narratologists by viewing novels as attempts to solve formal challenges and explore the possibilities of the genre. He recognized novelists as conducting inquiries into the relationship between art and reality.

 

He argued that readers' desires for vicarious experiences, reflecting their interest in private lives and economic motives, played a significant role in shaping the eighteenth-century novel.

 

Watt conceptualized the development of the novel as a progression from simpler to more complex forms, framing it as an evolutionary process. He saw the eighteenth-century novel as a necessary stage in the advancement of English fiction, leading to later achievements by authors like Austen.

 

He demonstrated that a historical approach was compatible with the aesthetic formalism of the New Criticism, enriching its focus on close reading. Watt used close reading to support his broader historical and sociological analyses.

 

Watt argued against the fashionable reliance on Freud and Jung in understanding authors, asserting that authors and their texts must be studied together within their historical context.

 

Finally, he suggested that there was no absolute division between external and internal approaches to character, exemplified by Fielding's omniscient narrator and Richardson's psychological depth.

In the first chapter of his work, "Realism and the Novel Form," Ian Watt approaches his subject as a social and historical issue that can be examined using factual methods. He views the rise of the novel as a response to specific social and historical conditions, similar to how scholars might study the emergence of universities in medieval Europe or the decline of monasteries in England.

2

Watt, influenced by positivist and empiricist principles, believes that scientific and historical inquiry can be applied to the humanities, including literature. He suggests that the novel's emergence was influenced by various factors, such as the Puritan concept of the dignity of labor and the rise of economic individualism. He argues that these conditions helped shape the novel's premise that the individual's daily life is worthy of literary exploration.

 

The concept of realism in novels, according to Watt, stems from philosophical realism, which focuses on studying the particulars of individual experiences without preconceived assumptions. Realism in novels involves presenting life in a detailed and accurate manner, with a strong emphasis on specificity of time, place, and character. Watt refers to this as "formal realism," which he sees as inherent to the novel form itself.

 

However, some issues arise in Watt's discussion. For instance, he doesn't clearly define the narrative procedures that constitute formal realism, making it difficult to identify these strategies in other texts. Additionally, Watt sometimes presents formal realism as both a process and an achieved result, leading to confusion about its nature and value.

 

Despite these challenges, Watt's exploration of realism in novels sheds light on the dynamic relationship between literature and the world it portrays. He suggests that novels allow readers to vicariously experience different realities and engage with complex social issues, ultimately enriching their understanding of the human condition.

 

Ian Watt, drawing upon his life experiences, believes that literature serves as a critique of life itself. He incorporates personal observations of human behavior into his literary criticism, which some may consider sentimental or old-fashioned humanism. However, Watt argues that a literary critic must possess experience and insight into human behavior to effectively analyze literature.

 

Influenced by thinkers like F.R. Leavis and the Scrutiny group, Watt sees the role of the literary critic as both serving the author and defending culture and civilization. He emphasizes moral intensity and profound seriousness in his standards, reflecting Leavis's influence. Watt's approach combines elements of New Criticism, focusing on close reading, with larger questions about authors' values, psychology, and social context.

 

Watt sees characters in novels as both individuals and symbols of historical developments. He examines how novels reflect social conventions and historical issues, using works like Richardson's "Clarissa" as examples. Watt's analysis emphasizes the relationship between literature and cultural context, recognizing the contribution of literary works to cultural change.

 

While Watt's approach aligns with structural explanations and recent narratological perspectives, he also believes in the uniqueness of human character and the capacity for authors and characters to define themselves. His criticism focuses on the English novel tradition, which often centers on individual choices and struggles within society.

 

Watt's emphasis on historical context enriches literary interpretation but does not claim to solve all interpretive problems. For example, while he highlights the tension between rational economic individualism and spiritual redemption in Defoe's works, he acknowledges that some interpretive issues, like Defoe's use of irony, remain unresolved.

 

In his analysis of "Tom Jones," Ian Watt responds to the perspectives of Chicago Aristotelians, particularly R.S. Crane's influential essay, "The Plot of Tom Jones" (1950). Watt suggests that the focus of the Chicago critics, emphasizing the exploration of the soul of the artist and the structures of experience and cultures, might have been too narrow.

 

Watt argues that in the central tradition of the novel, there has been a reversal of the Aristotelian priority of plot over character. He suggests that a new type of formal structure has emerged, where the plot aims to embody the ordinary process of life and becomes highly dependent on characters and the development of their relationships. However, because Fielding was more interested in characters as representative figures rather than their idiosyncrasies, he employs a more traditional plot structure.

 

Watt proposes a rule for a grammar of plot, stating that in novels like "Tom Jones," the importance of the plot is inversely proportional to that of character. He suggests that this principle allows for a greater variety of minor characters to be introduced, as they are less constrained by the roles assigned to them by the narrative design.

 

Crucial to Watt's argument is his distinction between the "realism and presentation" of Richardson and Defoe and the "realism of assessment" of Fielding. He suggests that Fielding brings a responsible wisdom about human affairs to his novels, which influences the deeds and characters within them. This "realism of assessment" plays upon the moral reality depicted in the narrative.

 

However, Watt acknowledges some limitations in his own approach. He realizes that his emphasis on realism of presentation over realism of assessment may have skewed the balance in his analysis. Additionally, he notes the challenge of separating these two forms of realism, as they often occur simultaneously in the reader's interpretation of the text.

 

Overall, while Watt's analysis may not articulate a specific aesthetic of fiction, his exploration of realism as a mode of perception remains essential to understanding the development of the English novel. Despite its limitations, Watt's work is praised for its clarity, subtlety, and elegance, making it a compelling argument and a pleasure to read.