“THE PURSUIT OF PERFECTION IS THE PURSUIT OF SWEETNESS AND LIGHT”
A Study on Matthew Arnold as a Critic
“And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by nights”.
-Mathew Arnold-
-Dover Beach-
Matthew Arnold (182-1888) was a major spokesperson of the Victorian era and his emphasis was on setting public standards in morality, religion and arts. He was a writer of many activities but he chiefly recognized as a poet and critic. Arnold’s father, Thomas Arnold, was a famous headmaster of Rugby, a boarding school for boys. Arnold was educated at Winchester, Rugby and at Balliol College, Oxford. In 1851 he was appointed as inspector of schools. This made him acquainted with the pulse of the evolving society. Since Arnold was an advocate of civility, he finds the institution of education as an important entity as far as a morally enriched society is concerned. When we discuss Matthew Arnold and his critical approaches it is indispensable to take into consideration the time in which he lived and the social background. The sixty years (1830-90) commonly included under the Victorian age is known for the drastic social changes and scientific developments. The era is marked for its extreme deference for conventions. The earlier stages of the lessening surge of the French Revolution were still felt, but by the middle of the century they had almost completely died down, and other hopes and ideals, largely pacific, were gradually taking their place. The age also witnesses new activities. Commercial enterprises got a revolutionary turn, there was a great increase in market and a new era of prosperity was introduced due to this. On the other side of the scene industrialization brought so many inequalities in the society. Emergence of the squalid slums and exploitation of cheap labour (often of children) became a common characteristic feature of the times. There was quite a revolution in scientific thought following upon Darwin and his school and an immense outburst of social, religious and political tensions. In spite of this popular education became a practical thing. This in turn produced a new hunger for the intellectual food and resulted in a great increase in the production of printing press and of other durable species of literature. The literature was inevitably affected by the new ideas in science, religion and politics. On the Origin of Species (1859) of Darwin shook the foundations of scientific thought and disturbed the authority of religion, Christianity in particular.
“POETRY IS NOTHING BUT THE CRITICISM OF LIFE”.
Matthew Arnold also echoes the turbulent social changes and religious tensions in all his literary and critical writings. As a poet his works were not bulky. The strayed Raveller and other poems (1849) and Empedocles on Etna are the first works of Arnold. Then followed Poems (1853) with its famous critical preface and New Poems (1867). They were marked as expression of self doubt, intellectual unease and emotional hesitancy. None of these volumes is of large size, though much of the content is of high quality. Arnold was very much fond of classical themes as far as the subjects of his poems are concerned. His prose works are large in volumes and wide in range. His critical essays are very sharp and he uses critical analysis as a tool to give guidelines to the Victorian society. For this purpose Arnold sometimes goes to the extent of standardizing certain notions like culture and education. As in his poetry he shoes himself to be the apostle of sanity and culture. In such a way his critical works are didactic to a certain extent. Arnold advocates a cosmopolitan view of European literature and he attacks provincialism and lack of real knowledge. He wrote widely on theology and politics along with the cultural and social changes of Victorian society. Arnold’s major works are Culture and Anarchy (1869), Essay on Criticism (1865 and 1889), Functions of Criticism at the Present Time and Literature and Dogma. According to Arnold, Literature and Dogma is the most important of all his prose works, the one most capable of being useful”. Since Arnold was an inspector of school he has got the chance to know how the minds of future generation work. He finds schools as the centre of “civilizing the next generation of the lower classes, who as the things are going, will have most of political power of the country in their hands”. This job somehow makes him identify himself as “liberal of the future.”
Though England had all the material prosperities of industrialization, on moral front there was much left to be desired. In terms of culture aristocrats were mere barbarians, the middle-class mere philistines and as for the populace (working class) the term is an alien one. For Arnold the English nation was provincial and it lacks the basic foundations of culture. When we use the term “culture” in the modern times we should take into consideration the time in which Arnold used the word. Today the whole definition of the idea of culture is changed and the using of the idea of culture becomes a political agenda. Arnold focuses on the framing of culture through art for building a progressive society. But his view of having a standardization of culture seems to be little problematic to the modern reader.
Arnold points out that, critic should strive to “see the object as in itself it really is”. He regarded reading and writing of literature as urgent activities in the world. The most important change that puts forward by Arnold is that he provided literary criticism with an important social function and paved the way for its “institutionalization” in the academics. As a critic and man of letters Arnold focuses on the question “how to live” rather than what is life. There is a celebrated definition of Arnold on criticism i.e., “disinterested endeavour to learn and propagate the best that is known and thought in the world.” According to Arnold criticism meant an engagement with history, education, politics, religion, philosophy, and other subjects. He finds criticism in relation to other fields of studies and not as an isolated entity. Since literature is vitally connected with society and culture criticism cannot stand apart. Arnold clearly echoes the Victorian social tensions in all his works and views. At the same time such a way should not be misunderstood as cynical. Arnold felt that it is his duty to stabilize the moral foundation of Victorian society. For him people must be brought into an awareness of the best in written and thought.
“SEE THE OBJECT AS IN ITSELF IT REALLY IS”.
Even though Arnold proposes for a moral upgrading through a cultural awareness, he did not find culture as designating whole away from life of the people and period. That is why he views that the critic should strive to “see the object as in itself it really is”. He says that foundation and spiritual renewal can be “achieved through the appreciative reading of the best literature.” He also argued that criticism is a way to “perfection” (a term Arnold uses both in Essay on Criticism and Culture and Anarchy).
