The Formal Artistry of Lavengro-Romany Rye

Abstract

With a few exceptions, reviewers in 1851 found little formal unity in George Borrow's Lavengro, but rather thought it a series of slightly interrelated sketches coming to an abrupt, inconclusive end. As they read a work not yet completed, however, their estimate is understandable, for The Romany Rye, comprising about the last third of the entire story, did not appear till 1857. Later critics, even with the complete Lavengro-Romany Rye before them, have paid little or no attention to its form. Their tendency has been to characterize the work, along with Borrow's other books, as generally “episodic” and “picaresque.” Remarks such as these are typical: “[Borrow's] books are planless, as picaresque books are apt to be”; “Borrow … possessed no idea of construction”; and “Lavengro is no more than a collection of incidents and dialogues.” A recent and distinguished literary history describes Borrow's major works as “episodic, inchoate, and inconsequential” and “strange, untidy, racy.” Edd Winfield Parks is unusual among critics in that he recognizes the “creative” and “conscious artist” in Borrow, yet he says: “Here [in Borrow's works] is no structural art, no objectified form; it is not as an artist that Borrow must be judged.”