From the outset, Wallace Stevens’s reputation has proven a vexation for even supportive critics. While the New Critics wanted his work to look more high modernist than late Romantic, “Romantic-modernists,” resenting even the possibility that Romanticism was passé, argued that modernism itself was a reaction-formation to Romanticism and that modernism itself was “late,” if not passé. The New Critic complained that the work had no ethical interest in what was going on between the two major wars that framed its composition; the Romanticists countered with Friedrich Nietzsche’s claim that morality is, at bottom, a branch of aesthetics. Moderating the battle between these competing idiolects, Charles Altieri straddles these positions and finds that Stevens himself never entirely subscribed to either.
Skip Nav Destination
Book Review| May 01 2015
Owning Wallace Stevens
Book Reviewed: Altieri, Charles,
Wallace Stevens and the Demands of Modernity: Toward a Phenomenology of Value(
Cornell University Press,
hereafter cited parenthetically by page number.
boundary 2 (2015) 42 (2): 211–229.
J. T. Barbarese; Owning Wallace Stevens. boundary 2 1 May 2015; 42 (2): 211–229. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/01903659-2866803
Download citation file:
Don't already have an account? Register
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Could not validate captcha. Please try again.
Sign in via your InstitutionSign In