Navigation – Plan du site

Charles Olson's Post-modern Instant and D.H. Lawrence's Demon

Joseph R. Shafer

Texte intégral

1In Plato's Republic, Socrates postulates four processes by which a philosopher-king may be produced, the fourth scenario being Socrates's own exceptional case, an indebtedness to his personal daimon. The daimon is a divine spirit, revolutionary in its rearing of the individual, unlike the transcendent gods on Olympus, sanctioned by the Greek State. Allan Bloom's rendition of The Republic of Plato translates Socrates's daimon as "demon," which is telling, as Bloom's fidelity to antiquity coats daimonic mystery with a conservative connotation while daimon and demon are already polysemies. The particularities of the daimon are more in line with Western poetry, as poets have presented panegyrics to their personal daimon since Homer, from Blake, Shelley and Yeats, to Emerson, Pound and Creeley. But as to why D.H. Lawrence would replace the poetic function of the daimon to that of a demon, thereby intentionally altering denotations as well, is something that remains an aberrational gesture. The traditionally alterior daimon was never insidious in its ordination, albeit ghostly, yet the demon harbors an ambigious enmity, an embodiment with carnal control. Lawrence kept a parallel theory of the daimon in his oeuvre, yet his poetic demonization speaks to a historical shift in daemonic etymologies which, for Lawrence, also signals a break in modern ways of writing.

  • 1 Perry Anderson, Origins of Postmodernity (New York: Verso, 1998), 7.
  • 2 Charles Olson and Robert Creeley: The Complete Correspondence, Volume 9. Ed. George Butterrick (San (...)

2The essays in Lawrence's Studies in Classic American Literature concatenated demons and daimons throughout revision, as within the chapter "Fenimore Cooper's White Novels," where "the daimon, or demon of America" haunts the American landscape (55). Lawrence had found, within “The Spirit of Place” and Cooper's novels a protruding demon not unlike that in his own poetry, where the demon suddenly surfaces when changing his poetic form. To tease out the historicity and physicality of Lawrence's demonic form, the poetics of Charles Olson's post-modern instant can be contextualized and juxtaposed. The American poet had relied on Lawrence in the 1940s and '50s, at a time when Olson developed a haptic form of verse, wherein both the "post-modern" and the "instant" where conceived. Olson's seminal work Call Me Ishmael (1947) had drawn from Lawrence's “Moby Dick” essays in Studies, and Olson's subsequent poetics of the "instant" bear similarities to Lawrence's demon. Lawrence's genuflection to his demon was anti-intellectual, and the demon's physical hand in Lawrence's new poetics was in many ways anti-modernist, not unlike Olson's post-modern instant. Perry Anderson notes that Olson was the first to employ the term “postmodern” in North America, beginning in 1952,1 the same year Olson proclaimed that the modern period was from "Hegel to Lawrence."2 What Olson refers to in his poetry as the "act of the instant" invokes, like Lawrence, a pre-Socratic attention to form or "speech act" that avoids the mechanics of modern language. What would appear to Olson as his postmodern instant, however, was for Lawrence the sign of his demon.

  • 3 Carla Billiterri, Language and the Renewal of Society in Walt Whitman, Laura (Riding) Jackson, and (...)
  • 4 Alan Golding, “D.H. Lawrence in Recent American Poetry,” in The Challenge of D.H. Lawrence. Ed. by (...)
  • 5 William Spanos, “Charles Olson and Negative Capability: A Phenomenological Interpretation,” Contemp (...)

