Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-94d59 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T05:04:18.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

“THE CIRCLES OF VITALITY”: RUSKIN, SCIENCE, AND DYNAMIC MATERIALITY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2011

Mark Frost*
Affiliation:
University of Portsmouth

Extract

The days have passed in which John Ruskin's scientific writings were deemed secondary and separate to his art, architecture, or politics, but his science still tends to be viewed predominately via the prism of his later natural history, with its characteristically virulent opposition to Darwin and materialism, and in relation to his application of typological exegesis to landscape study. I would argue that an approach is required that situates Ruskin's response to Darwin against the background of his entire career in scientific writing and that seeks to clarify the relationship between the various influences which informed his engagement with environment. While this article cannot pursue such an analysis in full, it outlines some key reasons for its necessity. Through examination of significant 1843 correspondence and related works, I will call in particular for a re-evaluation of the degree to which Ruskin engaged in modern scientific methods and approaches. In doing so, I will suggest that Ruskin's later anti-materialism did not represent a seamless continuation of a long-established attitude to science and nature, but something of a discontinuity, in which, faced with the implications of evolutionary theory, he attempted to reject not just Darwinism, but many of the elements that had made his own work in science distinctive, convincing, and attuned to modernity, materiality, and process.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

WORKS CITED

Agassiz, Louis. Recherches sur les poisons fossils, Études sur les glaciers, 5 vols. Neuchatel: Petitpierre, 1833–43.Google Scholar
Birch, Dinah. “Ruskin and the Science of Proserpina.” New Approaches to Ruskin. Ed. Hewison, Robert. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981. 142–56. Print.Google Scholar
Birch, Dinah. Ruskin's Myths. Oxford: Clarendon, 1988. Print.Google Scholar
Birch, Dinah. “‘That ghastly work’: Ruskin, Animals, and Anatomy.” Worldviews: Environment, Culture, Religion 4.2 (2000): 131–45. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brook, Michael W.John Ruskin and Victorian Architecture. London: Thames and Hudson, 1989. Print.Google Scholar
Brooke, John Hedley. “Natural Theology and the Plurality of Worlds: Observations on the Brewster-Whewell Debate.” Annals of Science 34 (1977): 221–86. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckland, William. An Inquiry whether the Sentence of Death Pronounced at the Fall of Man included the Whole Animal Creation or Was Restricted to the Human Race. London: Murray, 1839.Google Scholar
Burd, Van Akin. “Ruskin and His ‘Good Master,’ William Buckland.” Victorian Literature and Culture 36.2 (2008): 299315. Print.Google Scholar
Cardinal, Roger. “Ruskin and the Alpine Ideal.” Ed. Casaliggi, Carmen and March-Russell, Paul. Ruskin in Perspective: Contemporary Essays. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars, 2007. 157–76. Print.Google Scholar
Cate, George Allen, ed. The Correspondence of Thomas Carlyle and John Ruskin. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1982. Print.Google Scholar
Colenso, Bishop John William. The Pentateuch and the Book of Joshua Critically Examined. London: Longman, Roberts, and Green, 1862. Print.Google Scholar
Conner, Patrick. Savage Ruskin. London: Macmillan, 1979. Print.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, E. T. and Wedderburn, Alexander eds. The Library Edition of John Ruskin's Works, 39 vols. London: George Allen, 1903–12.Google Scholar
Cuvier, Baron Georges. The Animal Kingdom, Arranged After its Organisation Forming a Natural History of animals, and an Introduction to Comparative Anatomy. New ed., with considerable additions by Carpenter, W. B. and Westwood, J. O.. London: W. H. Allen, 1884. Print.Google Scholar
Cuvier, Baron Georges. Discourse On The Revolutionary Upheavals On The Surface Of The Globe And On The Changes Which They Have Produced In The Animal Kingdom. Paris, 1825. Print.Google Scholar
Darwin, Charles. The Works of Charles Darwin. 29 vols. Ed. Barrett, Paul H. and Freeman, R. B.. New York: New York UP, 1986–89. Print.Google Scholar
Emerson, Sheila. “The Authorisation of Form: Ruskin and the Science of Chaos.” Ed. Hayles, Katherine N.. Chaos and Order: complex dynamics in literature and science, Chicago: Chicago UP, 1991. 149–66. Print.Google Scholar
Finley, C. Stephen. Nature's Covenant: Figures of Landscape in Ruskin. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania State UP, 1992. Print.Google Scholar
Fitch, Raymond E.The Poison Sky: Myth and Apocalypse in Ruskin. Athens: Ohio UP, 1982. Print.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. The Order of Things: an Archaeology of the Human Sciences. London: Tavistock, 1970. Print.Google Scholar
Gutting, Gary. Michel Foucault's Archaeology of Scientific Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1989. Print.Google Scholar
Hewison, Robert. The Argument of the Eye. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1976. Print.Google Scholar
Hull, Howard. “Geographer of the Soul: John Ruskin and his ‘Fairy Books of Science.’” Ruskin in Perspective: Contemporary Essays. Ed. Casaliggi, Carmen and March-Russell, Paul. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars, 2007. 215–31. Print.Google Scholar
Hunt, John Dixon. The Wider Sea: A Life of John Ruskin. London: J. M. Dent, 1982. Print.Google Scholar
Kaplan, Fred. Thomas Carlyle, a Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1983. Print.Google Scholar
Kirchhoff, Frederick. “A Science against Sciences: Ruskin's Floral Mythology.” Nature and the Victorian Imagination. Ed. Knoeflmacher, U. C. and Tennyson, G. B.. Berkeley: U of California P, 1977. 246–58. Print.Google Scholar
Landow, George P.The Aesthetic and Critical Theories of John Ruskin. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1971. Print.Google Scholar
Lyell, Charles. Principles of Geology: being an attempt to explain the former changes of the Earth's surface, by reference to causes now in action. Ed. Secord, James A.. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1997. Print.Google Scholar
O'Gorman, Francis, “‘The Eagle and the Whale?’: Ruskin's Argument with John Tyndall.” Time and Tide: Ruskin Studies 1996. Ed. Wheeler, Michael. London: Pilkington, 1996. 4564. Print.Google Scholar
O'Gorman, Francis. “Ruskin's Science of the 1870s: Science, Education, and the Nation.” Ruskin and the Dawn of the Modern. Ed. Birch, Dinah. Oxford: Clarendon, 1999. 3555. Print.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, J. D.The Darkening Glass: A Portrait of Ruskin's Genius. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963. Print.Google Scholar
Ruskin, John. The Library Edition of John Ruskin's Works. 39 vols. Ed. Cook, E. T. and Wedderburn, Alexander. London: George Allen, 1903–12. Print.Google Scholar
Sherburne, James Clark. John Ruskin, or Ambiguities of Abundance: A Study in Social and Economic Criticism. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1972. Print.Google Scholar
Smith, Jonathan. Charles Darwin and Victorian Visual Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2009. Print.Google Scholar
Spear, Jeffrey. Dreams of an English Eden: Ruskin and his Tradition in Social Criticism. New York: Columbia UP, 1984. Print.Google Scholar
Twain, Mark. The Diary of Adam and Eve and other Adamic Stories. London: Hesperus, 2002. Print.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Michael. Ruskin's God. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1999. Print.Google Scholar
Worster, Donald. Nature's Economy: A History of Ecological Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1990. Print.Google Scholar