Romanticism There are many way to approach the concept (or movement) known as romanticism, and over the many years romanticism has been perceived and defined in wildly different ways. Scholars and historians have spent tens of thousands of words dissecting, describing, and trying to come to terms with what romanticism really means. The truth is there are many ways to approach romanticism, and this paper looks into scholarly approaches to romanticism in 1925, 1949, and 1990. How is the approach to romanticism in 1925 different -- but also similar -- to another approach in 1990? That question and others that are germane to this topic will be presented in this paper. The three scholarly articles that will be critiqued in this paper are: Paul Kaufman's "Defining Romanticism" (1925); Morse Peckham's "Theory of Romanticism" (1951); and David Perkins' "The Romantic Movement" (1990).

Three scholarly articles from three periods in the twentieth century

Kaufman, 1925. History shows us that 1925 was the year in which Adolf Hitler published his manifesto, Mein Kampf -- the antithesis of romanticism -- and F. Scott Fitzgerald published The Great Gatsby, not representative of romanticism either. It was also the year an article was published by Paul Kaufman suggesting that there had been, since 1890, an "engrossing concern" as to the true meaning of romanticism. Kaufman also termed the number of attempts to categorize romanticism as "bewildering" (Kaufman 193). Kaufman goes into the interpretations by various scholars, adding to the mystery of just what romanticism truly represents to the scholar.

When Kaufman uses the word "bewildering" he is apparently responding to the fact that notwithstanding the many "formulas" that had been in the mix as to what romanticism means, the "widely divergent views" are increasing, adding to the confusion (194). The author quotes Professor P.R. Frye (from a book published in 1922) who asserts that romanticism is "anything which 'tends to disrupt or disturb the balance of the faculties'" (194). That is likely the most obscure attempt at defining romanticism available;...

Another quote that Kaufman offers is from Professor H.J.C. Grierson, who, in 1923, explained that when it comes to romanticism, "…the spirit counts for more than the form" (Kaufman 194). Grierson didn't exactly hit the nail on the head, but he is certainly on the right track because we have learned in this class that romanticism is less about content and more about how and why the piece was painted.
It is clear that in the early 1920s scholars such as Kaufman were frustrated and nearly fed up trying to come up with a workable definition of romanticism. On page 196 of his essay Kaufman uses words like "futility," "crisis," "hopeless," "intolerable," and "chaos" to describe previous attempts at coming up with a more precise description. Nevertheless he seeks to reinvent a definition by searching for the historical meaning vis-a-vis "romantic" (198). I'm not sure he accomplishes what he set out to do because in his final paragraph he admits that the "present laissez-faire attitude" towards the task of defining romanticism is "demoralizing to criticism" (204). Moreover, he concludes, in an age of "wayward and troubled thought," any attempt to come to a workable understanding is "the greatest service criticism can render…" (204).

Peckham, 1951. Twenty-six years after Kaufman's essay, Morse Peckham digs into the same troubling issue, with a bit more success than his scholarly predecessor. Peckham, seemingly less bewildered, is certainly more pragmatic than Kaufman in that he begins his scholarship with what romanticism is not. Peckham asserts that romanticism should not be viewed as having been spawned by the "political revolutions" in Europe, or of the industrial revolution (Peckham 1951). Yes, the great push in Europe for political reform comes into play in romanticism, Peckham agrees; however, the two are not "the same thing" (5).

Peckham references the 1949 attempt by Jacques Barzun to define romanticism as part of "the great revolution which drew the intellect of Europe…from the expectation and desire of fixity into…