Imitation Leads to or Disrupts the Sublime?

There is a portion in the piece by Longinus that called to mind a reading from earlier this semester. Longinus discusses imitation of writers as a means to sublimity, which reminds me of Gilbert and Gubar’s “The Madwoman in the Attic” in which they discuss the “anxiety of influence” and “anxiety of authorship.” As a refresher, “anxiety of influence” is the fear that a man is not “his own creator and that the works of his predecessors, existing before and beyond him, assume essential priority over his own writings” (Gilbert 450). “Anxiety of authorship” occurs with female authors and is a “radical fear that she cannot write, that because she can never become a ‘precursor’ the act of writing will isolate or destroy her” (Gilbert 451). These are two conflicting arguments and I am trying to work through this dilemma. Longinus sees the use in copying bits from previous successful authors in order to achieve the sublime, but Gilbert and Gubar point out that many authors purposely try to avoid imitation. They want to be original and individual. This earns them more respect. However, Longinus says that studying and copying other authors could help an author to understand aspects of the sublime. “In all this process there is no plagiarism. It resembles rather the reproduction of good character in statues and works of art” (Longinus 355). However, Longinus then mentions that authors consciously compete against other authors. “Plato could not have put such a brilliant finish on his philosophical doctrines or so often risen to poetical subjects and poetical language, if he had not tried, and tried wholeheartedly, to compete for the prize against Homer” (Longinus 355). This conforms to Gilbert and Gubar’s discussion of how author’s must address their predecessors and want to separate themselves from them. Then Longinus continues, “As Hesoid says, ‘this strife is good for men.’ Truly it is a noble contest and prize of honour, and one well worth winning, in which to be defeated by one’s elders is itself no disgrace” (Longinus 355). In this situation, Longinus could console those authors feeling anxiety due to predecessors. Longinus explains that authors can learn valuable lessons from predecessors, including how to achieve the sublime. Anxiety of authorship and of influence are understandable circumstances. It seems that literary criticism would not have as much respect for a piece that was heavily influenced by another work, especially if it was a remarkable piece. It was strange to learn that many of the Disney movies I watched as a kid were based off of stories from other parts of the world, and perhaps they even had original films that they were based off of. Learning that something was inspired by another can be disappointing because then it seems to lack originality and creativity. It seems that if a listener or reader were to have such feelings about a work, it would not be able to achieve the sublime. I think that there is a hint in Longinus’s argument that the sublime needs to contain something new and surprising. It must inspire awe and an intense reaction. Thus, I am afraid that Longinus might not be giving the best suggestion that imitation can lead to the sublime. This might not be so if the reader or listener recognizes the influence and is turned away due to it, which is possible.