ESC: English Studies in Canada

M O R R E L L ’ S E A R T H L Y P A R A D I S E A N D T H E V A R I E T I E S O F P A S T O R A L I N S P E N S E R ’ S J U L Y E C L O G U E DAVID R. SHORE University of Ottawa I n her book The Spenserian Poets Joan Grundy several years ago remarked that “the world The Shepheardes Calender creates exists to be contemplated rather than entered; it presents to us a pure art-image, graceful and remote.” 1 There is little in recent criticism of the Calender to support this observation; the assumption that the Calender presents an unfolding “argument” 2or that it contains dramatic and dynamic “debates between pastoral perspectives of varying but plausible legitimacy” 3 tends to preclude the kind of response to which Joan Grundy is pointing. But she is, I think, pointing us in the right direction, and in this article I want to follow her suggestion and to show how at least one eclogue, “July,” can be viewed as “a pure art-image” which “exists to be contemplated rather than entered.” Admittedly one eclogue is not the whole poem, and since I join with those who believe in the unity of the Calender, I would accept and even insist that my reading of “July” must ultimately be shown to be consistent with the entire poem. To demonstrate that consistency, though, would be matter for at least a substantial part of a book. For the moment I would simply observe that there is probably as little agreement over the function of pastoral conven­ tions in The Shepheardes Calender as there is over the function of allegory in The Faerie Queene. We do need to know what was for Spenser the “mean­ ing” of the Calender. Without a clear understanding of what he is doing in his first major published work, we can never adequately understand either the course of Spenser’s own literary career or even, perhaps, the course of Eliza­ bethan poetry as a whole. First, however, we need a fuller understanding of what he set out to achieve in the individual eclogues. The following study of “July” will, I hope, suggest the need for a reconsideration of some of the other moral eclogues, particularly “February,” “May,” and “September.” Beyond that, I hope it will indicate the need for a reassessment of Spenser’s achieve­ ment in the Calender and at the same time provide some provisional conclu­ sions towards such a reassessment. The most common view of the July eclogue goes back as far as E.K.’s pre­ fatory Argument: “This /Eglogue is made in the honour and commendation E n g lish Stu d ies in C anada, v, i , Spring 1979 of good shepeheardes, and to the shame and disprayse of proude and ambitious Pastours. Such as Morrell is here imagined to bee.”4 The antithesis between the way of humility and the life of pride comes easily to both conventional morality and pastoral tradition, and when Hallett Smith follows and ex­ pands upon E.K. he is in agreement with most modern criticism of the eclogue: “Thomalin represents the Puritan ideal of a clergy unelevated, humble, and devoted to pastoral care, while Morrell represents the Catholic or Anglican clergy gloating in worldly pomp; most general and most signifi­ cant of all, Thomalin represents the mean estate, the central theme of pastoralism , and Morrell embodies the aspiring mind.” 5 Hallett Smith is un­ doubtedly correct in his identification of Thomalin, the shepherd of the low­ lands, as a representative of the “mean estate,” for Thomalin asserts clearly and unequivocally his adherence to the pastoral doctrine of tranquillity and retreat: In humble dales is footing fast, the trade is not so tickle: And though one fall through heedlesse hast, yet is his misse not mickle. (13-16) It is difficult, however, to see where in the poem Morrell, the hill-dwelling goatherd, shows himself to be “gloating in worldly pomp,” or even to have any interest...