| Abstrakt: |
Thomas Moore's Lalla Rookh: An Oriental Romance (1817) was successful on publication, but its critical reception has been almost entirely negative. Readers from William Hazlitt and W.B. Yeats to Terence Brown have portrayed Lalla Rookh as a trifling and hackneyed piece of Orientalism. Consequently, critics have argued that, given the parallels between Lalla Rookh's characters and Irish historical figures, Moore exploited his heritage for the sake of light entertainment. This essay contends that Moore deploys two Orientalist voices in Lalla Rookh; one that rehearses the conventions of the genre, and a second that undermines these clichés. With this sophisticated Orientalism, Moore communicates deep ambivalence concerning Irish politics in his lifetime. Lalla Rookh lacks a clear political message only because Moore cannot identify the means to achieve 'tolerance' and 'liberty'. It is difficult to discern clear analogues for Anglo-Irish politics in the work because it encodes Moore's anxiety over the Irish question rather than seeking to portray individual historical figures. The poem is contemptuous of the rationale behind imperialism, but troubled by the efficacy of political martyrdom exemplified by Robert Emmet and Wolfe Tone. Far from a work in which Moore draws on Irish history casually to inform light Orientalism, Lalla Rookh articulates grave doubts about the possibility that revolutionary violence can yield progress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
