安德魯˙馬維爾的《花園》、《鋤草者對上花園》和《論艾波頓莊園》詩中園藝對自然的影響 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)國立政治大學英國語文學系碩士班碩士論文. 指導教授：林質心博士 Advisor：Dr. Chih-hsin Lin. 政治大詩中園藝對自然的影響. 安德魯˙馬維爾的《花園》、《鋤草者對上花園》和《論艾波頓莊園》. 立. ‧ 國. 學. The Influence of Art on Nature in the Garden in Andrew Marvell’s “The Garden,” “The Mower Against Gardens,” and “Upon Appleton House”. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. 研究生：楊馥后撰 Name：Fu-hou Yang 中華民國一百年一月 January, 2011. v.

(2) The Influence of Art on Nature in the Garden in Andrew Marvell’s “The Garden,” “The Mower against Gardens,” and “Upon Appleton House”. A Master Thesis Presented to Department of English,. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. National Chengchi University. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts. by Fu-hou Yang January, 2011.

(3) Acknowledgements My warmest thanks go to Dr. Chih-hsin Lin, chair of department of English of National Chengchi University, for her inspiring guidance and support throughout my research for this work. For their reading of the manuscript and for helpful suggestions and encouragement, I want to thank Dr. Thomas J. Sellari, Dr. Michael Keevak, and Dr. Erick Heroux.. 政治大. My gratitude is also extended to Dr. Tsui-fen Jiang, Dr. Chao-ming Chen,. 立. and Dr. Shang-guan Chang for their instruction during my study at. ‧ 國. 學. National Chengchi University.. Finally, I would like to extend my heart-felt thanks to my dearest. ‧. parents, younger sister, and all my friends. Their love, support and. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. blessing have made this work possible.. Ch. engchi. iii. i n U. v.

(4) TABLE OF CONTENTS. Acknowledgments………………………………………………………………….. iii Chinese Abstract……………………………………………………………………. v English Abstract…………………………………………………………………….. vi Chapter. 立. 政治大. 1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………. 1. ‧ 國. 學. 2. The Mower’s Opposition to Gardening: Gardening as Damaging Nature…. 14 3. Marvell’s Admiration for Gardening: Gardening as Ordering Nature……... 40. ‧. 4. Conclusion………………………………………………………………….. 66. y. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. Works Cited.………………………………………………………………………... 74. Ch. engchi. iv. i n U. v.

(5) 國立政治大學英國語文學系碩士班碩士論文提要. 論文名稱：安德魯˙馬維爾的《花園》、《鋤草者對上花園》和《論艾波頓莊園》詩中園藝對自然的影響. 指導教授：林質心博士. 立. 研究生：楊馥后. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 論文提要內容：. ‧. 安德魯˙馬維爾的詩中經常出現花園，這一特殊的藝術形式為自然與工藝的. sit. y. Nat. 結合。關於園藝對自然的影響，馬維爾的看法一直以來被視為相當矛盾的。為了釐清馬維爾以何標準去判定園丁是破壞自然，還是修復自然，本論文擬以十七世. io. n. al. er. 紀關於園藝的文章，去探究馬維爾在《花園》、《鋤草者對上花園》和《論艾波頓莊園》詩中對於園藝對自然的影響的看法。. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. 本論文共分為四章，第一章回顧評論，以及整理十七世紀關於園藝的文章中所呈現的議題。第二章討論《鋤草者對上花園》詩中鋤草者如何批評園藝，並闡明鋤草者在批評園藝時，是否反對工藝家改變自然和扮演上帝的角色。第三章討論《花園》和《論艾波頓莊園》詩中馬維爾如何讚美園藝，並闡明馬維爾在讚美園藝時，是否提倡工藝家應整理自然並重建樂園。最後，第四章總結全文，結合鋤草者和馬維爾對園藝的看法，並加以衍伸評論馬維爾對於工藝對自然的影響的整體看法。本文希望藉由探討馬維爾在《花園》、《鋤草者對上花園》和《論艾波頓莊園》詩中對於園藝對自然的影響的看法，能夠證明馬維爾對於工藝對自然的影響的看法並不矛盾。. v.

(6) Abstract The garden, as a distinctive type of architectural art based upon nature, recurs in Andrew Marvell’s poetry and Marvell’s attitude toward the influence of art on nature in the garden has been considered quite ambivalent.. To clarify how Marvell. decides whether the gardener is impairing or repairing nature, this thesis proposes to study the influences of gardening on nature in “The Garden,” “The Mower Against Gardens,” and “Upon Appleton House” by examining how the gardener’s tasks in the. 政治大. poems are interpreted in the seventeenth-century treatises on horticulture.. 立. This thesis consists of four chapters.. Chapter One reviews critical opinions. ‧ 國. 學. and introduces the seventeenth-century treatises on horticulture that we will consult. Chapter Two concentrates on the Mower’s criticism of gardening in “The Mower In this chapter, we will examine the gardener’s tasks and explore. ‧. Against Gardens.”. whether artists should change nature and imitate God in the Mower’s view. Chapter. y. Nat. Three concentrates on Marvell’s admiration for gardening in “The Garden” and In this chapter, we will examine the gardener’s tasks and. io. sit. “Upon Appleton House.”. n. al. er. explore whether artists should organize nature and recreate paradise in Marvell’s view.. i n U. v. Finally, the last chapter will conclude by showing how the Mower’s opinions and. Ch. engchi. Marvell’s opinions about gardening complement each other, and commenting on Marvell’s attitude toward the influence of art on nature in general.. It is hoped that. an exploration of the influences of gardening on nature in “The Garden,” “The Mower Against Gardens,” and “Upon Appleton House” will clarify Marvell’s attitude toward gardening as well as his attitude toward art and nature and show that Marvell’s attitude is not as ambivalent as it appears.. vi.

(7) Chapter One Introduction. Among all images of nature and art, the garden is particularly noticeable since nature and art coexist in the garden.. There are no gardens without natural. elements—sun, water, and plants—and there are no gardens without artificial components—covert alleys, fountains, and hedges.. The garden, as a distinctive type. of architectural art based upon nature, often becomes the focus of discussions on nature and art in literature.. Andrew Marvell’s “The Garden,” “The Mower Against. 治政大 images of nature and art in Gardens,” and “Upon Appleton House” contain abundant 立 Nature imagery, including the trees,1 the flowers,2 the fruits,3 and the. 學. ‧ 國. the garden.. grass or meadows, means things that exist in the universe not made by human beings.. ‧. Art imagery, including the fountain,4 the grot,5 and the statues,6 means things. sit. y. Nat. shaped by human hands. A close reading of the recurrent images of nature and art in. io. er. Marvell’s garden poems shows that Marvell seems to feel ambivalent about the influence of art on nature. In Marvell’s eyes, the garden is a place to produce. al. n. v i n “adult’rate fruit” (“Mower” C 25)has well as enjoy “delicious Solitude” (“Garden” 16). engchi U Marvell on the one hand favors “most plain and pure” (4) nature undefiled by art in. “The Mower Against Gardens” and yet on the other hand appreciates “orderly” (26) nature organized by art in “Upon Appleton House.” Whether art impairs nature or repairs nature, Marvell’s attitude toward art seems to be revealed through his attitude 1. For example, “the Palm” (2), “the Oak” (2), “Bayes” (2) in “The Garden” and “the Wood” (stanzas 61-78) in “Upon Appleton House.” 2 For example, “the Roses” (11), “The Tulip” (13), “the Marvel of Peru” (18) in “The Mower Against Gardens” and “the Tulip” (312), “Roses” (333) in “Upon Appleton House.” 3 For example, “Ripe Apples” (34), “The Nectaren, and curious Peach” (37), and “Melons” (39) in “The Garden.” 4 For example, “the Fountains sliding foot” (49) in “The Garden” and “the Fountain” (31) in “The Mower Against Gardens.” 5 For example, “the Grot” (31) in “The Mower Against Gardens.” 6 For example, the “Statues” (37) of Fauns and Faryes in “The Mower Against Gardens.” 1.

