Bolingbroke and His Circle: The Politics of Nostalgia in the Age of Walpole

by Isaac Kramnick

"Behind this study lie two questions. Why is Bolingbroke, known primarily as a rationalist philosopher of the Enlightenment, so worshipped by English conservatives who are themselves, since Burke, so set against what the Enlightenment represents in political, social, and religious thought? The second question relates to Bolingbroke's public life. How does one explain the intense animosity between Bolingbroke and Walpole which provides the energy for English political life between 1725 and 1740? Is it mere vindictiveness, ambition, jealousy, or the inevitable reflex of the 'outsider' against the 'insider'? Or is it, as the late Victorian writers thought, their falling out at Eton which forever fated them to be protagonists?"―from the Preface.

336 pages, Paperback

First published May 1, 1992

About the author

Isaac Kramnick was an American political theorist, historian of political thought, political scientist, and the Richard J. Schwartz Professor of Government at Cornell University. He was a subject-matter expert on English and American political thought and history.

Reviews

[Nelson · Rating 2 out of 5]

There are some good things here, especially in Kramnick's consolidation of Pocock's thinking about 17th century political history and its impact on the 18th century. The bibliography on historical and political articles is also useful. What is vexing is Kramnick's use of outdated editions and commentaries on his literary texts. For instance, the choice of Elwin and Courthope's edition of Pope over the Twickenham is consistently perplexing--but then lots of early 20th century editions crop up here instead of the better edited, later sources. Also irritating is Kramnick's early insistence that he isn't taking sides on the old question of 'Bolingbroke--villain or hero?' when everywhere in the book he seems to plump for villain. This is another way to say that there are more nuanced views of Bolingbroke in general and the writers he influenced and was influenced by in particular. Kramnick is especially weak on these writers, repeating plenty of canards about Pope, Defoe and Gay. Most irritating is the endless recourse to the language of gloom or gloominess to describe these writers, as if the entire text was an exercise in bringing Louis Bredvold's article "The Gloom of the Tory Satirists" up to date. Plus ça change...

[Gaia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Se non avessi dovuto leggerlo per la tesi, avrei apprezzato di più.
Molto interessante.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really fine reading of the period - I wish I were more familiar with more recent criticism of Bolingbrokian/Robinocracy politics, but this will do.