Letter to Chesterfield
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Letter to Chesterfield (February 1755) was Samuel Johnson's notorious response to what he believed to be Lord Chesterfield's opportunistic endorsement of his A Dictionary of the English Language. The letter caused a minor furore in the contemporary literary world when Johnson made it public and it has been the subject of critical comment ever since. It has been described as literature's "declaration of independence".[1][2]
Contents |
[edit] Background
Johnson began work on his Dictionary in 1746 and although the consortium of booksellers that commissioned the work provided him with £1,575 as expenses, Johnson also sought subscriptions from literary patrons among the aristocracy.[3] One of those to receive a request for patronage was Lord Chesterfield, a noted patron of the arts. Johnson visited Chesterfield but, according to Johnson's account, he was kept waiting for a long time and was treated dismissively by Chesterfield when they eventually met. Chesterfield sent Johnson £10 but offered no greater support to Johnson through the seven further years it took him to compile the Dictionary. A degree of genteel mutual antipathy thereafter existed between the two men, Chesterfield regarding Johnson as a "respectable Hottentot, who throws his meat anywhere but down his throat" and as "uncouth in manners".[4] Johnson, in turn, was disparaging of both Chesterfield's nobility and his intellect: "I thought, that this man had been a Lord among wits; but I find he is only a wit among Lords."[4]
[edit] Publication of the Dictionary
With the publication of the Dictionary imminent, Lord Chesterfield published two essays in the periodical The World in praise of the Dictionary in which he implied that he had had a far greater connection with the project than had been the case. In response, Johnson published his famous letter, as a part of the preface to the Dictionary, attacking Chesterfield and renouncing the system of patronage upon which contemporary writers relied. The letter caused a sensation among the literary establishment of the time, already resentful of being beholden to wealthy aristocrats.
[edit] Critical commentary
The Letter to Chesterfield has continued to be commented on by some of the most noted critics and authors since its publication to the present day. In 1853, Thomas Carlyle, in his biography of Johnson proclaimed its significance[5]:
Listen, once again, to that far-famed Blast of Doom, proclaiming into the ear of Lord Chesterfield, and, through him, of the listening world, that patronage should be no more!
—Thomas Carlyle, Samuel Johnson
In the twentieth century, Alvin Kernan[6] wrote that the Letter to Chesterfield
...still stands as the Magna Carta of the modern author, the public announcement that the days of courtly letters were at last ended, that the author was the true source of his work and that he and it were no longer dependent on patron or the social system he represented.
—Alvin Kernan, Samuel Johnson and the Impact of Print
[edit] References
- ^ Sobran, Joseph (2000-06-22). Dr. Johnson, Radical. Retrieved on 2007-09-19.
- ^ Wishna, Victor (October 2005). Words. Words. Words.. National Endowment for the Humanities. Retrieved on 2007-09-19.
- ^ Kirsch, Adam (December 2004). The Hack as Genius. Harvard Magazine. Retrieved on 2007-09-19.
- ^ a b Stephen, Leslie (1878). Samuel Johnson. Retrieved on 2007-09-20.
- ^ Carlyle, Thomas (1853). Samuel Johnson, 59. Retrieved on 2007-09-20.
- ^ Kernan, Alvin (1987). Samuel Johnson and the Impact of Print. Princeton, 105. ISBN 0691014752. Retrieved on 2007-09-20.