3In "Human Universe" Olson distinguished his poetics of "language as the act of the instant" from "the act of thought about the instant," or, as Carla Billiterri has summarized: "Speech, in Olson's assessment, is the unreflective 'act of the instant,' whereas logos [...] is the reflective and abstract 'act of thought about the instant.'"3 Olson's unreflective act within language invokes Pound's and Fenollosa's reliance upon hieroglyphs and ideograms, which Olson explored in his ancient studies of Mayan and Aztec culture. And Alan Golding notes, it was Lawrence's Etruscan Places that had clearly influenced Olson's Mayan Letters, as Olson wrote: "his Etruria (my Sumeria)."4 For Olson, poetry's act of the instant was post-modern because it enacted a Heraclitian flow that is unrestricted by the structures of modern verse. Critics such as William Spanos have attributed Olson's postmodern "act of the instant" with the ideogrammatic use of language, thus the paradox of the instant is its sudden appearance of an underlying movement. Spanos argues that this "act of the instant" relates to Heidegger's Dasein, which is not an event or "discontinuity" but being itself.5 But devaluing the event of Olson's "instant" appears as slight oversight, perhaps displayed in Spanos's implicit spelling of "postmodern" (38), a relatively uninterrupted spelling, unlike Olson's persistent "post-modern," which includes the disrupting hyphen. The signatory or symptomatic act, of a repressed ontology, body or emotion in Olson's post-modern instant can, in some respects, align with Lawrence's demonic act of attention.

  • 6 Ralph Maud, Charles Olson's Readings: A Biography (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, (...)

4By the time Olson began composing his manifesto, “Projective Verse” (1950), he had owned and read Lawrence's Selected Poems "but wanted more," observes Ralph Maud.6 Seeing that Viking Press had published Lawrence's Collected Poems and Last Poems, Olson contacted Monroe Engel, a friend at Viking, in January 1950, and wrote, "I should like very much to have all the poems of Lawrence right now, and if by any odd chance there are copies of each of these in stock, or available, could you be so kind as to see that they are sent to me" (ibid). Maud reiterates that "It is, after all, Lawrence the poet that Olson is really interested in" (ibid), concluding that Olson carried out in-depth studies of Lawrence's poetry, and "that they were carried out simultaneously when Projective Verse was being written is significant" (225). Since Lawrence had introduced the form of the demon when prefacing a number of his poetry collections, the demon's character can speak to Lawrence's and Olson's anti-modern acts.

5The demonic impetus in Lawrence's poetry has been widely acknowledged in Lawrence criticism, mostly by focusing on his 1928 Preface to Collected Poems, where Lawrence formally introduces the demon:

the Sunday afternoon when I perpetrated my first two poems: “To Guelder Roses” and “To Campions” […] a young lady might have written them. But it was after that, when I was twenty, that my real demon would now and then get hold of me and shake more real poems out of me […] I never liked my real poems as I liked “To Guelder Roses”[…] but that is because a young man is afraid of his demon and puts his hand over the demon’s mouth sometimes and speaks for him. And the things the young man says are very rarely poetry. (27-8)

6The demon’s non-conformity rises against Lawrence's earlier Georgian poetry. In Acts of Attention: The Poems of D.H. Lawrence, Gilbert notes that the demon first appears in Lawrence’s "Emotional Realism" poetry, such as “Love on the Farm” and “Snapdragon,”where a base form of rhyme and iambic pentameter begin to break away unpredictably into new rhyme schemes and sporadic meter (5). Keith Sagar, in D.H. Lawrence: Poet, ascribes Lawrence’s controlled early form to a repression of this sexual demonic impulse: "It is the same demon being denied expression, and for the same reasons, in either poetry or sex" (17), since "modern life is a sinning against the Holy Ghost, repudiating and persecuting the demon" (129). Gilbert concedes that the demon was the appearance of unhindered spontaneity, "[w]hen he did not allow literary convention or novelistic invention to muffle the voice of the part of himself, that was his demon" (53). The emotional thrust of the demon has thus been observed as a physical discharge of energy, a disorderly gesture surfacing within or against preconceived notions of poetic structure or technique.

  • 7 Charles Olson, Collected Prose (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 142-144.