(8) Yang 2. toward art in the garden.. Indeed, when analyzing Marvell’s attitude toward the. influence of art on nature in the three poems, many scholars have discussed Marvell’s attitude toward art in terms of his attitude toward art in the garden. A number of scholars who have noticed the influence of art on nature in Marvell’s garden poems argue that art in Marvell’s eyes has a negative impact upon nature.. Scholars such as Edward W. Tayler and Ann E. Berthoff believe that. Marvell holds that art inevitably corrupts nature.. They focus on grafting in the. garden and assert that art in “The Mower Against Gardens” represents man’s “immoral activity” (Tayler 162), “a principle of corruption” (162), the “corruption of. 治政大 unworthy, unnatural, and nature” (Berthoff 155), and everything that is “hypocritical, 立 destructive of virtue” (195).. In other words, both Tayler and Berthoff merely. ‧ 國. 學. discuss Marvell’s attitude toward art in terms of one type of art in the garden, that is,. ‧. grafting, in “The Mower Against Gardens” and claim that art in Marvell’s eyes. sit. y. Nat. “corrupts” nature.. io. er. There are, however, other kinds of art in the garden represented by Marvell. For instance, the gardener in “The Mower Against Gardens” creates artificial. al. n. v i n C has fountains, grots,Uand statues (31, 37). ornaments for the garden, such engchi. The. gardener in “The Garden” arranges flowers and plants as a floral sundial (65-66). The gardener in “Upon Appleton House” lays out flowerbeds “In the just Figure of a Fort” (286) and grows flowers according to their colors: “See how the Flow’rs, as at Parade, / Under their Colours stand displaid” (309-10).. Thus, in the analysis of the. influence of art on nature in Marvell’s garden poems, it is necessary to explore Marvell’s attitude toward other kinds of art in the garden, such as creating artificial ornaments, organizing flowers and plants, and laying out flowerbeds. What then is Marvell’s attitude toward other kinds of art in the garden? Are all kinds of.

(9) Yang 3. gardening corruptive in Marvell’s eyes? Several scholars have analyzed Marvell’s attitude toward gardening, but most of them emphasize simply whether Marvell approves or disapproves of gardening as one kind of art.. Scholars like Rosalie L. Colie and Michael Craze argue that Marvell. disapproves of gardening and suggests that gardeners should not meddle with nature. In Colie’s view, Marvell holds that nature should grow wildly in fields rather than artificial gardens because in Marvell’s eyes only “unadorned, unaltered, unimproved” nature is “truly virtuous or truly beautiful” (39).. Craze notes that Marvell prefers. meadows to gardens because gardens are “artificial man-made enclosures” and. 治政大 meadows are “God-given because garden flowers are unnatural and exotic, while 立. natural growths” (130). Unlike Colie and Craze, Donald M. Friedman and Frank J.. ‧ 國. 學. Warnke argue that Marvell approves of gardening and suggests that gardeners bring. ‧. order to nature. In Friedman’s view, Marvell holds that gardening makes nature “a. sit. In Warnke’s opinion, Marvell’s nature is “a simulacrum of the. io. er. of artifacts” (242).. y. Nat. patterned and ordered reality” (123), and nature “finds its true purpose . . . in the form. world before creation” (248), and nature can be “reborn” (245) by the art of gardening.. al. n. v i n Basically, these two groups C of scholars different assumptions about Marvell’s h e n ghave chi U view of nature, so they reach different conclusions.. The first takes nature as the. original, unspoiled, or even perfect, so the art of gardening represents damage to the pristine integrity of nature. In contrast, the second takes nature as the unformed, imperfect, or even corrupt after the Fall, so the art of gardening represents the means by which gardeners may repair nature. With different assumptions about Marvell’s view of nature, neither groups of scholars, however, clarify what criteria they hold when they judge whether nature is perfect or imperfect in Marvell’s poems.. Furthermore, scholars who choose to.

(10) Yang 4. defend either side neglect to consider Marvell’s seeming ambivalence toward gardening.. In the tenth stanza of “Upon Appleton House,” Marvell explicitly points. out that nature “had laid so sweetly wast” (78) and the art of gardening “would more neatly have defac’d” (77) nature.. Here, the word “defac’d” apparently shows that. Marvell is worried that nature may be damaged by the art of gardening, but the word “wast” seems to reveal that nature is useless if not neatly ordered.. Why does. Marvell want nature to be ordered but meanwhile feel ambivalent about the art of gardening? It seems a little arbitrary and simplistic to argue that Marvell either approves or disapproves of gardening in an analysis of Marvell’s attitude toward art.. 治政大 and With the double influences of gardening on nature—defacing 立 either assumption about nature.. 學. ‧ 國. ordering—represented in Marvell’s poems, probably Marvell does not incline towards That is to say, Marvell may hold that nature is. It is thus necessary study. sit. y. Nat. is imperfect and approve of gardening due to other factors.. ‧. perfect and disapprove of gardening due to some factors, and he may hold that nature. io. er. what factors determine Marvell’s approval and disapproval of the art of gardening in the analysis of the double influences of gardening on nature in Marvell’s garden. n. al. poems.. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. Some scholars hold that Marvell’s approval and disapproval of gardening is determined by whether the gardener appropriately maintains the garden.. For. example, Friedman argues that what Marvell deplores is not gardening but “man’s abuse of the fertile principles of art” (123) in “The Mower Against Gardens.”. That. is, Friedman suggests that Marvell holds that gardeners impair nature when they abuse gardening.. In Friedman’s opinion, “The Mower Against Gardens” is then an. account of the consequences of man’s abuse rather than a reproof against the art of gardening.. Indeed, Marvell in the poem explicitly refers to “Man” twice:.

(11) Yang 5. “Luxurious Man, to bring his Vice in use” (1); “To Man, that sov’raign thing and proud” (20).. Friedman’s observations on Marvell’s poetry may be true; it is possible. that Marvell’s attitude toward the influences of gardening depends upon whether man—the gardener—abuses gardening or not.. However, Friedman does not further. examine the gardener’s abuse of gardening in Marvell’s eyes. How does Marvell distinguish between the gardener who abuses gardening and the gardener who does not? By what standards does Marvell judge whether the gardener abuses gardening or not? Scholars seldom explore by what standards Marvell judges whether the. 治政大 notices the gardener’s gardener abuses gardening or not. Only Patsy Griffin 立. In Griffin’s opinion, Marvell suggests that the gardener intends to “create. 學. ‧ 國. intentions.. a new Eden” (50) to evoke “Edenic feelings” (50) with the aid of gardening, and the. ‧. garden in Marvell’s poems is an “artful re-creation” (50) of Eden.. By associating. y. sit. Nat. the artful garden with the re-creation of Eden, Griffin supposes that the art of. io. tries to show how Marvell distinguishes between the a Griffin iv l C n gardener who abuses the art of h gardening and the gardener who does not—when the engchi U. n. a paradise-like garden.. er. gardening for Marvell is not sinful but redemptive when the gardener intends to build. gardener intends to build a paradise-like garden.. However, the gardener’s intentions. alone are not convincing standards for judging whether the gardener abuses gardening or not in Marvell’s view. In the poems, when judging whether the gardener abuses gardening or not, Marvell seldom mentions the gardener’s intentions; what Marvell mentions most are the gardener’s tasks—what the gardener does.. It is thus necessary. to focus on the gardener’s tasks in the analysis of the double influences of gardening on nature in Marvell’s poems. Coincidentally or not, in the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century treatises on.

