Today, we are returning to Anna Laetitia Barbauld and as I look back at her writing and background. I am full of questions. I wonder if Barbauld was not raised in the progressive, education-based household that she did, would her genius ever have been expressed. Also, how many women with equal intelligence to Barbauld were overshadowed by their male-counterparts and never given the opportunity or experience to express themselves. So much of Barbauld’s writing shows a mediation of her female role and her educated self.

In “Washing Day,” Barbauld shows us how her society is constantly being relfected, even in the most mundane ways. The women washing clothes shows gender inequalities, social customs, and community, all within a female sphere (something that is often exempted). Barbauld is giving women a voice through her female voice, a very empowering venture.

For class today, we read poetry by Anna Laetitia Barbauld. I found her writings striking in that they are able to use such beautiful language to describe the issues facing society at this time. She touches on imperialism, women’s rights, familial structures, and the social structures. The poem that I found the most interesting was either “Eighteen Hundred and Eleven” or “Washing Day.” The two titles seem distinct from one another, however; I realized that when you looked closer, there are connections between the two. Barbauld is able to take something as simple and mundane as washing clothes and use it to paint a picture of the issues the society was facing. “Eighteen Hundred and Eleven” blatantly shows the reader how the speaker views the political structures of the time, and how misinformed and volatile they could be.

            Lines 241 to 248 in “Eighteen Hundred and Eleven” were my favorite lines of poetry we ready by Barbauld. In the short amount of words that she devotes to this idea, she shows the greed and rashness that the British imperialists/politicians were showing around her. Barbauld builds up to this moment by describing the sinful nature of past empires and how these periods will always fall. The idea of Britain always rising above the rest of the world does not seem to work for Barbauld and without explicitly stating her views, she seems to hold a very strong opinion. Barbauld is tying together art, politics, and history in her poetry in ways that prove that the female mind was not incapable of this high-level thinking. She proves the points she makes in “The Rights of Woman” by writing such powerful words here.

Today, we focused on William Jones’s relationship with the Orient as he praises the poetry and art that comes from this area of the world. Throughout his Essays: “On the poetry of Eastern nations.” and “On the arts, commonly called imitative.,” Jones shows his passion for researching the East. I was conflicted by his account because in one moment he is able to show a level of respect for the East that was relatively unusual for the time period he was writing. While also showing a nonchalant infantilization of the Eastern poets he writes of. Jones keenly focuses on the beauty of Eastern poets and how the language is essential to detailing this beauty because of its musicality. He compares this poetry to that of the Greeks, stating that the two are completely on par with one another. With all of his praise and awe, he shows a nuanced view of the East that is so rarely showcased by his contemporaries and predecessors.

However, similarly, he is still shown to fall into the trap of “othering” the artist he writes of. He describes the differences in appearance the Arabs have: “in some provinces they dark complexions, harsh features; in others they are exquisitely fair, and well-made…” (81). In one sentence, to our modern eyes, Jones has completely detracted from the points he had previously made about the elegance of Eastern poetry and language. To us, his actions are worthy of complete revulsion because of his ability to boil a community down to “harsh” versus “well-made,” dark skin versus light. As readers in the present looking on his perspectives in the past, we have to quantify and qualify his opinions as an essay in history not as we would read a current New York Times article.

In introduction to Romantic Poetry, we read certain essays from critics like Arthur O. Lovejoy, W.L. Wimsatt, and M. H. Abrams. Each author presented a clear, while also varied, account of what Romanticism is and how it has been developed over decades. The most interesting idea that I found within these texts came from Lovejoy. He described how the arts had been in the course of evolving toward Romanticism in the late 1700s, early 1800s, since the Renaissance. I thought it was fascinating that so much of the details of what Romanticism would come to be were in place so early on, it was only a matter of society and culture at that time that prevented the full expression of Romanticism.

From each essay, I was wholly interested in the unifying aspects of Romanticism and its cyclical tendencies. Romanticism brought forth a joining of the outward with the internal in both the individual and the individual’s relationship with their surroundings. I feel that even today, we attempt to categorize our lives into separate boxes. Romanticism transcends past this idea that our lives should have separate voices to distinguish separate experiences. Romanticism as a literary movement wants the reader to see that every single experience within their life is connected in some way and that these events can be timeless. Our experiences with nature may grow to repeat themselves from one day to the next, making them an intense experience worth cataloging. This idea was really impactful in my understanding of Romanticism because it draws me, as the reader, more into learning about the psyche of the authors and artists we will be studying.