| The problem with Sidney, many critics contend, is that his writings are so contradictory as to make it all but impossible to cull any clear moral or philosophical statement from them: Sidney tends to undermine the ethical propositions he sets forth, he inclines towards heroes who are both self-indulgent and exemplary, and he implies that his art is at once frivolous and serious. Unsurprisingly, critics in search of a clear teleology often conclude that Sidney was a literary overreacher, unable to control his ambitious aesthetic schemes.;Originality is implied in the problematic careers of Sidney's protagonists (and alter egos), all of whom fall from a conventional "masculine," authoritative ethos to a unique, "feminine," subversive state. Although Sidney associates these falls with failure, he also suggests that they awaken the creative faculties; by falling into a "feminine" ethos, the author experiences marginality--a state that Sidney associates with fantasy, invention, and originality.;This aesthetics questions the traditional relationship of authoritative poet and receptive reader; for as the poet falls away from authority, the reader takes on a more significant role. This process is dramatized by the many instances in which the female audience masters her poet's words: Stella reinterprets Astrophil's sonnets, Queen Elizabeth has the final word in The Lady of May, and Philoclea (in the Arcadias) completes her suitor's narratives. Such interactions between audience and author suggest the role that Sidney expects us to play; rather than have us passively accept his authoritative statements, he encourages us to fashion for ourselves the moral significance of his heterogenous, contradictory writings.;If we assume that Sidney intended to write clear, consistent fictions, then he indeed failed in his goal. My own view, however, is that Sidney consciously employs contradiction as a structural principle; in particular I argue that he exploits contradiction at once to affirm his originality as a writer and to encourage his readers to think for themselves. |