(12) Yang 6. horticulture, the gardener’s tasks are also discussed as the factors by which horticulturalists decide whether the gardener is impairing or repairing nature. Thus to understand by what standards Marvell judges whether the gardener abuses gardening or not, it is helpful to see first what factors the seventeenth-century people considered when they decided whether the gardener is impairing or repairing nature. This thesis proposes to examine the speakers’ opinions about the gardener’s tasks in “The Garden,” “The Mower Against Gardens,” and “Upon Appleton House” by studying how the gardener’s tasks are interpreted in the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century treatises on horticulture.. Without a consideration of the 治政 speakers’ various opinions about various gardening大 tasks in Marvell’s poems in the 立. light of the seventeenth-century horticulturalists’ concerns and rationale, we may be. ‧ 國. 學. bewildered by Marvell’s different attitudes toward gardening and have no ground to. Among all of Marvell’s poems, there are four “Mower” poems: “Damon. sit. y. Nat. Mower.. In “The Mower Against Gardens,” the speaker is the. ‧. support our interpretation.. io. Mower Against Gardens.”. al. er. The Mower,” “The Mower To The Glowworms,” “The Mower’s Song,” and “The Because each of the four poems is different, the readers. n. v i n C h in the four poems cannot even assert that the Mower e n g c h i U is the same persona, not to mention assuming that the Mower represents Marvell.. Different from “The Mower. Against Gardens,” the speakers in “The Garden” and “Upon Appleton House” are anonymous. In discussing the two poems, most scholars agree that the speakers in “The Garden” and “Upon Appleton House” are very likely to be the same persona, and that persona is probably Marvell himself.7 Is there any difference between the Mower’s opinions about gardening and Marvell’s opinions about gardening? What 7. The supporting evidence is that the two poems were composed during the period (1651-1653) when Marvell served as a tutor to Mary Fairfax, the Lord General’s daughter, at Nunappleton in Yorkshire. It is believed that the two poems are inspired by Marvell’s personal experience at Nunappleton (Berthoff 156; Friedman 199; Hunt 90; Legouis 17-20)..

(13) Yang 7. is the difference between the Mower’s opinions in “The Mower Against Gardens” and Marvell’s opinions in “The Garden” and “Upon Appleton House?”. Do the Mower’s. opinions about gardening contradict Marvell’s opinions about gardening? Or, are the Mower’s opinions about gardening part of Marvell’s discourse on gardening? Apart from the difference between the speakers, the gardener’s tasks in the three poems are also different. What is the difference between the gardener’s tasks in “The Mower Against Gardens” and those in “The Garden” and “Upon Appleton House?” If the readers understand how each of the gardener’s tasks in the three poems is perceived in each speaker’s eyes, they may not be confused anymore. To. 治政大 in Marvell’s poems, we need find out how the speakers perceive the gardener’s tasks 立 to study how the gardener’s tasks are interpreted in Marvell’s time.. To understand. ‧ 國. 學. how the gardener’s tasks are interpreted in Marvell’s time, it is probably essential to. ‧. consult the seventeenth-century treatises on horticulture.. sit. y. Nat. In the seventeenth-century treatises on horticulture, various horticulturalists. io. reasons.. er. show their approval or disapproval of various gardening tasks and explain their It is therefore necessary to examine how each of the gardener’s tasks in. al. n. v i n Cthe Marvell’s poems is viewed in treatises on horticulture. h eseventeenth-century ngchi U. Among the gardener’s tasks in the three poems, the gardener’s tasks in “The Mower Against Gardens” are criticized by the Mower—including enclosing the garden with brick walls, making double flowers, changing the color and scent of flowers, grafting plants and fruits, and making fountains, grots, and statues.. In contrast, the. gardener’s tasks in “The Garden” and “Upon Appleton House” are praised by Marvell—growing shade trees, organizing flowers, and laying out flowerbeds. According to the speakers’ different attitudes toward the gardener’s tasks, the thesis will explore the gardener’s tasks in “The Mower Against Gardens” first and then.

(14) Yang 8. those in “The Garden” and “Upon Appleton House.”. An examination of various. seventeenth-century horticulturalists’ concerns and rationale is helpful in understanding what concerns and rationale Marvell might have about the gardener’s various tasks. For example, in Sir Hugh Plat’s Floraes Paradise and John Rea’s Flora: seu de Florum Cultura, both authors discuss the building of enclosed gardens. According to Plat and Rea, enclosing the garden with brick walls is particularly prevalent in the seventeenth century.. They hold that the gardener, when enclosing. the garden with brick walls, is marking the boundaries of his own territory; with. 治政 boundaries, the gardener can ensure that plants and大 flowers grow within his own 立. In other words, Plat and Rea imply that the gardener takes God’s creations. 學. ‧ 國. territory.. as his own possessions when he grows plants and flowers within the walls.. Rea even. ‧. calls the enclosed garden “an immured Nothing” (1), which suggests that the gardener. sit. y. Nat. builds walls around the garden not only to possess nature but also to “immure” nature.. io. enclosed in the garden and controlled by the gardener.. n. al. Ch. engchi U. er. Seeing the gardener “immuring” nature, Rea reveals that nature should not be In brief, Plat and Rea explore. v ni. whether artists have rights to take God’s creations as their own possessions and control them when they discuss the building of enclosed gardens.. In “The Mower. Against Gardens,” the Mower indeed claims that the gardener builds enclosed gardens: “He first enclos’d within the Gardens square / A dead and standing pool of Air” (Marvell 5-6).. Does the Mower suggest that the gardener, when building enclosed. gardens and enclosing plants and flowers within the gardens, is taking God’s creations as his own possessions as well? In Paradisi in Sole Paradisus Terrestris, for another example, John Parkinson focuses on the making of double flowers and the changing of the color and scent of.

(15) Yang 9. flowers.. In Parkinson’s opinion, making double flowers and giving flowers color. and scent is God’s work; only God has the power to make double flowers and give flowers color and scent “at his will and pleasure” (24).. Parkinson maintains that the. gardener, when making double flowers and changing the color and scent of flowers, is challenging God by doing what only God can do and trying to take God’s role as the Creator.. That is, the making of double flowers and the changing of the color and. scent of flowers are interpreted as the means by which the gardener plays God in Parkinson’s view.. In “The Mower Against Gardens,” the Mower indeed reproaches. the gardener for making double flowers and changing the color and scent of flowers in. 治政大taint, / And Flow’rs themselves the garden: “With strange perfumes he did the Roses 立 were taught to paint” (Marvell 11-12).. Does the Mower deem that the gardener is. ‧ 國. 學. playing God and challenging God as well? Is it possible that the Mower is reacting. ‧. to the issue of the artists’ capability to play God’s role as the Creator when the Mower. y. sit. io. er. flowers?. Nat. criticizes the gardener for making double flowers and changing the color and scent of. Another task that is criticized appears in Francis Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum, or,. al. n. v i n A Natural History and RalphCAusten’s upon Some Part of Sir Francis h e n Observations gchi U Bacon’s Naturall History.. In these two treatises, Austen argues with Bacon about. grafting and the grafted nature.. Bacon holds that grafting is improving nature by. mending or repairing nature, so the grafted nature is still nature.. In contrast, Austen. holds that grafting is creating a new species by mixing different species, so the grafted nature is a man-made product.. In other words, in discussing grafting, Bacon and. Austen examine whether or not artists create man-made products when they change nature.. In another treatise The Spirituall Use of an Orchard, or Garden of. Fruit-Trees, Austen further relates grafting to God’s work.. In Austen’s opinion, the.

