Classical Romantic: Identity in the Latin Poetry of Vincent Bourne

This monograph examines a selection of Vincent Bourne's Latin verse in its classical, neo-Latin and vernacular contexts, with particular attention to the theme of identity (and differing forms of identity). Its aim is to initiate the resurrection from silence of an author whose self-fashioning is achieved by investigating the identity of the self in relation to the other and by foregrounding multiple attempts to fashion other selves.

From Back Cover of published book:

Through close and perceptive analysis of Bourne's negotiation of poetic identity, Haan argues in new ways for the blend of classicism and Romanticism informing his marginalized status. As such, the book promises to revive scholarship on Bourne, and to be of use to students and scholars of Latin as well as vernacular verse.
Carla Mazzio, Professor of English, University of Chicago.


Estelle Haan is the UK's most eminent neo-Latinist. Her books with the APS on Milton (From Academia to Amicitia, Transactions 88, part 6) and Addison (Vergilius Redivivus, Transactions 95, part 2) are both important contributions to our knowledge of those authors, and their scholarship is presented in a way that accommodates the growing number of specialists who do not read Latin. Much of the content of this study is entirely new, and it is written in a way that will make it accessible to non-Latinists. The connections with English-language poets that Professor Haan adduces page after page will be a very considerable resource for students of vernacular poetry.
Gordon Campbell, Professor of Renaissance Literature, University of Leicester.


I have long thought that a modern study of Vincent Bourne was very much needed, and am greatly pleased that one has now been written. Estelle Haan offers a thoughtful and sensitive study that has remarkable depth. She capitalizes on the familiarity with other eighteenth-century English poets about whom she has previously written (Cowper, Gray, and most recently Addison) and she makes use of contempoary literary theory without becoming dependent on any single approach or disfiguring her writing with critical jargon. This work will, one hopes, provoke further research into Bourne and his poetry.
Dana F. Sutton, Professor Emeritus of Classics, The University of California, Irvine.

State power matters: power, the state and political struggle in the post-war American novel

This article is concerned with resituating the state at the centre of the analytical stage and, concomitantly, with drawing attention to the dangers of losing sight of the state as a locus of power. It seeks to uncover the relationship between two related lines of critical inquiry: Marxist and Foucauldian theories of the state; and the attempts by three postwar American novelist (Ken Kesey, William Burroughs and E.L. Doctorow) to determine the nature and extent of this power and to consider under what conditions political struggle might be possible. It argues that such a move is needed because recent critical analysis has been too preoccupied by corporeal micropolitics and global macropolitics, and that the postwar American novel can help us in this move because it is centrally concerned with the repressive potentiality of the US state. It maintains that the resuscitation of Marxist state theories in early 1970s and a debate between Poulantzas and Foucault is intriguingly foreshadowed and even critiqued by these novels. Consequently, it concludes that these novels constitute an unrecognized pre-history of what would become one of the key intellectual debates of the late twentieth century: an engagement between Marxist and post-structuralist conceptions of the power and resistance.

Benevolent Patriotism: Art, Dissent and the American Effect

This article examines the role of contemporary art in a post-9/11 context through The American Effect exhibition at the Whitney Museum of American Art in New York in 2003. This exhibition displayed a range of artworks from around the world that specifically engaged with, commented upon and interrogated the USA's pre-eminent position as a global superpower. In the politically charged climate after 9/11, the exhibition offered itself as a critical voice amid the more obvious patriotic clamour: it was one of the places where Americans could ask (and answer) the question, `Why do they hate us so much?' Although The American Effect claimed to be a space of dissent, it ultimately failed to question, let alone challenge, US global hegemony. Instead, the exhibition articulated a benevolent patriotism that forced artwork from other nations into supplicating and abject positions, and it obscured the complex discursive networks that connect artists, curators, critics, audiences and art museums.