The Making of the English Novel

The search for the origins of the novel now bears comparison to the quest for the Holy Grail. Part of the problem is to do with the very terms in which such investigations are couched. Almost inevitably, the search for origins assumes the evolutionary connotations of Darwin's classic account, On the Origin ofSpecies by Means ofNatural Selection. Several unfortunate consequences ensue. First, the search for origins insinuates that the novel is in some obscure sense a natural phenomenon, when it quite clearly is not. Second, the evolutionary overtones that accompany the search make it difficult to avoid offering an account of the novel that is not uncompromisingly teleological, the part played by human agency in the novel's development downplayed, if not discounted altogether. Finally, the overall effect is to imply that, whatever it is, "the novel" is not a construct. Although most recent studies of the origins of the English novel illustrate several if not all of these points, they are equally appropriate to Ian Watt's classic, The Rise ofthe Novel (1957). The OED' s first signification of "origin" is, after all, "The act or fact of arising or springing from something: derivation, rise; beginning of existence in reference to its source or cause" (emphasis added). If John J. Richetti was the first to take exception to Watt's "teleological bias,"1 critics have subsequently queued up to identify other weaknesses in Watt's approach. For all its initial persuasiveness, Watt's "triple-rise" thesis is built on a number of flawed or at least unverified—perhaps unverifiable—assumptions.