Denis Donoghue

Denis Donoghue was born in 1928 in Tullow, Ireland. He earned his BA, MA, and PhD from the National University of Ireland. He has taught at Cambridge University, University College Dublin, University of Pennsylvania, University of California-Los Angeles, and New York University, where he serves as professor emeritus. Over his four-decade career, the Irish-born critic has written several highly praised works on British, Irish, and American literature and culture. Much like the New Critics, Donoghue is skeptical of what he considers the "ideologically opportunistic" criticism that came into vogue after Deconstruction, and argues for the importance of readers' direct experience of literary texts. Though this stance has drawn some negative response, it has caused others to welcome Donoghue's work as bracing and corrective. Boston Globewriter Mark Feeney, praising Donoghue's work as "scrupulous, authoritative, [and] common-sensical," called him "one of our finest literary critics," and Alfred Kazin in the New Republic hailed him as "one of the ablest critics writing today."

The Arts without Mystery includes the texts of six lectures Donoghue presented over the British Broadcasting Corporation radio network in 1982. In three subsequent volumes of essays, Donoghue explores the literary legacies of Ireland, the United States, and England. We Irish: Essays on Irish Literature and Society focuses in particular on Yeats and Joyce, though it also includes essays on such writers as Sean O'Casey, Maud Gonne, George Moore, and Flann O'Brien. The book received generally respectful reviews. Though New York Times Book Review contributor Robert Boyers suggested that the book does not entirely succeed in distinguishing the Irish spirit from that of other groups, he noted that Donoghue "is ever alert to questions of memory and identity," and extended that the essays "are not only a pleasure to read and to argue with; they also provide valuable testimony that tradition remains very much alive even for the most cosmopolitan Irish writers and thinkers." John Gross in the New York Times praised the scholarship and "intimate knowledge of Irish life" with which the book is imbued, and National Reviewcontributor Thomas P. McDonnell hailed it as a "fascinating study of a highly individualistic culture that still confronts the dilemma of having to write in the language of another." Julian Moynahan, however, in an otherwise highly positive New Republic review, pointed out that Donoghue's writing on recent Irish poetry is relatively weak; he also expressed puzzlement that We Irish scarcely mentions Samuel Beckett.

Reading America: Essays on American Literature, which New York Times Book Review critic Lawrence Graver hailed as a "mixture of discriminating intelligence, vigor, civility and acidulousness," includes ten essays and seventeen book reviews on such writers as Emerson, Thoreau, Dickinson, Henry James, T.S. Eliot, Allen Tate, Sylvia Plath, and Wallace Stevens. "Imagination has long been the cardinal term in Mr. Donoghue's criticism," wrote Graver, "and Reading America is more a book about the many ways our writers transform experience--real or imagined--into poetry, essays and fiction than it is about an essentially American imagination. ... What emerges most powerfully from Mr. Donoghue's book is not a theory of American literature but a kind of continuous drama of American literary creation, heightened by the critic's receptivity and fine habits of attention." In National Review, Thomas P. McDonnell termed Donoghue's essays "well-focused" and intelligent, but added that the author fails to address fully the issue of Christianity and anti-Christianity in American letters.

England, Their England: Commentaries on English Language and Literature is, as Michael H. Levenson observed in the New York Times Book Review, a book that contains two parallel histories: the chronological history of English literature, and the story of Donoghue's "passage through those scenes of carnage we know as contemporary criticism." His essays on such subjects as Shakespeare's sonnets, the politics of the English language, the importance of Oscar Wilde, or the fascism of Wyndham Lewis--all of which Levenson considered "little gems"--are interspersed with Donoghue's responses to other critics. "The result," wrote Levenson, "is that his work becomes ... not simply a commentary on literary tradition but a commentary on commentaries. The tension between the two perspectives creates the unacknowledged drama of his book." John Gross, writing in the New York Times, deemed England, Their England a "fairly orthodox, fairly miscellaneous gathering of literary studies ... [that] might just as well have been written by an Englishman." Nevertheless, though Gross expressed disappointment that the book lacks the thematic unity of its predecessor, he considered it "always intelligent and usually illuminating."

Donoghue challenges new trends in critical thought in The Old Moderns: Essays on Literature and Theory. The book is Donoghue's defense of modernism against such detractors as Lionel Trilling, Fredric Jameson, Leo Bersani, and Michel Foucault, who have argued that modernist art is elitist and narcissistic. In essays about such writers as Poe, Wordsworth, Joyce, Eliot, Yeats, Wallace Stevens, and Henry James, Donoghue insists on the value of aesthetics in art and advocates the patient reading of, rather than political reaction to, literary texts. Bill Marx in Nation criticized the book for some vagueness, but emphasized that "Donoghue's attempt to intuit ethics in the dynamics of aesthetic form is a welcome alternative to the banalities to his left and the pieties to his right. ... Respectful of literature's sense of anarchy as well as order, Donoghue stands for a sensitive--and supple--middle ground. His belief in the constants of human experience is a welcome rebuke to deconstructionist clichés about the opacity of language, the illusion of continuity and the abolition of the self."