7Lawrence criticism has accounted for various sensual forms popping up in his writing, and therefore the repression of such an impulse as well, but the demon is mentioned in passing. Lawrence's “Foreword,” written on the same day as his “Preface,” nevertheless expanded upon the demon's role throughout Lawrence's poetry, even if part of its nature was to be repeatedly repressed by Lawrence and his readers. Lawrence writes, "My demon is not easily loved: whereas the ordinary me is [...] Perhaps it may seem bad taste to write this so personal foreword" (852). To open the “Foreword,” Lawrence stipulates that the demon's sole occupation was to introduce the "present" moment within a physical form, for its occasions are "here and now and present, as ever were, and the pastness is only an abstraction. The actuality, the body of feeling, is essentially alive and here" (849). The stress upon the "body of feeling" as the present instant in Lawrence is picked up years later in Olson's own manifesto on "the INSTANT" in “Projective Verse.” But before 1950, Olson had already privileged Lawrence's poetic mask, which casts aside mindful technique (or semantics) for a more somatic form. In Olson's 1946 essay, “This is Yeats Speaking,” Olson admonishes Pound's "narrow" politics and verse, a "true lover of order," arguing, "But this I say to you: you must take strength by embracing the criticism of your enemy. It is the beauty of demons they rush in to struggle with a cry of hate you must hear if you will answer them," which polemically posits the demon trope against modernists (besides Yeats) while concluding: "Lawrence among us alone had the true mask, he lacked the critical intelligence, and was prospective."7 Olson's use of the demon also trickles across his oeuvre, yet here, in the spirit of Lawrence, Olson directs its antagonistic form at Pound.

  • 8 Charles Olson, Collected Prose (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 136.

8In “D.H. Lawrence and the High Temptation of the Mind” (1950), Olson praised Lawrence's ability to attend to the body over the mind, or, more specifically, to be mindful of his body's resistance to the mind. "It is the evidence of the connection between sex and the structure of the mind. When Lawrence, in one of his verses, calls the search for truth 'the profoundest of all sensualities' [...] he is recognizing the connection I am talking about," "and that what may be the resistance which enables some men to put off thought as it is metaphysical is precisely the strength of the sensual in them."8 The statement at once disavows the metaphysical mind while making thought a sensual experience. Such a raging battle, between Lawrence and his demon, is documented explicitly and implicitly in Lawrence's poetry. Just as Olson observed that "[Lawrence] calls the search for justice 'the next deepest sensual experience,'" second to the search for "truth" in sensuality, Lawrence's poems in Pansies search for justice in the demon, as in “Demon Justice.” The poem opens, "If you want justice / let it be demon justice / that puts salt on the tails / of the goody good" (562), reminding us that the demon's body counters the "mind" with the mysteries of sex: "that the face is not only / the mind's index / but also the comely / shy flower of sex–" (ibid). “Demon Justice” introduces the following poem “Be A Demon!” where the demon has anarchistic potential, "Oh be a demon / outside all class!" (563). Animalistic rather than intellectual, the demon appears "[w]hen you've been being / too human, too long / and your demon starts lashing out / going it strong, / don't get too frightened / it's you who've been wrong" (564). The "you" being, no doubt, the modern ego.

  • 9 G.W.F. Hegel, Encyclopädie der Philoſophiſchen Wiſſenſchaften im Grundriffe (Berlin: Berlag von Dun (...)
  • 10 Goethe's Faust: An American Translation of Part I & II, trans. C.F. MacIntyre (New York: New Direct (...)
  • 11 Brady Bowman, Hegel and the Metaphysics of Absolute Negativity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Pre (...)
  • 12 William Wallace, The Logic of Hegel (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1904), 80.

