Critical Review. W. Simpkin and R. Marshall.
50 (1780): 168
William Enfield
Standard Name: Enfield, William
Connections
| Connections Sort ascending | Author name | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|
| Literary responses | Margaret Minifie | The Critical belatedly noted: She is now no longer in partnership, but sets up for herself. |
| Literary responses | Elizabeth Sophia Tomlins | William Enfield
in the Monthly Review praised the novel only faintly, although he admitted that the story was well told. Garside, Peter et al., editors. The English Novel 1770-1829. Oxford University Press. 1: 576 |
| Literary responses | Mary Charlton | This novel, although it seems not to have been remembered in the course of MC
's later career, received three lengthy reviews in serious periodicals. William Enfield
in the Monthly, quoted above, said he... |
| Literary responses | Eliza Parsons | The Critical Review treated this work with respect while placing it firmly in an inferior category: strictly moral and generally pleasing . . . . We wish our circulating libraries were always so well supplied... |
| Literary responses | Lady Mary Walker | Reviewers were impressed. The Critical praised the author's great knowledge of the world and her soundness of judgement, both natural and acquired: Considered as a female writer, (we beg pardon of the ladies for this... |
| Literary responses | Maria Susanna Cooper | The Critical Review welcomed this novel because it was not the work of a mercenary (throwing light on the continued prejudice against writing as a trade or profession), and said it was well calculated to... |
| Literary responses | Eliza Parsons | William Enfield
wrote in the Monthly Review that this book must stand or fall by its moral merit. He found the first volume better than the second, and the language natural, but never elegant and... |
| Literary responses | Lady Mary Walker | Again, the two leading journals endorsed LMW
's project. Enfield
in the Monthly thought the work well designed to answer its laudable purpose of instruction, and the Critical Review used the book as a peg... |
| Literary responses | Maria Susanna Cooper | The Critical Review announced that MSChas executed her task with taste and judgement. Garside, Peter et al., editors. The English Novel 1770-1829. Oxford University Press. 1: 237 |
| Literary responses | Eliza Parsons | The Critical Review found this one romantic but plausible, with well supported characters, virtuous sentiments, and situations extremely interesting to the tenderest feelings of the heart.William Enfield
in the Monthly agreed with a good... |
| Literary responses | Lady Mary Walker | This time the Critical Review seems not to have recognised the same hand in this narrative, with several letters interspersed as in LMW
's earlier works. While it approved the characters, the knowledge exhibited, and... |
| Literary responses | Eliza Parsons | The Critical Review sounded somewhat divided in its judgement. It commended this work's general good sense and tendency, and found the incidents, in the first volume at any rate, probable, interesting, and affecting, and interspersed... |
| Literary responses | Jane West | The Critical Review cited West's preface approvingly and noted that she had fulfilled the intentions there set out. William Enfield
in the Monthly Review professed himself delighted to see fictional talent successfully employed to efface... |
| Literary responses | Joanna Baillie | Very few copies sold. Baillie, Joanna. “Introduction”. The Selected Poems of Joanna Baillie, 1762-1851, edited by Jennifer Breen, Manchester University Press, pp. 1-25. 3 |
| Literary responses | Eliza Fenwick | Secresy had six reviews in 1795; EF
wrote much later that they blamed the principles but commended the style & Imagination. Paul, Lissa. Eliza Fenwick, Early Modern Feminist. University of Delaware Press. 71 |
Timeline
No timeline events available.
Texts
No bibliographical results available.