This engagement with new literary theories is expanded in The Practice of Reading, in which Donoghue argues that we are losing the capacity to read texts with the close attentiveness that literature requires. "If we taught English as a second language and a second literature," he suggests, "we would become more responsive to the mediating character of the literary language." Donoghue disagrees with the "ideologically opportunistic" criticism that treats literature as a socially constructed product without any special meaning, and argues for, in the words of New York Times Book Reviewcontributor Peter Brooks, "the rehabilitation of the esthetic." Though he expressed much admiration for The Practice of Reading, Brooks pointed out that Donoghue does not sufficiently develop issues that are "crucial and complex." Though he found Donoghue's ideas often "bracing," Brooks added that "they can also confuse and even trivialize important issues now much debated.... The result is a book that is somehow less than the sum of its parts."

Terry Eagleton in the Times Literary Supplement also found Donoghue's arguments flawed. In particular, he challenged Donoghue's view that theorists do not read texts with close attention; he also commented that "Donoghue seems not to recognize that what he means by 'imaginative sympathies' is what some radical theorists mean by politics." Eagleton acknowledged that "few literary critics since F.R. Leavis have matched Donoghue's own skill in tracking the complex sense of a poem," and granted that The Practice of Reading contains "some fascinating criticism," but he nevertheless faulted Donoghue for not accepting the importance of theoretical approaches to literary study. "There is no need," Eagleton concluded, "for theory and this kind of critical practice to be at odds."

Donoghue's study of T.S. Eliot generated much critical debate. Some found Words Alone: The Poet, T.S. Eliot to be conservative and too defensive about the poet's reactionary political views and anti-Semitism. New York Times Book Review contributor Adam Kirsch acknowledged the book's scope, intelligence, and "respectful seriousness toward Eliot's poetry," but complained that Donoghue's "interventions in the debate over Eliot's anti-Semitism do not do justice to the complexity of the issue, and at moments are simply querulous." New Leader critic Phoebe Pettingell noted that Donoghue "argues that Eliot's detractors misread and caricature his intellectual positions." Conceding that "the book's defense [of Eliot's anti-Semitism] will doubtless fail to persuade those who passionately condemn attitudes that once seemed merely unenlightened," Pettingell pointed out that "Donoghue himself dislikes many of Eliot's comments" and that his book shows how it is possible to appreciate the poetry without accepting all of the poet's beliefs. "Donoghue's passionate readings make Eliot sound fresh, lyrical and exciting," she concluded. "Best of all, Words Alone reminds us what it was like to discover poetry and be transformed by its song."

In Walter Pater: Lover of Strange Souls, Donoghue explores the life and art of a subject many considered rather unlikely: Victorian critic and essayist Walter Pater, who led an uneventful life as an Oxford don and wrote most memorably about art of the Italian Renaissance. Donoghue takes the unconventional view that Pater was a stylistic precursor of modernism, arguing that Pater's writing influenced Joyce, Eliot, Woolf, and other modern authors. The book drew mixed reviews. A Publishers Weekly reviewer considered it an "interesting and informed contribution to literary studies," but National Review contributor James Gardner commented that Donoghue "has little new material to reveal about his subject, and his treatment is perfunctory in the extreme." Richard Jenkyns, writing for the New Republic, found the book difficult to follow and "strange," as if the author were actually more interested in writing about someone else. Nevertheless, Jenkyns pointed out that "Donoghue ... is too perceptive and intelligent a critic ... for his book not to contain good things," in particular an "admirable" chapter on Pater's style.

Among Donoghue's most admired works is his memoir, Warrenpoint. The book recounts the author's early home life in Northern Ireland in the family barracks of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, in which his father--a Catholic--served. Though Donoghue writes about Protestant bigotry against Catholics and the frustrations of growing up in a cultural backwater, the book most impressed critics as a tribute to Donoghue's beloved father. As Mark Feeney wrote in the Boston Globe, " Warrenpoint ... is far from the standard Irish memoir of the 'how I escaped the tyranny of Church and family and so gained my intellectual freedom'; variety. ... This fine and various book reminds us ... that the child is father to the mind." Alfred Kazin in the New Republic observed that "The son's feeling for the father is the great thing about the book." Though Kazin appreciated Donoghue's asides on Irish history and literature, he found them sometimes underdeveloped; nevertheless, he concluded that " Warrenpoint is a fascinating personal document. As an unexpected story of total love between a father and son, it is wonderful that the son could write it."