(16) Yang 10. gardener who “makes choice of what wild Plants he pleaseth” (1) to graft is like God, who “giveth grace to those whom he hath chosen” (2). Austen claims that the gardener, when grafting one plant onto another, is helping the plants as God “help[s], and encourage[s] those that are weake” (4).. Seeing grafting as helping the weak. plants, Austen believes that grafting is a way to “obtaine the most usefull, and most profitable fruits” (23) and “strengthen the spirituall part against the fleshly part” (26). In short, both Bacon and Austen argue that grafting is a way to improve nature, whether grafting is mending nature or creating a new kind.. Austen even compares. the gardener to God when the gardener is grafting.. In “The Mower Against 治政大 plants and fruits. In the Gardens,” the Mower criticizes the gardener for grafting 立. Mower’s view, do artists improve or damage nature when they change nature? What. ‧ 國. 學. does the Mower really oppose when he criticizes grafting and the grafted nature in the. ‧. poem? Is it possible that the Mower, when commenting on the gardener’s task of. sit. y. Nat. grafting, is talking about the issue of art that changes nature and exploring whether. io. er. artists should imitate God and think they could improve nature?. Francis Bacon remarks on another task—the making of ornamental objects in. al. n. v i n the garden, such as fountainsCand his famous essay “The Garden.” h estatues—in ngchi U Bacon’s opinion, both fountains and statues are made to adorn the garden.. In. Bacon. prefers fountains to statues because fountains are made to beautify nature—the flow of water—whereas statues are merely made to glorify human achievements. Regarding fountains and statues as ornaments to the garden, Bacon addresses the issue of beautifying nature and examines whether nature needs to be beautified by art and whether artists can make nature more beautiful.. In “The Mower Against. Gardens,” the Mower indeed refers to the making of fountains and statues in the garden.. In the Mower’s eyes, fountains are “all enforc’d” (Marvell 31) and statues.

(17) Yang 11. are just “polish’d by some ancient hand” (37).. What does the Mower mean exactly. when he criticizes fountains and statues? Does the Mower, when criticizing fountains and statues, suggest that art is not more beautiful than nature, artists could not beautify nature by making ornamental objects, and ornamental objects should not be admired more than God’s creations? In addition to discussing the making of ornamental objects in the garden, Bacon also remarks on the planting of shade trees in “The Garden.”. According to. Bacon, growing shade trees is a way to reduce the heat of the sun, so that the climate of the garden can be mild like paradise (142).. That is, growing shade trees is 治政大 the mild climate of interpreted as the means by which the gardener reconstructs 立 paradise in Bacon’s view.. In his poem “The Garden,” Marvell praises the gardener. ‧ 國. 學. for making “the milder Sun” (67) in the garden with trees and flowers.. Does. ‧. Marvell suggest that the gardener is recreating paradise as well?. sit. y. Nat. In A New Orchard and Garden, William Lawson maintains that nature is Regarding the. io. er. “corrected by Art” (54) when flowers are organized by the gardener.. ordered flowers as the “corrected” nature, Lawson suggests that wild flowers, which. al. n. v i n C h In other words, do not grow in order, are incorrect. e n g c h i U when discussing the organizing. of flowers, Lawson deems that artists bring order to nature and change the disordered nature into the ordered nature. In “Upon Appleton House,” Marvell admires the ordered flowers in Fairfax’s gardens greatly.. What does Marvell advocate when he. admires the ordered flowers in “Upon Appleton House?”. Is Marvell here showing. that he approves of the art that changes nature because art orders nature? Apart from Lawson, Ralph Austen also discusses the gardener’s task of organizing flowers in A Treatise of Fruit-trees.. Austen maintains that the gardener. plants flowers in orderly flowerbeds because the “order and curious formes of things.

(18) Yang 12. much delight the sight” (36). That is, planting flowers in orderly flowerbeds in Austen’s view is regarded as the means by which the gardener builds a garden that pleases the sense of sight, and building a garden that pleases the senses is one of the criteria of paradise (35). paradise.. Like Bacon, Austen suggests that the gardener is recreating. It seems that the intention to recreate paradise is the prevailing concern. among the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century treatises on horticulture; that is, gardening is often interpreted as recreating the gardener’s own paradise around Marvell’s time. In Two Bookes of Constancie, Justus Lipsius also holds that the gardener is. 治政 recreating paradise when discussing gardening. In大 contrast to Austen, Lipsius 立. emphasizes that a paradise-like garden is built for a wearied man to restore his peace. ‧ 國. 學. of the mind; everything in the garden, such as flowers, fruits, and the gentle breeze,. ‧. provides man with the peace of the mind more than the pleasure of the senses.. In. sit. y. Nat. “The Garden,” Marvell indeed refers to man’s spiritual repose and meditation in the. io. “The Garden” and “Upon Appleton House.”. al. er. garden. However, Marvell also mentions the pleasure of the senses in the garden in In Marvell’s eyes, is a paradise-like. n. v i n garden built for the pleasureC ofh the senses or the happiness of the mind? engchi U. What kind. of paradise does Marvell have in mind when he praises the gardener for building a paradise-like garden? To clarify how Marvell decides whether the gardener is impairing or repairing nature, the following two chapters will be devoted to studying the influences of gardening on nature in “The Garden,” “The Mower Against Gardens,” and “Upon Appleton House” by examining how the gardener’s tasks in the poems are interpreted in the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century treatises on horticulture.. Chapter Two. concentrates on the Mower’s criticism of gardening in “The Mower Against.

(19) Yang 13. Gardens.”. In this chapter, we will examine the gardener’s tasks such as building. enclosed gardens, making double flowers, changing the color and scent of flowers, grafting plants and fruits, and making ornamental objects and explore whether artists should change nature and imitate God in the Mower’s view.. After elucidating what. exactly the Mower opposes when attacking those gardener’s tasks, we can understand the kind of art that the Mower opposes.. After understanding the kind of art that is. criticized, we will study which kind of art is praised in Marvell’s poems in Chapter Three.. This chapter concentrates on Marvell’s admiration for gardening in “The. Garden” and “Upon Appleton House.”. In this chapter, we will examine how the. 治政大 flowers in orderly gardener’s tasks such as growing shade trees and planting 立. flowerbeds are interpreted in the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century treatises on. ‧ 國. 學. horticulture and explore whether artists should organize nature and recreate paradise. ‧. in Marvell’s view. This chapter aims to see what Marvell exactly advocates when. sit. y. Nat. defending those gardener’s tasks. Finally, the last chapter will conclude by showing. io. er. how the Mower’s opinions and Marvell’s opinions about gardening complement each other, and commenting on Marvell’s attitude toward the influence of art on nature in. al. n. v i n It is hoped that anC exploration influences of gardening on nature in h e n gofcthe hi U. general.. “The Garden,” “The Mower Against Gardens,” and “Upon Appleton House” will clarify Marvell’s attitude toward gardening as well as his attitude toward art and nature and show that Marvell’s attitude is not as ambivalent as it appears..

(20) Chapter Two The Mower’s Opposition to Gardening: Gardening as Damaging Nature. In “The Mower Against Gardens,” the Mower criticizes the gardener, showing his disapproval of “allur[ing]” (3) plants from the fields to the gardens, making double flowers, changing the color and scent of flowers, grafting plants and fruits, and making fountains, grots and statues.. In discussing the Mower’s criticism of. gardening in the poem, scholars have noticed that Marvell presents an “argument over the relationship of nature and art” (Baldwin 26) and have agreed that the Mower’s. 治政大 of art. opposition to gardening shows the Mower’s disapproval 立. Edward W. Tayler. claims that nature in the poem still “preserves something of the intercourse between. ‧ 國. 學. heaven and earth that man forfeited through the Fall” (161), but gardening “has Rosalie L. Colie asserts that gardening for the Mower. ‧. corrupted nature” (161).. sit. y. Nat. represents “the artifices of a materialist, worldly, and producing society” (36).. io. er. Michael Craze notes that gardening in the Mower’s eyes embodies the Epicurean vice, that is, “voluptuous idleness” (132). These scholars have concluded that gardening. al. n. v i n C h opposes, and theUgardener in the poem represents a represents the art that the Mower engchi certain kind of artists—a corrupt man, a materialist, or an “Epicurean Man” (Craze 132).. However, these scholars either fail to prove their interpretations or give. unconvincing evidence.. Colie holds that the Mower’s opposition to gardening. shows that the Mower abhors the artifice of a materialist society, but Colie does not show any documents that connect gardening with materialism.. Craze quotes the. Elder Pliny’s The Historie of the World to demonstrate that the Mower opposes gardens because city gardens are invented by the “Epicurean Man” (132), but Craze does not explain why the Mower’s opposition to gardening must agree with a. 14.

