Critical Review. W. Simpkin and R. Marshall, 5 series.
(October 1794): 99
William Enfield
Standard Name: Enfield, William
Connections
| Connections Sort descending | Author name | Excerpt |
|---|---|---|
| Literary responses | Sarah Pearson | The Critical Review reported that this book was written upon the same plan with the Adventures of a Guinea, which the writer has ingeniously imitated. |
| Literary responses | Margaret Minifie | The Critical belatedly noted: She is now no longer in partnership, but sets up for herself. Critical Review. W. Simpkin and R. Marshall, 5 series. 50 (1780): 168 |
| 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | Anna Letitia Barbauld | This work was controversial. William Enfield
in the Monthly Review praised it and endorsed its opinions. McCarthy, William. Anna Letitia Barbauld, Voice of the Enlightenment. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2008. 162-3 |
| 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 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 | 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, 2000, 2 vols. 1: 576 |
| 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 | Charlotte Smith | The Critical Review, reviewing this book, called CS
a sister-queen qtd. in Fletcher, Loraine. Charlotte Smith: A Critical Biography. Macmillan, 1998. 141 Garside, Peter et al., editors. The English Novel 1770-1829. Oxford University Press, 2000, 2 vols. 1: 548 |
| Literary responses | Phebe Gibbes | The Critical Review thought it mediocre circulating-library fare (though the closing scenes were better than the rest), while William Enfield
in the Monthly Review praised this now lost work for its easy and agreeable style... |
| Literary responses | Anna Maria Bennett | |
| Literary responses | Charlotte Smith | Again the Analytical reviewer may have been Wollstonecraft
, and if so she was better pleased than before: another novel, written with her usual flow of language and happy discrimination of manners. . .... |
Timeline
No timeline events available.
Texts
No bibliographical results available.