9The "Introduction" to Lawrence's Pansies touches upon the conflict between mind and body, though Lawrence's form seeks to avoid dualism and idealism through the immanency of demonic forms of thought. For example, Pansies does not render word-images of flowers through glimpses of thought but instead presents the physical shape of thought as a gripped flower. Lawrence derives his Pansies from "Pascal’s Pensées or La Bruyere’s Caractères," treating Pansies more like a "handful of thoughts." Such an aesthetic seems to critique Hegel's "Science of Logic," however inadvertently, for Hegel sought to take the hand back to thought. In his "Second Attitude of Thought to Objectivity," Hegel chides empiricism, for while analyzing what is strictly "in hand," empiricism neglects the "truth" attributed to "thought" alone. Hegel quotes from Goethe's Faust to make a witty retort: "Encheiresin naturae nennt’s die Chimie! / Bohrt sich selbst einen Esel und weis nicht wie. / Dann hat er die Theil in seiner Hand, / Fehlt leider nur das geistlich Band."9 But Hegel misquotes Goethe here, for in Faust these last two lines come first: "The man who wants to know / organic truth and describe it well / seeks first to drive the living spirit out; / he's got the parts in hand there, / it's merely the breath of life that's lacking. The chemists call it encheiresin naturae / and mock themselves and don't know how or why."10 Hegel's notion, to render the object in hand as the spirit of thought, is re-inverted by Lawrence, as Lawrence situates what was in hand (within the mind) back to the hand as a "handful of thoughts." Hegel's intention was to show the dividedness of both Kant's transcendental idealism and Locke's empiricism in order to "unify" them,11 as Hegel makes evident before quoting Goethe: "Mind itself is an inherent division. The error lies in forgetting that this is only half-truth of the process, and that the main point is the re-union of what has parted."12 Perhaps Lawrence would relate more to Husserl, as Lawrence's Pansies finds a "half-truth" in materialism as in idealism, since thought lies in the body's perception, writing, "We have roots, and our roots are in the sensual, instinctive and intuitive body, and it is here we need fresh air of open consciousness" (418). Lawrence's critique or act of attention finds him against certain modernist traditions, in philosophy but mostly poetry, and it is Olson who sees Lawrence's vision as a departure from “the modern” and the end of Hegelian dialectics.

10In 1952, Olson wrote to fellow poet Robert Creeley, lamenting about the deterministic (and optimistic) nature of Marx and Hegel, the "palefaces" of the modern trajectory. Charting a way out, Olson first refers to the cursedness of Rimbaud, then to the alienating drive behind Melville, before finally positioning Lawrence's vision of the body as the post-modern "instant."

  • 13 Charles Olson and Robert Creeley: The Complete Correspondence, Volume 9. ed. George Butterrick (San (...)

LAWRENCE, THE MAN WHO SAW: what he saw (and he’s the only one who saw, up to the men who were born after 1910) was, that the MIND is a TEMPTATION which has to be defeated / and my own sense is that CONJECTURE is the defeat of DIALECTIC, is the ploughing back of that thing, the male mind, to the INSTANT [...] (I have this horror, –oh to hell with it, only, / THIS: / HEGEL to LAWRENCE / and CONJECTURE takes all that energy and redisposes it ANTI-HISTORY, says, the INSTANT.13

  • 14 Charles Olson and Cid Corman: Complete Correspondence, Vol. 1 (Orono: The National Poetry Foundatio (...)
  • 15 Charles Olson, The Special View of History (Berkeley, Oyez, 1970), 33.

11Olson offers his own "conjecture" by mapping the modern from "Hegel to Lawrence," and while the epithet given to Lawrence, "The Man Who Saw," may sound vague, Olson appears to be playing off of Lawrence's resurrection narrative, The Man Who Died. A letter to Cid Corman, written forty-three days after the above, seems to follow-up on what Lawrence "saw," for the letter lays out an identical outline for (post)modernity: Rimbaud searched in "despair," but Melville and Rimbaud were too early to escape, while Lawrence arrived with the "dream of nakedness."14 From Olson's later work, The Special View of History, we can see Olson critiquing Hegel directly, though always in elusive diction, as Olson finds "sensual touch" to be an indicator of what is excluded in thought and what instantiates "change in time."15 The characteristics of such an instant resonate with what Olson sees in Lawrence, and what Lawrence saw in his demon.

12Criticism has found both Olson and Lawrence's poetic to be emasculated, and their demonic form is another testing ground. Lawrence's demon is, on the one hand, frequently expressed in its opposition to masculine discourse. In Women in Love, Birkin advocates a demon lover or body adverse to cerebralism, yet such a body tends to rise more from antagonisms against his very words. First chastising Hermione's "heady intellectualism" quite violently, Birkin fails to clarify the alternative:

"Spontaneous!" he cried [...]"If one cracked your skull perhaps one might get a spontaneous, passionate woman out of you, with real sensuality […]"

"But how? How can you have knowledge not in your head?" she asked.

