Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Frances Yates
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==Reputation== Historian of religion Henrik Bogdan asserted that Yates's work was "instrumental in changing the attitude of historians of science and philosophy toward esotericism."{{sfn|Bogdan|2007|p=8}} Although some of her conclusions would later be challenged by other scholars,<ref>For an example, see {{harvnb|Jardine|Brotton|2005| p=240}}: "Our analysis of the ''Valois Tapestries'' leads us to turn Yates's argument on its head: the tapestries actually are deeply antithetical to the Protestant, and specifically [[Huguenot]], cause."</ref> Yates remains one of the major scholars of hermeticism in Renaissance Europe;<ref>E.g. described as such in {{harvnb|Leggio|2007}} and {{harvnb|Marlowe Society|n.d.}}</ref> and her book ''The Art of Memory'' (1966) has been named one of the most significant non-fiction books of the 20th century. Paolo Rossi identified two key points in it: the past importance and later loss of mnemotechnics as a human power, where he argues that she overstated the occult or "[[Jungian]]" aspect; and the subsequent marginalization of the area, which he considers valid and of wider applicability.{{sfn|Rossi|2000|pp=xxii–xxiii}} ''Frances Yates and the Hermetic Tradition'' by Marjorie G. Jones, the first biography of Yates, was published in 2008 by Ibis Press. ===Scholarly critiques=== It is now said that Yates founded a [[paradigm]], or gave out a [[grand narrative]]. In those terms, a so-called '''Yates paradigm''' (sometimes '''Yates Thesis'''), her work is contested freely. This is a view that [[Wouter Hanegraaff]] has put forth, starting with Yates as the scholar first to treat Renaissance hermeticism, integrated with [[Rosicrucianism]], as a coherent aspect of European culture. He has stated it as an attractive paradox, the autonomous esotericism helping give birth to the scientific mentality that will be dismissive of its parent. But, it is now said, there was no unitary esoteric tradition and that view is only tenable on a selective reading of the evidence. The arguments surrounding this questioning of Yates include [[Lodovico Lazzarelli]] and the rival views of [[Antoine Faivre]], who has proposed a clearer definition of esotericism.{{sfn|Bogdan|2007|pp=9–10}} Hanegraaff argued that the reception of Yates's work was coloured by the ''[[Zeitgeist]]''. An extra assumption, that the [[magus]] had a point of view that could be recovered, was fashionably added. Further he argues that [[essentialist]] rather than [[nominalist]] use of the very term "esotericism" has vitiated succeeding work. The "Yates paradigm", in his view, dominated in the 1970s but fell by the wayside in the 1980s for scholars.{{sfn|Hanegraaff|2004|pp=507–08}} Hints on the "Yates thesis" were left as sketches in works of Yates herself ([[Francis Bacon]] in relation to hermeticism, and the [[Hartlib circle]], in particular). These related to paths, and how actual influence on science was effected. [[Brian Vickers (academic)|Brian Vickers]] identifies Rattansi, [[A. G. Debus]] and Peter J. French as on the side of the Yates thesis, with [[M. B. Hesse]], Edward Rosen, Paolo Rossi, and Charles Trinkaus on the other side. He notes that the debate (up to 1984) was not conducted by close reading of texts and evidence; he himself is entirely unconvinced by the thesis.{{sfn|Vickers|1984|pp=5–6}} Yates's scholarship was often criticised for using what she termed her "powerful historical imagination"; she put forward scenarios that could not be proved using documentary evidence, something that many other historians saw as a flaw in her methodology.{{sfn|Jones|2008|p=68}} But she "dealt with traditions whose remoteness she could not eliminate, even while she made them more understandable."{{sfn|Krois|2002}} ===Influence on popular culture=== [[John Crowley (author)|John Crowley]] drew extensively on Yates for the occult motifs in ''[[Little, Big]]'' (1981) and the ''[[Ægypt]]'' series (1987–2007) in which she briefly appears as a character.<ref>{{Cite web |title=John Crowley on the Ægypt Cycle – The Secret History of Western Esotericism Podcast (SHWEP) |url=https://shwep.net/2020/07/30/john-crowley-on-the-aegypt-cycle/ |access-date=2024-11-19 |language=en-GB}}</ref> [[Philip Pullman]] was influenced by Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition for the design of the alethiometer in the [[His Dark Materials]] series (1995–2000).<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.readersdigest.co.uk/culture/books/meet-the-author/philip-pullman-books-that-changed-my-life | title=Philip Pullman: Books that changed my life - Reader's Digest }}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)