簡明英國文學史 節選

　　《簡明英國文學史（修訂本 英文版）》：　　Of course the main elements of Romanticism were not new： no one would pretend that the works of Chaucer， Spenser or Shakespeare were never Romantic in spirit. Nor did the Romantic poets think of themselves in those terms， or regard themselves as a group. Frequently， indeed， they thoroughly disliked each other's poetry. But， when all the nervous qualifications have been made， it remains true that the mode of thinking of intelligent people was changed by the poetry， the critical writings， and the social attitudes of the leaders of the Romantic Movement. By 1830， a man who was brought up in the neo-classical tradition， or who clung to it from innate conservatism， was feeling very lonely in and alienated from the literary world ~ indeed from his social world in general.　　It is not difficult for the modern reader to see what the Romantic poets were reacting against： their feeling that the neo-classical tradition had exhausted itself into cliche， repetition， and staleness was understandable， even if （in the manner of young revolutionaries） they produced too frank a condemnation. Their reaction against the dominant modes of thinking of the eighteenth-century writers and philosophers was vigorous and wholesale. Where their predecessors saw man as a social animal， saw him in his daily relations with his fellows， the Romantics saw him essentially in the solitary state， self-communing， Where the Augustans emphasized those features that men have in common， the interests that bring them together， the Romantics emphasized the special qualities of each individual's mind； they exalted the atypical， even the bizarre， they honoured the hermit， the outcast9 the rebel. Where for the Augustans， literature was a communal activity， likely to be carried on in a metropolitan environment， for the Romantics it was essentially solitary， or at most the communing of two sympathetic souls， and it was inevitably attached not to the city， but to the outdoors. Nature， for the most influential eighteenth-century writers， was more something to be seen than something to be known.　　It is of nature that the ordinary reader will think when the subject of Romantic poetry comes up， and by and large the emphasis is not misplaced. The natural world n w comes to the forefront of the poetic imagination and provides the dominant subject matter. Naturally it does not mean quite the same to all the poets. Wordsworth is the closest to nature， though he is not primarily an observer； the natural world is known， felt in Wordsworth - it is an emotional necessity for him， the basis of his spiritual life. Shelley and Keats know nature much less well； the natural object tends to be a springboard for philosophical， social or personal meditations. For Byron nature is a magnificent backdrop， in front of which he can make splendid gestures. But it was Wordsworth's view of the natural world that was the dominant influence in changing people's sensibilities： nature to him was a s：urce of mental cleanliness and spiritual understanding， it was a teacher， it was the stepping stone between Manand God. Such a view was easier to propagate in the wild rolling countryside of England.　　……