LITMIR.BIZ

       Life & Times

      In purely literary terms, the view of Scott’s talents has fluctuated over the two centuries since his lifetime. It is important to remember that he became successful at a time when relatively few people attempted to become authors, so it was easier to be published and there was little by way of competition. In addition, Scott invented the historical novel genre, so he hit on a formula that immediately appealed to a burgeoning readership.

      His skills as a novelist had been called into question by the early 20th century, when the medium had progressed to a point of high professionalism. It was thought by many that Scott was inefficient with his prose and his plotting left a good deal to be desired. His characterization was also rather two-dimensional, because he was more concerned with telling a good yarn than saying anything about the human condition. To E. M. Forster, Scott’s limitations made him the lesser novelist when compared with his contemporary Jane Austen who was already experimenting with ideas of what it meant to be human and was, therefore, using literature as a high art form. The Brontë sisters went on to take the baton from Austen, continuing the development of English literature in that direction. That is not to say, however, that Scott was not an influence on subsequent authors – far from it. His approach was the equivalent of a blockbuster movie as opposed to an ‘art house’ film. Consequently there have been plenty of authors who have taken the historical novel genre and run with it.

      In terms of sales Scott was extremely successful and became a very wealthy man. He was also held in very high esteem in Britain, America, and the European continent and had a strong work ethic, continuing with his writing until his death. He was also a proud man and insisted on getting himself out of debt with sales of his books when he was made bankrupt by a banking crisis in 1825–26 that saw his investments crash. He might easily have asked for financial assistance from his many friends in high places, but was too principled to take the easy road. He remained in debt for the rest of his days, but the sales of his books did eventually balance the books posthumously.

      Scott’s Works

      Although Scott was writing fiction, he was using real historical events as his backdrop and framework. Some literary scholars use the term ‘faction’ to describe this hybrid between fact and fiction. The results can be misleading because the reader receives an obscured version of history, partly from the narrative tale and partly from the partiality of the author. Even when historians attempt to document historical events as accurately as possible, in reference books, they can only ever arrive at a ‘version’ of history. Added to this is the author’s choice of literary style which further blurs the lines between historical fact and fiction.

      Rob Roy tells the story of an Englishman named Frank Osbaldistone who travels to Northumberland, an English county that borders southern Scotland. The eponymous Rob Roy is Rob Roy MacGregor, a real-life outlaw and folk hero, whom Osbaldistone encounters several times as the story plays out. Scott paints Rob Roy as a mysterious and powerful character, who devotes his life to the defence of Scotland against the tyranny of the English monarchy and parliament. Thus, Scott did a good job at expanding the myth and legend of Rob Roy and extending his fame and reputation to an international audience.

      Most of Scott’s novels have Scotland as their setting, but not all. A notable exception is Woodstock (1826), which is set in England following the English Civil War. The story is about the failure of the revolutionaries to control and run the nation, with the ultimate reinstatement of the English monarchy as the son of the executed King Charles I reclaims the throne to become King Charles II. The eponymous Woodstock was a royal residence near Oxford – Woodstock Manor – which was surveyed for its assets in 1649 following the execution of the king. Legend has it that the commissioners were tormented in their beds night after night during their stay by, what became known as, the ‘Good Devil’ of Woodstock. In 1660, the year that saw King Charles II begin his reign, a pamphlet was published explaining that one of the servants had been responsible for the strange nocturnal goings on, but people preferred the idea that a supernatural entity had been assigned to haunt the civil servants by the executed king.

      The story of Ivanhoe (1820) is set in medieval England in the late 12th century – AD 1194 to be precise. This period in history was dominated by Christian fanaticism, when noblemen believed they would secure their passage to heaven by crusading against the Saracens in the Middle East. The central character is Wilfred of Ivanhoe, a Saxon and supporter of the Norman King, Richard I. As the setting is only 130 years after the Norman Conquest, Wilfred is not well regarded by his Saxon kith and kin.

      Richard is abroad on the Continent, following the Third Crusade, and thought to be held captive. His brother, Prince John, has assumed the throne in Richard’s absence and is abusing his powerful position. During a jousting tournament, Wilfred is badly wounded and finds himself captive. The Black Knight then appears on the scene and Wilfred is rescued. The Black Knight turns out to be none other than King Richard himself in disguise, for he has returned to England covertly to find out what his brother has been up to.

      Ivanhoe is famous for introducing the legend of Robin Hood to popular fiction. In the story, Robin of Locksley and his men are allies of Wilfred and Richard. Robin is portrayed as a happy-go-lucky outlaw in command of his merry men, and this became the model for the Robin Hood known and loved today. The legend of Robin was part of English folklore, although he was formerly known as a rather more mysterious figure, who wore a hood to obscure his identity. Scott’s version of the character is able to reveal his identity because he possessed an untouchable quality that meant he had no reason to fear anyone. This made him the perfect outlaw: debonair, and acting on behalf of the common man – stealing from the rich Normans and giving to the poor Saxons.

      As one might expect from his characterization of Robin Hood, Scott’s interpretation of this historical era is rather romanticized. The lot of the Saxons under Norman rule was, in truth, rather dire. Life was cheap and Saxons were severely and cruelly punished for breaking the Norman laws of the land, often paying with their lives for relatively minor offences. Starvation, disease, and pestilence were part of everyday life for all except those in positions of power. Scott’s version of medieval England was, for good or ill, a highly sanitized, picture-book version.

      Scott now holds a curious place in the history of English literature. While he is rather disregarded in the context of his ability as a writer, he is seen as something of an innovator with his ideas. The basic notion that one might take real events and bring them to life in the form of a novel was immediately attractive to the reader. It made the fictitious elements seem more believable, not least because the reader had no clear idea of where fact ran into fiction. Of course, from Scott’s point of view it made the process of planning his books easier, because the structure of major events was already in place. In addition, Scott was a historian, so his acquired knowledge gave him the perfect platform on which to imagine and build his stories. Some might say that it was a lazy way to write, but others might say that it was inspired. One thing is for sure: Scott’s legacy is a tradition in historical fiction that is now seen ubiquitously

Скачать книгу