"In the blood," he answered; "when the mind and the known world is drowned in darkness everything must go—there must be the deluge. Then you find yourself a palpable body of darkness, a demon--"

"But why should I be a demon?" she asked.

"WOMAN WAILING FOR HER DEMON LOVER," he quoted, [...] "You are the real devil who won’t let life exist." (26)

13His words confuse his interlocutors, our audience, and in those instants in which he calls for a demon, the possibility of the demon is rather solicited by such provocation. Ursula is later roped in: "He says he wants me to accept him non-emotionally, and finally—I really don’t know what he means. He says he wants the demon part of himself to be mated—physically—not the human being" (532). The demon confronts masculine discourse and is attributable to the non-human or animal body, more than any human male or female thinking, hence its disturbing appearance.

14It then comes as less a surprise that this excluded non-human element is also found in beasts as well, as in Lawrence's 1925 novella St. Mawr. The black stallion's silent power drives the plot and its protagonist, Mrs. Witt, from post-war English to the deserts of New Mexico, and as a non-speaking character, the demonic horse shapes the text through the presence of its non-language. Regarding the demon-horse's affect upon Mrs. Witt, Lawrence writes:

That horse looked at her with demonish question [...] and his great body glowed red with power [...]. What was it? Almost like a god looking at her terribly out of the everlasting dark, she had felt the eyes of that horse; great, glowing, fearsome eyes, arched with a question, and containing a white blade of light like a threat. What was his non-human question, and his uncanny threat? She didn’t know. He was some splendid demon, and she must worship him [...]. It was something much more terrifying, and real, the only thing that was real. Gushing from the darkness in menace and question, and blazing out in the splendid body of the horse. (14-16)

15"Possessed with all the demons of perversity" (24), Mrs. Witt only "saw demons upon demons in the chaos of his horrid eyes" (26). The force of the demon, in this case, disrupts the otherwise bourgeois stability of dialogue and living, as the sexual atmosphere of the demon seeks the remote natural landscape, which St. Mawr leads Mrs. Witt to, the deserted mountains where the goats of "Pan" roam. The subtle priapism is quieted, as Mrs. Witt upholds her independence, but the protagonist of The Plumed Serpent, Kate, is also pulled in.

16The nativism of the demons in Studies was exacerbated by the Americanization of the frontier, and similar demons crop up in Lawrence's Mexican writings, such as The Plumed Serpent. Olson would teach The Plumed Serpent at Black Mountain College, and the drumming rhythm which Olson cherished in his own pulsating and pre-historic poetic is personified in Lawrence's novel. In Lawrencian language, Olson wrote to Creeley from Lerma:

  • 16 Charles Olson & Robert Creeley: The Complete Correspondence, Volume 1, ed. by George Butterick (San (...)

Yet right here we close the ugly Western gap between, say, what Lawrence called the phallic or priapic, and knowledge. For it is exactly the sexual act where man takes up rhythm in its most elementary expression from nature: just that difference from insemination that the involuntary motion of the sexual (at its least or worst) involves, is the “common” from which all of man’s rhythmic acts proceed.16

  • 17 Charles Olson, “The Escaped Cock: Notes on Lawrence and the Real,” Collected Prose (Berkeley: Unive (...)

