Acts of Union: Scotland and the Literary Negotiation of the British Nation, 1707-1830

Scholars of eighteenth-century British literature and culture have been explicitly using the insights of post-colonial theory for well over a decade now, and the results have become increasingly exciting. One need only be familiar with Katie Trumpener's impressive volume, Bardic Nationalism (1997), to recognize the powerful potential of deploying postcolonial theory to investigate questions of nationalism, identity and cultural hegemony in the century that witnessed the consolidation of Britain's imperial power. By judiciously applying Michael Hechter's model of "internal colonialism" to eighteenth-century Scotland and Ireland, scholars such as Trumpener and Robert Crawford have been able to examine the importance of the "Celtic periphery" to the consolidation of a British identity with increasing perspicacity. This postcolonial approach adds to, rather than supplants, other modes of critical scholarship already in use, including new historicism, deconstruction and cultural studies.

Leith Davis' Acts of Union, while admittedly smaller in scope than Trumpener's sweeping survey, is a welcome addition to this burgeoning brand of scholarship. In this accessible first book, Davis explores the intricacies of the cultural formation of Britain over the long eighteenth century. In her introduction, the author lays out the twofold purpose of her text: "While I employ postcolonial theory to interrogate the imagining of the British nation, I also want to use the case of Britain, one of the earliest established nations, to interrogate postcolonial theories of nationalism" (2). Due to the inherent limitations of its size and methodology, the book does not fulfill the second of these goals, never truly developing a critique of postcolonial theory using the historical materials of Britain. Nevertheless, Davis does a fine job of using postcolonial, deconstructive and new historical approaches to help unpack the complexities of the formation of British identity. Given the strained circumstances under which England and Scotland were formally united in 1707, what could serve as the principle nodes of national identity for a nation torn by such deep political, economic, and cultural differences? How would English and Scottish discourses of national identity interact? Instead of taking for granted Hechter's idea that England simply overwhelmed and subjugated Scotland on the cultural as well as material level, Davis seeks to examine the slippages and complications that occurred in the process of forging a uniquely British identity. Perhaps wisely, she is somewhat vague when it comes to passing judgment on the paradigm of internal colonialism that she brings to bear on the problem of British identity. While she seems to believe that "Britishness" is ultimately more English than Scottish, Davis never says exactly whether she sees the British nation that emerged in the nineteenth century as being formed at the expense of the Scots. Instead, the author remains committed to "the incommensurabilities that exist within Britain, incommensurabilities written and rewritten in literature at different times and in different configurations" (178).

Alongside Homi Bhabha's theories of discursive ambiguity, which are inflected by literary deconstruction, Davis' postcolonial theoretical sensibility draws heavily on Mikhail Bakhtin's notion of "dialogism." Accordingly, the book is structured around a series of "discursive encounters" between English and Scottish writers, each of which plays a crucial role in articulating and negotiating the changing identity of the British nation. In separate chapters, Davis considers the work of Daniel Defoe and Lord Bellhaven on the Union; Henry Fielding and Tobias Smollett on the 1745 Jacobite uprising; Samuel Johnson and James Macpherson on the Ossian controversy; William Wordsworth and Robert Burns on the role of poetry in national discourse; and Thomas Percy and Walter Scott on the place of Scottish literature in British cultural life. Davis uses such juxtapositions not only to contrast the differing positions of these authors on issues of national significance, but also to highlight the dialogical ambiguities within each author's writings. The principal advantage of this framework is that Davis is able to generate invigorating readings of both canonical and lesser-known texts by first placing them in their literary and historical contexts, then subjecting them to close readings designed to bring out their ideological contradictions. The author's somewhat rigid adherence to her principle of dialogic comparison, however, means that some texts do not receive the sustained reading they deserve.

On the other hand, Davis' fourth chapter, "The Poetry of Nature and the Nature of Poetry: Robert Burns and William Wordsworth," exemplifies the strengths of her approach. Here, she demonstrates both that Burns' Scottish nationalism is more complex than his popular reputation suggests, and also that Wordsworth's critical interventions after Burns' death purposefully negate the politically disruptive elements of the Scottish poet's work. Beginning with an extended consideration of Burn's vexed relationship to his own British identity, the author argues convincingly that "Burns positioned himself partway between critiquing the cultural hegemony and participating in it" (107). Far from unselfconsciously promoting Jacobitism in particular, or nostalgic Scottish nationalism in general, Burns' poetry repeatedly articulates an inclusive cultural vision that emphasizes heterogeneity, both within Scotland and within Britain as a whole. A close reading of "Tam O'Shanter" shows the poet working hard to counter universalizing ideologies of nationhood: "Rather than attempting to delineate the nation with one representation, Burns offers a picture of an imagined community ghosted by its unheimlich Other" (121). If the radical thrust of Burns' work has been historically underrated, however, this is due to his "subsequent repackaging" by both the moderate Edinburgh literati and Wordsworth. Threatened by Burns' critique of hegemonic power relations within Britain, Wordsworth retaliates by marginalizing Burns as a "flawed poet of nature" in order to "overwrite the national differences that Burns represented and to create an assimilated nation of participants in the British cultural realm" (107). By reading Wordsworth's critique of Burns alongside contemporary reviews of both poets by the famous critic Francis Jeffrey, Davis effectively shows how Wordsworth's response to the Scottish poet is not simply a matter of the anxiety of influence, but a concerted effort to refashion Burns to support a more exclusively English vision of the British nation.

Taken as a whole, Acts of Union is rewarding reading for scholars interested in Anglo-Scottish relations and the literary negotiation of British identity over the long eighteenth century. With her accessible prose style and vast knowledge of the period, Davis effectively synthesizes arguments concerning the rise of the novel, the role of literature in culture, and the emergence of a hegemonic British identity with admirable aplomb. Her readings of specific texts, while occasionally terse, are fresh and thought- provoking. Leith Davis' book is a valuable contribution to the growing number of studies employing postcolonial approaches to eighteenth-century British literature and culture.