(21) Yang 15. criticism of city gardens in ancient Rome.. Tayler argues that the Mower sees. gardening as a sign of man’s corruption after the Fall, but Tayler neglects to notice that gardening is also regarded as Adam’s employment before the Fall when he was in the Garden of Eden.. If the Mower’s opposition to gardening is a reflection on. physical gardens or gardening, it seems more likely that the Mower is attacking contemporary gardens or gardening than to those in ancient times.. If the gardener in. the poem is the key to the Mower’s criticism, it is probably essential to explore what the gardener does specifically in the Mower’s eyes.. In describing the gardener as. “Luxurious Man” (Marvell 1) and “Man, that sov’raign thing and proud” (20), the. 治政 Mower suggests that what the gardener does shows大 that the gardener is “luxurious” 立 To better understand the Mower’s opposition to gardening in “The. 學. ‧ 國. and “proud.”. Mower Against Gardens,” this chapter proposes to study the gardener’s tasks in the. y. By consulting the seventeenth-century treatises on horticulture,. sit. Nat. seventeenth century.. ‧. poem by examining at the same time how the gardener’s tasks were interpreted in the. io. er. we can understand what the seventeenth-century people thought about gardening and elucidate what the Mower opposes in the poem. We will go through the Mower’s. al. n. v i n C hfirst, including building criticism of the gardener’s tasks e n g c h i U enclosed gardens, making. double flowers, changing the color and scent of flowers, grafting plants and fruits, and making ornamental objects, and then we will explore whether the Mower opposes the gardeners who changes nature and imitates God as the seventeenth-century horticulturalists oppose. At the end of this chapter, we will discuss how the Mower’s attitude toward gardening in the poem shows his attitude toward art and nature. At the outset, the Mower rebukes the gardener for “seduc[ing]” (Marvell 2) the world of nature and “allur[ing]” (3) the flowers and plants from the fields into the.

(22) Yang 16. gardens.. It is noteworthy that the Mower uses the verbs “seduce” and “allure” to. describe what the gardener does because men usually “seduce” or “allure” innocent women rather than flowers and plants.. Edward W. Tayler, from a theological. perspective, argues that the gardener in the poem “seduces” nature as a result of his “fallen mind” (160).. Tayler states, “the fallen mind possesses for most religious. thinkers some knowledge of good as well as evil, but here Marvell restricts himself to man in his knowledge of evil” (160).. In other words, Tayler maintains that the. gardener seduces nature in pursuit of the “knowledge of evil” (160) in Marvell’s poem.. Nevertheless, pursuing the knowledge of evil is not exactly what the Mower. criticizes.. 治政大 for what the gardener In the poem, the Mower reproves the gardener 立. physically does in reality:. ‧ 國. 學. Luxurious Man, to bring his Vice in use,. ‧. Did after him the World seduce:. sit. y. Nat. And from the fields the Flow’rs and Plants allure,. io. er. Where Nature was most plain and pure. He first enclos’d within the Gardens square. n. al. i n C A dead and standing pool of Air. (1-6) he ngchi U. v. In this passage, the Mower criticizes the gardener because the gardener encloses “A dead and standing pool of Air” (6) within the gardens in the physical world, not because the gardener pursues the knowledge of evil in his mind.. To understand in. what ways the gardener “seduces” or “allures” nature in the Mower’s view and in what aspects the Mower opposes the enclosed gardens, we have to study the gardener’s possible act of seduction and the implications of the enclosed gardens in Marvell’s time through the seventeenth-century garden books. In Floraes Paradise, Sir Hugh Plat mentions that the gardener, to have flowers.

(23) Yang 17. and plants in his garden, has to “fill it [the garden] with the best vegetable which [he] can get, that hath stoode two yeeres, or one at the least, quiet within his own Sphear” (2).. In other words, the gardener has to transplant flowers and plants from the fields,. where they originally grow, to the enclosed gardens ruled by the gardener.. In a. sense, “seduc[ing]” (2) or “allur[ing]” (3) nature in the Mower’s eyes probably refers to transplanting flowers and plants from the fields to the gardens.. Regarding. transplantation as seduction, the Mower implies that flowers and plants do not belong to the gardener so that the gardener has to “seduce” (2) or “allure” (3) them into the gardens.. According to the Bible, plants and flowers are created by God.. John 治政大 that plants are God’s Gerard, a seventeenth-century herbalist, also emphasizes 立. creations: “the principall delight [of the plant] is in the minde, singularly enriched. ‧ 國. 學. with the knowledge of these visible things, setting forth to vs the inuisible wisedome. ‧. and admirable workmanship of almighty God” (“Epistle Dedicatorie”).. When the. sit. y. Nat. gardener “seduce[s]” (2) or “allure[s]” (3) God’s creations into his own gardens, the. io. er. gardener shows no respect for God; that is to say, God created plants and flowers in the open fields originally, but the gardener entices God’s creations away from God.. al. n. v i n C hseduction seems toUbe like the serpent’s seduction in To some extent, the gardener’s engchi the Book of Genesis.. The serpent, understood in Christianity to be Satan, aims to. lead human beings away from the love of God by seducing Eve into disobeying God’s command—into eating the forbidden fruit. Like Satan, the gardener who seduces flowers and plants away from the open fields leads God’s creations astray.. In the. gardener’s case, flowers and plants are seduced into the gardener’s enclosed gardens. The enclosed gardens, which flowers and plants are seduced into, are gardens with brick walls.. According to the garden books, enclosed gardens were particularly. prevalent in the seventeenth century.. Both Sir Hugh Plat and John Rea mention that.

(24) Yang 18. their contemporary gardeners build brick walls around their gardens.. In Floraes. Paradise, Plat emphasizes that building brick walls is the first step to make a garden: “First, paue a square plot with bricke making vp sides of bricke also plaistered likewise: let this bee of a convenient depth” (1-2). plot, the garden is definitely an enclosed space.. With brick walls around a square. Moreover, Rea in Flora: seu de. Florum Cultura states that the walls should be placed carefully so as to develop a garden: If you are to inclose a new ground for a Garden, be careful in placing the Walls, that the size, situation and form, may all be answerable to your. 治政大 and tried, that the Walls may intended plot: the ground exactly measured, 立 be neither out of square or level, which will much advantage the work. ‧ 國. 學. which is to follow. . . . The walls being finished, the ground is to be (3). ‧. prepared for planting . . . .. sit. y. Nat. In Rea’s opinion, walls are crucial to the development of a garden because walls. io. er. determine the size and form of a garden; in other words, the gardener uses walls to mark the boundaries of a garden. Only when the walls are finished and placed well. al. n. v i n can the gardener prepare forC planting. the walls are used to separate a garden h e n gThus chi U from other areas, and the enclosed garden is usually viewed as the gardener’s own territory. As the gardener’s own territory, the enclosed garden is occupied by the gardener alone, which is not as easily accessible as the open fields; no wonder the enclosed garden is considered inferior to the fields in the Mower’s view. Interestingly, John Rea holds a similar view in his garden book.. Although Rea’s. Flora: seu de Florum Cultura is a book on the “making and planting of fruit and flower-gardens” (1), Rea explicitly prefers “a green Medow” to his contemporary.