17Olson distinguishes rhythmic sensitivity as something "between" the phallus or "knowledge," not unlike when Olson attempted to describe what he called the "real" in Lawrence – the "unknown dark" of sensuality: "to the dark or phallic god who is not phallic or penissimus alone but the dark as night the forever dark, the going-on of you-me-who-ever as conduit of that dark, the well-spring, whatever it is."17 Attempting to locate the dark energy of the sensible real as available to either sex, Olson brushes against a body that nevertheless seems quite masculine in The Plumed Serpent, though it had also belonged to women earlier in Lawrence. Kate finds herself caught in the gap between her Euro-American background and the local villages around Lake Chapala, and when retreating to the mountainous watershed of Quetzalcoatl, the drums signal the growing Mexican revolution and impose upon her senses: "Kate, who had listened to the drums and the wild singing of the Red Indians in Arizona and New Mexico, instantly felt that timeless, primeval passion of the prehistoric races, with their intense and complicated religious significance, spreading on the air" (102), while the drummers sang, "[t]he breath said: Go! And lo! / I am coming" (104). In a climactic tableau, the drumming surrounds her as she witnesses the encircling fifi dancers. A Hegelian diagram is sketched out as the circle forms through opposing dancers, while "negated" figures lay outside the circle in shadow, soon included. From this dark, the bareness of certain natives comes forth. A "demon" emerges, touching and interrupting Kate's scrupulous gaze: "So, before very long, the organdie butterflies and the flannel-trouser fifis gave in, succumbed, crushed once more beneath the stone-heavy passivity of resistance in the demonish peons" (101), before a "demon" then offers his hand. When she touches him, judging is suspended and she becomes a "virgin," in an ontological sense it seems, as she is jostled from the "modern spirit," the "machinery" of modernisation weighing upon her (101). Olson invokes a similar initiative in Lawrence. In Olson's essay “Quantity in Verse,” the West's traditional and quantifiable measurements of diction or meter can be interrupted with a new sense of being, and this "is a sticker a man as post-modern as Lawrence can be no more explicit about […] to asservate what he says he begged [his past lovers] throughout love [to do], find their virginity […] If the intensity of attention is equal to it […] innocence emerges with a thrust much more than sensuality ever gave" (281). Again a priapic language bleeds through, yet the post-modern and demon here are that which also characterize instances wherein the hegemonic logic of Western modernity is punctured. Olson and Lawrence's contexts are also quite different, but they share a language in conveying an affected and temporal sense of form.

18The demon and post-modern instant relate also to the wider poetics of the two poets, who had each pushed a poetics that could only be discerned after the pen had dictated its own bodily form for itself. Though predicting the physical force beforehand, they testify in retrospect. Lawrence grants his demon agency, which is not unrelated to his known dictum in the “Foreword” to Fantasia of the Unconscious, where "This pseudo-philosophy of mine […] is deduced from the novels and poems, not the reverse," for the "novels and poems come unwatched out of one’s pen": "The novels and poems are pure passionate experience. “these ‘pollyanalytics’ are inferences made afterwards, from the experience" (65). And Olson, in “Projective Verse,” claimed that "From the moment he ventures into FIELD COMPOSITION—puts himself in the open—he can go by no track other than the one the poem under hand declares, for itself. Thus he has to behave, and be, instant by instant, aware of some several forces just now beginning to be examined” (240). Within these general frameworks, the post-modern instant and Lawrence's demon nevertheless make a distinct mark. Their instantaneousness is but a single concept, and the demon and post-modern are but tropes in disparate and developing poetics, each further informed in juxtaposition, and in a temporal relation to modern thought.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Anderson, Perry. Origins of Postmodernity. New York: Verso, 1998.

Billiterri, Carla, Language and the Renewal of Society in Walt Whitman, Laura (Riding) Jackson, and Charles Olson: The American Cratylism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.

Bowman, Brady, Hegel and the Metaphysics of Absolute Negativity. Cambridge: Cambirdge University Press, 2013.

Butterrick, George, ed. Charles Olson and Robert Creeley: The Complete Correspondence, Volume 9. Santa Barbara: Black Sparrow Press, 1990.

Christensen, Paul. Charles Olson: Call Him Ishmael. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1979.

Gilbert, Sandra. Acts of Attention: The Poems of D.H. Lawrence. New York: Cornell University Press, 1972.

Golding, Alan, “D.H. Lawrence in Recent American Poetry,” in The Challenge of D.H. Lawrence, ed. by Michael Squires. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1990.

