ABSTRACT
Apparently no systematic effort has been made to ascertain whether a relation exists between the aesthetic theory of Burke’s The Sublime and Beautiful (1757) and his political ideas.1 This omission would be readily understandable if the book were an in significant and immature effort, or if the author at some later time had drastically altered his views, or if he had lost his interest in the arts. But all the evidence seems to be to the contrary. The work has been appraised as “among the most important documents of its century” to which men of great stature were indebted, including Johnson, Blake, Wordsworth, Hardy, Diderot, Lessing, and Kant.2 Although Burke did write a first draft while he was an under graduate in Trinity College, Dublin, he continued to work upon it six or seven more years.3 Except for the extensive revisions for the second edition of 1759, revisions which did not modify the basic thesis, Burke evidently made no textual changes in the numerous subsequent editions.4 Nothing that Burke said or wrote indicates that he had second thoughts about the substance of the argument.5 And to the end of his days he maintained his vital interest in the arts. He was an intimate of Oliver Goldsmith, David Garrick, and Sir Joshua Reynolds, the friend and patron of the two painters, George Barret and James Barry,6 and a member of the Royal Academy. Nor can the failure to consider the question of the con nection between the aesthetics and the politics be due to the un familiarity of students of Burke’s political thought with The Sublime and Beautiful. For if they do not discuss the relevance of the aesthetics for the political ideas, they are not infrequently con cerned with the hedonistic psychology of The Sublime and Beauti-
fuV Surprising it is that the very fact of Burke’s own great literary artistry has not suggested to commentators some kind of connection between his aesthetic and political doctrines. Still more surprising is the omission since Burke does draw the connection fairly explic itly in the book’s longest section, entitled “Power,” which appeared in the second edition, and in three sections on beauty and the virtues.8