(25) Yang 19. formal gardens: I have seen many Gardens of the new model, in the hands of unskilfull person, with good Walls, Walks and Grass-plots; but in the most essential adornments so deficient, that a green Medow is a more delightful object: there Nature alone, without the aid of Art, spreads her verdant Carpets, spontaneously imbroydered with many pretty Plants and pleasing Flowers, far more inviting than such an immured Nothing.. (1). Here, Rea does not condemn all gardens but the gardens of the “new model” made by “unskilfull” gardeners, that is, the gardens “with good Walls,” the enclosed gardens.. 治政 Calling the enclosed garden “an immured Nothing,”大 Rea reveals that the gardener 立學. ‧ 國. imprisons plants and flowers; the plants and flowers imprisoned in the garden become the gardener’s own possessions, not the plants and flowers freely growing in the In Rea’s opinion, the garden is inferior to the meadow because. ‧. meadow anymore.. y. sit. Rea’s ideas help understand why the Mower holds that the enclosed. io. er. meadow.. Nat. plants and flowers do not grow “spontaneously” (1) in the garden as they do in the. garden contains “A dead and standing pool of Air” (Marvell 6). Compared to the. al. n. v i n C h grow in the U plants and flowers that spontaneously e n g c h i fields, plants and flowers in the enclosed garden are immured as if they were prisoners.. Prisoners, deprived of. freedom, are less lively and less energetic, so the air in the enclosed garden, the place where plants and flowers are imprisoned, becomes lifeless and stagnant.. With the. stagnant air, plants and flowers inevitably become ill in the enclosed garden. With the ill-grown plants and flowers, the enclosed garden is denounced as “Nothing” (Rea 1).. Seeing the enclosed garden as “Nothing,” Rea connects the. enclosed garden with the concept of ex nihilo.. The Latin phrase ex nihilo, which. means “out of nothing,” often appears in conjunction with the concept of creation..

(26) Yang 20. As the sixteenth-century influential theologian John Calvin puts it in Institutes of the Christian Religion, “God by the power of his Word and Spirit created heaven and earth out of nothing” (179).. Here, “nothing” signifies the state before God’s creation,. which was in chaos, “without form, and void” (Gen. 1:2). and earth, God brought “form” and order out of chaos. created plants, God gave order to plants.. When God created heaven. That is to say, when God. To know what kind of order God gave. plants, we have to see what rule God gave plants when He created them.. According. to the Bible, God created the plants that bring forth seeds or fruits after their own kinds:. 治政大the herb yielding seed, and the God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, 立 fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the. ‧ 國. 學. earth: and it was so. / And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding. (Gen. 1:11-12). sit. y. Nat. after his kind: and God saw that it was good.. ‧. seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself,. io. yield seed and fruit after their own kinds.. al. er. This biblical passage shows that God created the grass, the herb, and the fruit tree that That is, the rule or order God gave plants. n. v i n C hseed and fruit afterUtheir own kinds. is that plants should bring forth engchi. Rea, in calling. the enclosed garden “Nothing” (1), implies that the garden is similar to the state before God created it, chaotic and lack of order.. In other words, Rea suggests that. the gardener destroys the order of nature created by God and throws flowers and plants into chaos in the garden, that is, the flowers and plants in the garden do not necessarily yield fruits after their own kinds.. In Marvell’s poem, the Mower. contrasts the flowers and plants in the gardens with those in the fields.. While the. flowers and plants in the gardens are seduced into going astray, the flowers and plants in the fields are “most plain and pure” (4).. That is to say, the Mower reveals that.

(27) Yang 21. “plain” and “pure” flowers and plants are those that follow the order of nature created by God and bring forth fruits after their own kinds.. By contrast, the flowers and. plants in the gardens do not necessarily follow the order of nature created by God and do not necessarily bring forth fruits after their own kinds. In seducing flowers and plants into defying the order of nature created by God, the gardener in the Mower’s view indeed has something in common with Satan. the Bible, Satan’s seduction is believed to arise from his pride.. In. Due to his pride,. Satan does not bow to God as all other angels do; what is more, Satan covets the chance to rule heaven himself.. Similarly, the gardener in the poem is called “that. 治政 sov’raign thing and proud” (Marvell 20). Donald 大 M. Friedman claims that the 立 and commits the “sin of pride” (126).. 學. ‧ 國. gardener in the Mower’s eyes is a tyrant who “force[s] nature out of its own course” Friedman’s interpretations seem reasonable,. In the seventeenth century, people tended to. Ralph Austen, a horticulturist and “radical Puritan”. io. er. associate the gardener with God.. sit. y. Nat. the seventeenth-century people’s view.. ‧. but Friedman neglects to consider the connection between the gardener and God in. (Turner 39) of the seventeenth century, highlights the similarity between the. al. n. v i n gardener’s work and God’s C work in The SpirituallU Use of an Orchard, or Garden of he ngchi Fruit-Trees.. According to Austen, the gardener “makes choice of what wild Plants. he pleaseth” (1) as God “chose some persons” (1).. The gardener, like God, “giveth. grace to those whom he hath chosen” (2) and let the trees “bring forth fruit” (2).. If. the gardener is associated with God in the seventeenth century, what does the Mower imply through “that sov’raign thing and proud” (20)? In Marvell’s prose work An Account of the Growth of Popery, and Arbitrary Government in England, Marvell attacks popery and the arbitrary government in the court and uses the term “the Soveraign” to describe the Pope and the King, who behave “as God and not as man”.

(28) Yang 22. (7).. In other words, “the Soveraign” for Marvell probably denotes not merely a. tyrant who “force[s] nature out of its own course” and commits the “sin of pride” (Friedman 126) but also a person who thinks he could play God. In the poem, seeing the gardener as “that sov’raign thing and proud” (Marvell 20), the Mower is very likely to suggest that the gardener is a person who is so proud as to think he could play God and covets the chance to rule God’s creations himself like Satan.. In brief,. the Mower implies that the gardener is not only a seducer who entices God’s creations away from God but also a proud person who rules God’s creations as if he were God. Being imprisoned in the enclosed gardens where the air is dead and standing. 治政大could play God, flowers and and being ruled by the proud gardener who thinks he 立 plants in the gardens are inevitably “stupifi’d” (Marvell 8) in the Mower’s view.. ‧ 國. 學. According to Oxford English Dictionary, to “stupefy” something means to deprive That is, the Mower suggests that flowers and plants in the Moreover, to “stupefy” someone. sit. y. Nat. gardens are imprisoned and deprived of mobility.. ‧. something of mobility.. io. feel properly.. er. means to stun someone with amazement or fear, making someone unable to think or That is, the Mower suggests that the gardener stuns flowers and plants. al. n. v i n C henclosed gardens;Uflowers and plants in the enclosed with the amazing or frightening engchi gardens become unable to think properly and distinguish the gardener from their Creator—God.. Unable to distinguish the gardener from God, flowers and plants in. the gardens are easily led astray by the gardener and forget to follow the order of nature created by God. Not following the order of nature created by God, flowers and plants would certainly become problematic.. In the poem, the Mower condemns. the gardener for producing three kinds of problematic flowers in the gardens: “double” (9) pinks, roses tainted with “strange perfumes” (11), and white tulips streaked with red, “interlin[ing] its cheek” (14).. By picturing those flowers wearing.