Hegel, G.W.F. Encyclopädie der Philoſophiſchen Wiſſenſchaften im Grundriffe. Berlin: Berlag von Dunder und Sumblot, 1840.

Houlgate, Stephen. The Opening of Hegel's Logic: From Being to Infinity. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 2005.

Lawrence, David Herbert, Complete Poems. London: Penguin Group, 1993.

Lawrence, David Herbert. Psychoanalysis and the Unconscious and Fantasia of the Unconscious. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Lawrence, David Herbert. St. Mawr and The Man Who Died. New York: Vintage Books, 1953.

Lawrence, David Herbert. Studies in Classic American Literature. New York: Thomas Seltzer, Inc., 1923.

Lawrence, David Herbert. Women in Love. Stilwell: Digireads, 2007.

Maud, Ralph. Charles Olson's Readings: A Biography. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1996.

Olson, Charles. The Collected Prose of Charles Olson. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997.

Olson, Charles. The Special View of History. Berkeley: 0yez, 1970.

Sagar, Keith. D.H. Lawrence: Poet. Leicester: Troubadour Publishing Ltd, 2008.

Spanos, William, 'Charles Olson and Negative Capability: A Phenomenological Interpretation', Contemporary Literature, 21:1 (Winter, 1980), 43.

Wallace, William. The Logic of Hegel. Oxford University Press, 1904.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Perry Anderson, Origins of Postmodernity (New York: Verso, 1998), 7.

2 Charles Olson and Robert Creeley: The Complete Correspondence, Volume 9. Ed. George Butterrick (Santa Barbara: Black Sparrow Press, 1990), 71.

3 Carla Billiterri, Language and the Renewal of Society in Walt Whitman, Laura (Riding) Jackson, and Charles Olson: The American Cratylism (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 127.

4 Alan Golding, “D.H. Lawrence in Recent American Poetry,” in The Challenge of D.H. Lawrence. Ed. by Michael Squires (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1990), 203.


5 William Spanos, “Charles Olson and Negative Capability: A Phenomenological Interpretation,” Contemporary Literature, 21:1 (Winter, 1980), 38-80, 43.

6 Ralph Maud, Charles Olson's Readings: A Biography (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1996), 17.

7 Charles Olson, Collected Prose (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 142-144.

8 Charles Olson, Collected Prose (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 136.

9 G.W.F. Hegel, Encyclopädie der Philoſophiſchen Wiſſenſchaften im Grundriffe (Berlin: Berlag von Dunder und Sumblot, 1840), 82.

10 Goethe's Faust: An American Translation of Part I & II, trans. C.F. MacIntyre (New York: New Directions, 1949), 60.

11 Brady Bowman, Hegel and the Metaphysics of Absolute Negativity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), 138.

12 William Wallace, The Logic of Hegel (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1904), 80.

13 Charles Olson and Robert Creeley: The Complete Correspondence, Volume 9. ed. George Butterrick (Santa Barbara: Black Sparrow Press, 1990), 71.

14 Charles Olson and Cid Corman: Complete Correspondence, Vol. 1 (Orono: The National Poetry Foundation, 1987), 244-248.

15 Charles Olson, The Special View of History (Berkeley, Oyez, 1970), 33.

16 Charles Olson & Robert Creeley: The Complete Correspondence, Volume 1, ed. by George Butterick (Santa Barbara: Black Sparrow Press, 1980), 240.

17 Charles Olson, “The Escaped Cock: Notes on Lawrence and the Real,” Collected Prose (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), 139.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Joseph R. Shafer, « Charles Olson's Post-modern Instant and D.H. Lawrence's Demon », Études Lawrenciennes [En ligne], 48 | 2017, mis en ligne le 20 décembre 2017, consulté le 22 septembre 2018. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/lawrence/285 ; DOI : 10.4000/lawrence.285

Haut de page

Auteur

Joseph R. Shafer

University of Warwick, UK

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Licence Creative Commons
Études lawrenciennes est mis à disposition selon les termes de la licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.

Haut de page
  • Logo Presses universitaires de Paris Ouest
  • Logo Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense
  • OpenEdition Journals