Rule of Darkness

Patrick Brantlinger

Description

A major contribution to the cultural and literary history of the Victorian age, Rule of Darkness maps the complex relationship between Victorian literary forms, genres, and theories and imperialist, racist ideology. Critics and cultural historians have usually regarded the Empire as being of marginal importance to early and mid-Victorian writers. Patrick Brantlinger asserts that the Empire was central to British culture as a source of ideological and artistic energy, both supported by and lending support to widespread belief in racial superiority, the need to transform "savagery" into "civilization," and the urgency of promoting emigration.Rule of Darkness brings together material from public records, memoirs, popular culture, and canonical literature. Brantlinger explores the influence of the novels of Captain Frederick Marryat, pioneer of British adolescent adventure fiction, and shows the importance of William Makepeace Thackeray's experience of India to his novels. He treats a number of Victorian best sellers previously ignored by literary historians, including the Anglo-Indian writer Philip Meadows Taylor's Confessions of a Thug and Seeta. Brantlinger situates explorers' narratives and travelogues by such famous author-adventurers as David Livingstone and Sir Richard Burton in relation to other forms of Victorian and Edwardian prose. Through readings of works by Arthur Conan Doyle, Joseph Conrad, H. Rider Haggard, Rudyard Kipling, John Hobson, and many others, he considers representations of Africa, India, and other non-British parts of the world in both fiction and nonfiction.The most comprehensive study yet of literature and imperialism in the early and mid-Victorian years, Rule of Darkness offers, in addition, a revisionary interpretation of imperialism as a significant factor in later British cultural history, from the 1880s to World War I. It is essential reading for anyone concerned with Victorian culture and society and, more generally, with the relationship between Victorian writers and imperialism, 'and between racist ideology and patterns of domination in modern history.

Sujets

• Royaume-Uni
• Anglais
• Great Britain
• English
• History of Europe
• United Kingdom
• 20th century
• Reino Unido
• Idioma inglés

Informations

• Publié par: Cornell University Press
• Date de parution: 15 janvier 2013
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9780801467035
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 8 Mo

Extrait

RuE ôF DakNESS

FRom James MoomeRyĚ James GRahame ad É BengeR Pèm on hé Aolition o thé Slavé radé   809)

Rule of Darkness bïïŝh Lïéáué á iméïáïŝm, 10-11

pâîçk BâlîgE

CornelL Unîversîty Press ITHàÇà àNd lÔNdÔN

Côpyrght  1988 by Cône Unversty

ALl rghts reseved. Except fôr bref qûôtatôns n a revew ths bôôk ôr parts theeôf mûst nôt be reprôdûced n any fôrm wthôût permssôn n wrtng frôm the pûbLsher Fôr nfôrmatôn address CôrneLL Unversty Press, Sage Hôûse 52 East State Street îthaca New Yôrk 14850.

Frst pûbLshed 1988 by CôrneLL Unversty Press Frst prntng CôrneLL Paperbacks 1990

LîbRay ôFCônréss Caâoing-în-Pubîçatîôn Daâ

BranDnger Patrck 1941- RûLe ôf darkness.

BbLôgraphy: p Incûdes ndex.  EngLsh teratûe19th centûyHstôy and crtcsm. . imperasm n Lteratûre. 3 Côônes n Lteratûre. 4 Engsh Lteratûre0th centûy­ Hstôry and crtcsm ï. TDe PR469.5B73 1988 80'9'358 874783 iSBN13 9780801497674 (pbk  aLk pape) ïSBNo 0801497671 (pbk.  ak paper

Prnted n the Unted States ôf Amerca

CôrneLL Unversty Press strves tô ûse envônmentaLLy respônsbe sûppLes and materas tô the uLest extent pôssbe n the pûb shng ôf ts bôôks Sûch materaLs ncLûde vegetabebased LôwVOC nks and acdfree papers that are ecycLed tôtay chLôrnefee ôr partLy cômpôsed ôf nônwôôd bes Fôr Ûrher nfôrmatôn vst ôûr webste at W .côMepresscôrne.edû.

Papeback prntng

10 9 8 7 6

OR LAON, LÉONÉ, OSÉ, AND RNOD

rEfacE NtrOductION

Côtets

PARt I DAN rOmawN ïsaNdtOHEaÔakNEss  BrINgINg Ùp tHE mpIrE ÇaptaIN MarryatŚ MIdŝHIpmEN

PARt îî NOON  HacErayŚ NdIa  Blac waNŝ Or BOtaNy Bay cOguEŝ 5 HE Ew ÇruŝadEŝ  HE GENEaLOgy Of tHE MytH Of tHE ar ÇONtINENt À HE El at ÇawNpOrEþ ItEray EprEŝENtatIONŝ Of tHE NdIaN MutINy Of 1 8 5À

PARt III DÛk 8 mpErIal GOtHIcþ AtavIŝm aNd tHE ccult IN tHE BrItIŝH AdvENtuE OvEl  1 881 ¦ 1 



¦ À

À ¦ <   < À

¦¦

À

v

ONENŝ 9 pIOguE ‡utŚ "NEŝŝ N ONr ŚHéa o akNEss

OtEŝ NEx

 5 5

À 5  

PreFàce

HE bibliogaPhY of StUdiES of thE itiSh ÉmPiE iN E NiNEtEENth cENtUY iS ENomoUS. ÇoNtovESiES aboUt thE caUSES of imPEia EXPaN SioN, oftEN focUSEd oN vaidatiNg, qUalifYiNg, o EfUtiNg SomE vESioN of thE "EcoNomic thEoY of imPialiSm,  aE aS livE aNd UNSEttlEd todaY aS thEY wEE iN 1 902 whEN JohN obSoN PUbliShEdïmpEiaism:ASudy. Ut of thESE coNtovESiES havE aiSEN diStiNctioNS bEtwEEN vaioUS PEi odS aNd kiNdS of imPEiaiSt EXPaNSioN aNd domiNatioN, PobablY thE moSt im¸o¹taNt of thEm thE iStiNctiON EwEEN thE Ea Om thE ENd O thE aPoEoNic aS to thE EiN ÇoNfEENcE of 1 88đ8 5 aNd thE Ew mPEiaiSm tha bEgaN iN thE 1 880S@ hiS Ew mPEialiSm waS chaac tEizEd bY iNtENSE ivaY amoNg thE ÉUoPEaN PowES dUiNg thE cam blE fo Afica aNd lagE PotioNS of ASia aNd thE oUth acićc AS obSEvES havE coNcENtatEd thEi attENtioN oN thE camblE aS a PEUdE to old a , So dEvEloPmENtS iN thE EalY aNd midictoiaN YEaS havE SomEtimES bEEN ovEShadowEd o igNoEd NdEEd, bEfoE thE  90S hiStoiaNS oftEN tEatEd thoSE YEaS with Scat EfEENcE to imPEi aliSm, SomEtimES EvEN viEwiNg thEm aS aNti-imPEialiSt AthoUgh moE EcENt hiStoiaNS havE EcogNizEd that thE EXPaNSioN of thE itiSh Ém PiE waS coNtiNUoUS, abEit UNSYStEmatic, thoUghoUt thE NiNEtEENth cENtUY, thEY Still SomEtimES dEa with thE PEiod fom ¤ 830 to thE 1880S aS thoUgh imPEialiSm waS Not YEt aN imPotaNt iSSUE hE PobEm haS bEEN EXacEbatEd bY thE ambigUitY of thE tEm