(29) Yang 23. “strange perfumes” (11) and being “taught to paint” (12), the Mower seems to associate garden flowers with “harlots” (Craze 134; Friedman 125), who put on cosmetics in an attempt to “improve natural beauty” (Friedman 125). With a closer examination of the passage, we find that the Mower does not hold that putting on cosmetics improves one’s inborn beauty.. Instead, the Mower holds that wearing. makeup taints one’s appearance as well as mind: “The Pink grew then as double as his Mind; / The nutriment did change the kind” (Marvell 9-10).. Here, the word. “double” can be viewed as a pun, which implies a root with double flowers as well as a man with “double Heart”—the phrase Marvell uses to express that the heart is. 治政大 deceitful in “A Dialogue between the Soul and Body”: 立. 學. Of Nerves, and Arteries, and Veins. Tortur’d, besides each other part, (7-10). Through the imagery of two. io. er. Literally, “double Heart” refers to its two ventricles.. sit. y. Nat. In a vain Head, and double Heart.. ‧. ‧ 國. A Soul hung up, as ’twere, in Chains. ventricles beating as one, the speaker implies the duplicity of the heart; that is, the. al. n. v i n Ch heart may be deceitful and untrustworthy; may deceive i U others and even itself. e n g cit h. Similarly, by saying “The Pink grew then as double as his Mind” (“The Mower. Against Gardens” 9), the Mower may be showing not only that the gardener grows double flowers with one root but also that the double flowers mirror the gardener’s deceitful mind. The Mower is not the only one that finds double flowers problematic.. With the rising interest in horticultural experiments in the seventeenth. century, especially the making of double flowers and the changing of the color and scent of flowers, the seventeenth-century people became more and more concerned with such new gardening techniques.. To further understand what the Mower.

(30) Yang 24. opposes when he criticizes such garden flowers, we need to study how such garden flowers are perceived in the seventeenth-century garden books. In Paradisi in Sole Paradisus Terrestris, John Parkinson holds that it is nature, or “the God of nature” (23), that makes double flowers.. Parkinson claims that. double flowers “did first grow wilde, and were so found double, as they doe now grow in Gardens, . . . we onely haue them as nature hath produced them, and so they remaine” (23). In Parkinson’s opinion, those double flowers are double by nature instead of being made double by art; that is to say, all sorts of flowers grow by nature; flowers that are single by nature grow single, and flowers that are double by nature grow double.. 治政大shows that the gardener “can Parkinson further asserts that no proof 立. imitate nature, or rather the God of nature, to doe the like” (23).. In other words,. ‧ 國. 學. Parkinson suggests that the gardener cannot play God’s role in making double flowers.. ‧. Parkinson’s argument that the gardener who makes double flowers shows his. sit. y. Nat. intention to play God helps explain why the Mower opposes making double flowers.. io. er. In the poem, double flowers are criticized for growing “as double as his [the gardener’s] Mind” (Marvell 9). Viewing those flowers as “double” as the gardener’s. al. n. v i n C hthose double flowers mind, the Mower suggests that e n g c h i U are deceitful because they are made by a fake God—the gardener who counterfeits God.. In the Mower’s opinion,. double flowers are made double by the gardener; that is to say, the gardener assumes God’s role as a creator when he makes double flowers in the enclosed gardens. When assuming God’s role in making double flowers, the gardener thinks he could create the flowers that only God can create. However, the Mower deems that the gardener, who is absolutely not God, could only change what God creates: “The Pink grew then as double as his Mind; / The nutriment did change the kind” (9-10). Claiming that the “kind” was changed by the gardener’s nutriment, the Mower reveals.

(31) Yang 25. that the flowers made double by the gardener are not God’s creations anymore.. In. the Mower’s eyes, the flowers that are made double by the gardener are fake double flowers; they resemble the flowers created by God, but actually they are not.. Here,. by criticizing double flowers in the gardens as deceitful as the gardener, the Mower explores whether artists should produce the products that resemble God’s creations. The Mower argues that artists should not produce the products that resemble God’s creations.. In the Mower’s view, the products that resemble God’s creations, such as. double flowers made by the gardener, are counterfeit: they are made to deceive others into regarding them as God’s creations, and the artist as the Creator.. 治政大the Mower reproves the Apart from opposing making double flowers, 立. gardener for changing the scent and color of garden flowers:. ‧ 國. 學. With strange perfumes he did the Roses taint,. (Marvell 11-14). io. er. And learn’d to interline its cheek:. sit. y. Nat. The Tulip, white, did for complexion seek;. ‧. And Flow’rs themselves were taught to paint.. According to the Mower, garden flowers are “taint[ed]” (11) with either strange. al. n. v i n perfumes or alien color as ifC they put on makeup. UObviously, the Mower holds that he ngchi the gardener stains garden flowers when he changes the scent and color of flowers.. Different from the Mower again, Plat and Parkinson doubt whether the gardener can change the scent and color of flowers.. In Plat’s opinion, the change of scent or color. of flowers results from “their own naturall infused qualitie” rather than “the hand of man” (142).. Parkinson agrees with Plat and refutes the theory that the gardener can. change the scent or color of flowers by steeping seeds in wine, watering plants with sweet or colored liquor, or putting sweet things on the top of the roots (24). Parkinson asserts,.

(32) Yang 26. [T]hey are all but meere idle tales & fancies, without all reason or truth, or shadow of reason or truth: For sents and colours are both such qualities as follow the essence of plants, . . . and if any man can forme plants at his will and pleasure, he can doe as much as God himselfe that created them. (24) Parkinson, similar to Plat, claims that the change of scent or color of flowers arises from nature rather than art.. Parkinson even notes that only God has the power to. create flowers and give flowers scent and color “at his will and pleasure” (24). Again, Parkinson’s argument that only God can give flowers scent and color helps. 治政 explain the Mower’s opposition to the change of the大 scent and color of flowers. 立. That. is, in changing the scent and color of flowers, the gardener assumes God’s role again;. ‧ 國. 學. this time, the gardener shows he could give flowers scent and color at his will and. ‧. pleasure as God did.. sit. y. Nat. The gardener’s presumption in changing the color of flowers is further. io. er. clarified in Raphael Holinshed’s Chronicles of England, Scotlande, and Irelande: How art also helpeth nature in the dailie colouring, dubling and inlarging. al. n. v i n Cour the proportion of it is incredible to report: for so curious and h efloures, ngchi U. cunning are our gardeners now in these daies, that they presume to doo in maner what they list with nature, and moderate hir course in things as if they were hir superiours.. (351). Viewing himself as the “superior” of nature, the gardener in Holinshed’s eyes appears to take God’s role because nature is directly and only subordinate to God. Moreover, Holinshed points out that the gardener presumes he could “moderate” the course of nature by coloring flowers. To “moderate” something means to adjust or modify something; in addition, to “moderate” something also means to control, regulate, or.

(33) Yang 27. restrain something (O.E.D.).. In “moderating” the course of nature by coloring. flowers, the gardener reveals that the original color of flowers created by God is either too showy or too plain. Holinshed implies that the gardener is dissatisfied with the original course of nature created by God, so he modifies and controls it. gardener further shows his pride.. Here, the. In addition to rebelling against God by seducing. God’s creations away from God, taking God’s creations as his own possessions, and attempting to create what only God can create, the gardener finds fault with God’s creations.. When finding fault with God’s creations, the gardener shows that he. would be not only the superior of nature but also the superior of God.. Viewing 治政 himself as the superior of God, the gardener intends大 to not only play God but also 立 surpass God by changing the scent and color of a species.. In the poem, considering. ‧ 國. 學. the roses “taint[ed]” with “strange perfumes” (Marvell 11) and the flowers “taught to. Instead, the Mower claims that the gardener perfumes and paints flowers,. sit. y. Nat. of flowers.. ‧. paint” (12), the Mower argues that the gardener does not modify the scent and color. io. color of flowers.. er. to deceive others into regarding the scent and color put on as the original scent and Here, the Mower reveals that the gardener demonstrates stronger. al. n. v i n C h the scent and color arrogance; that is, when changing e n g c h i U of flowers, the gardener is not only so proud as to think he could play God but also so proud as to think he could surpass God. In addition to changing the color and scent of garden flowers, the Mower is outraged by grafting.. In the poem, the Mower reproves the gardener for “deal[ing]. between the Bark and Tree” (Marvell 21) and producing “Forbidden mixtures” (22). In discussing “Forbidden mixtures,” most scholars, such as Beretta,8 Craze,9 and. 8. Beretta, Ilva. The World’s a Garden: Garden Poetry of the English Renaissance. Uppsala: Acta Univ. Ups., 1993. 98. 9 Craze, Michael. The Life and Lyrics of Andrew Marvell. London: Macmillan, 1979. 135..