Adam's Curse: Reflections on Religion and Literature contains seven lectures for Erasmus Institute at Notre Dame. The first lecture is called "God without Thunder," and in the lecture Donoghue tackles how the God from the Old Testament who was in favor of Jesus Christ is ignored in Christianity.

J. Robert Barth commented in Christianity and Literature that the book "grapples vigorously with a wide range of poets, novelists, critics, philosophers, and theologian." Barth added that "For all the brilliance of his analysis, however, Donoghue's reading of modern theology is too limited. Discussions of the role of the Cross in theology, in Scripture, and in the spiritual life have been many and varied in recent years. ... This is by no means 'soft' theology. Nor does the rediscovery of the joy of the Resurrection in contemporary theology imply a denigration or diminishment of the Cross; the two have their fullest meaning only in terms of one another. Donoghue is wise to remind us that Christianity demands much from those Christ calls, but he is far from alone in his view." Barth concluded that "This book will challenge the most sophisticated reader--and there is much to quarrel with--but the rewards are likely to be many. Denis Donoghue's learning is broad and deep, and walking this journey in his company can only enrich us." Peter A. Huff, writing in Theological Studies, stated that "The book generously stimulates debate. Lucid prose, restrained animus, and well-tempered argumentation support its insightful analysis. Even critics of its conclusions will agree that Adam's Curse is a blessing." Steven Schroeder, writing in Booklist, concluded that "He [Donoghue] richly explores an impressive range of writings as he defends the transcendence of analogy."

In Speaking of Beauty, Donoghue tackles the language by examining its social manifestations. Morris Hounion, writing in Library Journal, called Speaking of Beauty a "gracefully written scholarly study." Edward T. Oakes commented in First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life:"Donoghue has no thesis or nugget-statement to flog, no particular sound-bite that the reader might take away from a pleasant evening spent reading this charming essay. The speaking that Donoghue does in Speaking of Beauty is conversational, anecdotal, allusive, and circular, although deeply learned for all that, and teeming with insights." William Pratt, writing in World Literature Today,concluded that "Speaking of Beauty is interesting but more abstract, speculative, and argumentative than his discussion of the James story, indicating that Donoghue is better as a practical than as a philosophical critic."

Donoghue uses The American Classics: A Personal Essay, published in 2009, to name five books as American classics. Herman Melville, David Thoreau, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Walt Whitman, and Mark Twain are all cited as representative of cultures that were produced and followed by ante-and post-bellum cultures, and the literature that these eras produced.

Anne Ramirez, writing in Christianity and Literature, stated in a review of The American Classics that "Lovers of American literature will find much food for thought in this highly distinguished critic's reading of the five selected classics: Melville's Moby-Dick, Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter, Thoreau's Walden,Whitman's Leaves of Grass, and Twain's Huckleberry Finn." Ramirez went on reveal that "Donoghue reflects on why these books may be identified as the American classics, what their status implies about American culture, and what several noted critics have said of them, as well as offering his own commentary on each one." Ramirez concluded, "Although The American Classics overlooks such matters in its conscientious navigation between the extremes of formalism and cultural criticism, it has much to offer those who share the voyage to the end." A Publishers Weekly contributor noted, "Whatever contemporary critique is contained in the book is so intermittent, though, that it seems more of an intrusion than an integral part." Ben Bruton, writing in Library Journal, opined that Donoghue's "insights should prove useful in promoting discussion in upper-level graduate courses on American literature." Joseph M. Hassett, writing in Irish Literary Supplement, remarked that "If The American Classics' efforts to set a statesman right darken its author's lucidity from time to time, the significance of the questions it raises are worth the price."

In 2008, Donoghue published On Eloquence, offering an estimation of eloquence, which was described as the sequel to Donoghue's Speaking of Beauty by Michael Vander Weele in Christianity and Literature. Weele went on to reveal that he felt, "In isolating eloquence from rhetoric, the book takes too dim a view of human exchange and too high a view of non-efficacious expression. The freedom of eloquence shouldn't be without aim--Donoghue's eloquence certainly is not." John Wilson, writing in Book & Culture, asserted that "Donoghue helps us--if we pay attention--to recognize a pervasive tendency in evangelicalism: an overweening earnestness. There is, of course, a time to be earnest, and much that is good in the evangelical tradition reflects this imperative. But how dreary, how deadly, when earnestness loses all sense of proportion." A Library Journal contributor commented that Donoghue "has fashioned a well-written and engaging exploration of eloquence in literature."