(34) Yang 28. Legouis,10 cite the passages in Leviticus and Deuteronomy from the Bible to demonstrate that there is a “scriptural objection to mixtures in gardens” (Craze 135), and that the grafted mixtures are the “forbidden mixtures mentioned in the Bible” (Beretta 98).. However, with a closer examination of the Biblical passages quoted by. these scholars, we find that the forbidden mixtures in the Bible are not the grafted mixtures. In Leviticus, God said: “Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee” (19:19).. In Deuteronomy, God said: “Thou. shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast. 治政大 sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled” (22:9). 立. Both of the Biblical passages. show that God forbids man from sowing the field with “mingled” or “divers” seeds;. ‧ 國. 學. that is to say, the “forbidden mixtures” in the Bible are not the grafted mixtures but Hence, the Bible does not seem to be an. ‧. the mingled seeds sown in the field.. sit. y. Nat. appropriate source for explaining the Mower’s opposition to grafting or the grafted. io. er. mixtures. To understand what the grafted mixtures mean to the Mower, we can consult what the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century people thought about grafting and. al. n. v i n find out what the Mower hasCinhmind when he describes e n g c h i U the grafted plants and fruits as “Forbidden mixtures” (Marvell 22).. Among others, Francis Bacon’s Sylva. Sylvarum, or, A Natural History and Ralph Austen’s Observations upon Some Part of Sir Francis Bacon’s Naturall History are worthy of attention, in which Austen argues with Bacon about grafting and the grafted mixture. Francis Bacon in Sylva Sylvarum, or, A Natural History maintains that the gardener cannot “make a new kind” (492) by grafting; instead, the gardener only “make[s] the fruit greater” (487) or “mend[s] the fruit” (492) by grafting.. 10. Legouis, Pierre.. Andrew Marvell: Poet, Puritan, Patriot.. In. Oxford: Clarendon P, 1968.. 43..

(35) Yang 29. Bacon’s opinion, grafting is not creating but improving nature by mending or repairing the substance of nature, so the grafted nature is still part of nature. Disagreeing with Bacon, Ralph Austen in Observations upon Some Part of Sir Francis Bacon’s Naturall History maintains that the gardener grafts fruits by “mix[ing] and compound[ing] fruits” (23) in order to “make one new kind” (22).. In. Austen’s opinion, grafting is creating “one new kind,” and the grafted nature is a mixture, a combination of the scion and the stock.. Austen further points out the. difference between the grafted nature and nature: “although it [is] true that every graft keeps his owne nature, yet so as that it receives some small alteration from the stock” (23).. 治政大 from nature because nature is Austen asserts that the grafted nature is different 立. altered when the scion is grafted onto the stock. Mentioning “mixtures” (Marvell 22). ‧ 國. 學. in the poem, the Mower is very likely to side with Austen and regard grafting as. ‧. creating a mixture, a new kind, or a man-made product distinct from nature.. The Mower claims that the. io. er. attitudes toward the grafted mixture are quite different.. sit. y. Nat. Although both the Mower and Austen see grafting as creating a mixture, their. gardener creates “Forbidden mixtures” (Marvell 22), whereas Austen maintains that. al. n. v i n C heven better than nature the gardener creates something e n g c h i U because what the gardener. does is “to imitate God in this thing, to help, and encourage those that are weake” (Spirituall 4).. Agreeing that grafting is creating a mixture but opposing the grafted. mixture, the Mower suggests that the gardener does not “help” plants and fruits by grafting.. It is possible that the gardener creates “Forbidden mixtures” (22) in the. Mower’s eyes because the Mower holds that the gardener should not reveal his pride by trying to imitate God and think he could play God’s role in helping the weak plants. Viewing some of God’s creations as the weak that are in need of his help and taking action to help them by grafting, the gardener not only finds fault with God’s creations.

(36) Yang 30. but also mixes God’s creations at will merely to show he could surpass God by creating the mixtures that are better than God’s creations. In creating the mixtures by grafting plants, the gardener is actually creating a new species by mixing different species. Considering those grafted mixtures “Forbidden” (22), the Mower maintains that mixing different species to create a new species is not allowed by God.. On the. one hand, the gardener defies God when he mixes God’s creations at will with no regard for God.. On the other hand, the gardener challenges God when he plays. God’s role in creating a species.. The Mower further elucidates this species created. by the gardener:. 治政大it came; No Plant now knew the Stock from which 立 That the uncertain and adult’rate fruit. (Marvell 23-26) . ‧. Might put the Palate in dispute.. 學. ‧ 國. He grafts upon the Wild the Tame:. sit. y. Nat. Here, the “Plant” refers to the grafted mixture, which is personified as an illegitimate. io. er. child, a child who is not born in wedlock and does not know his own ancestry. Through this personification, the Mower reveals that the grafted mixture is like a. al. n. v i n bastard who does not come C from couple. The Mower is not the first h aemarried ngchi U person that calls the grafted mixture a bastard. Winter’s Tale as well.. Shakespeare has done so in The. When Perdita and Polixenes discuss the grafted flowers,. Perdita angrily rejects the “carnations and streak’d gillyvors, / Which some call nature’s bastards” (4.4.82-83) because those flowers were created through grafting. In defending the grafted flowers, Polixenes proposes that “The art itself is nature” (4.4.97) and tells Perdita, “do not call them bastards” (4.4.100).. The ambiguity of. Shakespeare’s argument lies beyond the scope of our investigation; nevertheless, this debate demonstrates that the grafted plants are surely called “nature’s bastards” at.

(37) Yang 31. least in the sixteenth century. According to Perdita in The Winter’s Tale, the grafted plants are called “nature’s bastards” and considered illegitimate because they are created by the gardener’s art: “There is an art which in their [the grafted flowers’] piedness shares / With great creating Nature” (4.4.87-88).. Perdita suggests that the. art that gives the grafted plants their piedness is the art of “creating Nature,” by which the gardener seeks to be as “great” as the one who creates Nature—God.. In other. words, Perdita implies that the grafted plants are “nature’s bastards” because they are not created by the legitimate creator of nature—God—but by the illegitimate creator of nature—the gardener.. Similar to Perdita, the Mower in Marvell’s poem calls the. 治政 grafted mixture “the uncertain and adult’rate fruit” 大 (25). 立. Regarding the grafted. mixture as “the uncertain and adult’rate fruit” (25), the Mower reveals that the grafted. ‧ 國. 學. mixture is the impure fruit as well as the fruit of adultery, the fruit after mixed kinds Creating the fruit after mixed kinds by. ‧. rather than the fruit after its own kind.. sit. y. Nat. grafting, the gardener obviously does not follow the order of nature to bring forth the. io. er. fruit after its own kind. In the poem, the Mower further compares the grafted plants and fruits to “eunuchs” and claims that the gardener “vexes” nature when grafting:. n. al. i n C His green Seraglioh has its Eunuchs too; engchi U. v. Lest any Tyrant him out-doe.. And in the Cherry he does Nature vex, To procreate without a Sex.. (Marvell 27-30). Literally, “eunuchs” refer to castrated men, who were employed to guard the Sultan’s “seraglio”—a walled enclosure for the Sultan’s harems.. By comparing the grafted. plants and fruits to eunuchs, the Mower implies that grafting plants is procreating plants “without a Sex;” that is, the grafted plants and fruits are not propagated from seed.. Criticizing the grafted plants and fruits for not being propagated from seed, the.