As a true democrat, powered by the spirit of nationalism, Arnold preached his social philosophy of culture (sweetness and light) as the only cure for the spreading ill that afflicted national life. Arnold’s concept of culture lays stress on the harmonious development of human nature. Culture is not just personal equipment, but a social force leading to social progress. Culture is described by Arnold in the first essay ‘Sweetness and Light’ in Culture and Anarchy as “having its origin in the love for perfection. It moves by the force, not merely or primarily of the scientific passion for pure knowledge, but also of the moral and social passion for doing good (45)”. Arnold further observes that; “culture which believes in making reason and the will of god prevail, believes in perfection. To reach this ideal (spirit of human race) culture is an indispensable aid, and that is the value of culture. Not a having and a resting but a growing and a becoming are the character of perfection as culture conceives it (48)”. And a pursuit of perfection, for Arnold is the pursuit of what Swift calls in his The Battle of Books ‘the two noble things, sweetness and light.’
“Criticism Gestures toward Who One Is”.
Unlike the critics of the later times, who find culture as an extension of anthropology, Arnold reads the idea of culture very close to the lives of common men. He wants to have a general moral base for the society. But what is this moral base he wishes to have is nothing but a Victorian one. Gramshi and Said find culture as an instrument for social control and conquest. Arnold disagrees with this view. For Arnold culture is ‘selective and harmonious’. Culture leads to a new world of experience and curiosity. This flux in the society is brought by culture. Derrida uses the term ‘free play of mind’ for denoting this flux.
T S Eliot points out that Arnold’s notable essay Study of Poetry is a classic work in English criticism. Arnold opens the essay like this,
“The future of poetry is immense. There is not a creed which is not shaken, not an accredited dogma which is not shown to be questionable, not a received tradition which does not threaten to dissolve. Poetry attaches its emotion to the idea. The idea is the fact. The strongest part of our religion today is its unconscious poetry.”
What Arnold was trying to say is, the dogmatic foundation of religion is shaken. Poetry can provide self assurance and nourishment to mankind. Tendencies of Victorian society like the emphasis on science, money making and commercial prosperity had let some to regard poetry as merely pastime. So Arnold indirectly saying that it is our need to keep best of poetry as our models. The other question is how can we find good poetry for the cause of social progress and moral upgrading?
TOUCHSTONE METHOD
The word Touchstone was introduced to literary criticism by Matthew Arnold in The Study of Poetry (1880) to denote short but distinctive passages, selected from the writings of great poets, which he used to determine the relative value of passages or poems which are compared to them. Arnold proposes this method of evaluation as a corrective for what he calls ‘fallacious’ estimates of poems according to their historical importance in the development of literature or else according to their personal appeal to an individual critic. For Arnold these are the two major fallacies as far as critical reading is concerned. Arnold puts it; “there can be no more useful help for discovering what poetry belongs to the truly excellent ... than to have always in one’s mind lines and expressions of the great masters and to apply them as a touchstone to other poetry”.
The touchstones he proposed are passages from Homer, Dante, Shakespeare, and Milton, ranging in length from one line to four lines. The best known touchstones are of Dante’s and Milton’s. They are Dante’s “In His is our peace”. (Paradiso, iii.85) and the close of Milton’s description in Paradise Lost, “which cost Ceres all that pain/ To seek her through the world”.
The very concept of touchstone paved the way for whole lots of discussions. Arnold claims that “short passages even single lines; will serve our turn quite sufficiently.” Appreciation of art is subjective. In any field of study, especially in literature it is very hard to standardize things. For a modern reader meaning production happens at a very individualistic or personal level. So, we cannot project our personal interests as the general criteria for standardizing poetry. What you find great in poetry or art will not seem to be worthwhile for me. His touchstones have sometimes been likened to the fellow who carried a brick to show what a house is made of. On the other side of the scene Arnold does not want to do the comparison in touchstone method in a mechanical manner. What he proposes is that the emotional appeal of the lines which we are taking for comparison should be considered. When we read some lines we will have certain emotional appeal to that and we would think them as a piece of great poetic quality. We can compare other poems on the basis of this emotional appeal.
“Criticism Gestures toward Who One Is”.
“Criticism Gestures toward Who One Is”.
For Arnold poetry that does not possess truth and high seriousness- that which gives to our spirits what they can rest upon- cannot be ranked as great poetry. He has his notions on moral seriousness in concept of high poetry. That is typical of Victorian moral conceptions. When we read this tendency of Victorian morality reflected in art and criticism through the eyes of a modern reader, we can say that the idea of moral cause in art is still exists. Art should uphold moral righteousness. Today the term culture is manipulated for political and religious cause in such a way that it became a synonym for morality. Unlike the Victorian compromises modern day seems to have a more complicated seen. Our anxieties are also reflected in our literary scenario.
Essay in Criticism, first series, marks the end of the first phase of Arnold’s critical career. The second phase was spent in theological and religious controversies and the second series of the same essay marks the third phase. The two series are divided by a long gap of twenty years.
It was a time when criticism was not considered as a creative discourse or field of study. Arnold wants to show the other side of the page by foregrounding the progressive level criticism functions. Arnold was called as propagandist for criticism. He argues that when other forms of social life do not unify mankind, literary culture and tradition should be strengthened. Arnold rejected the poetry of romantics and Elizabethans. He favoured poems which are ‘particular, precise and firm’ dealing with human actions, which appeals to the primary human affections. Arnold rated the English romantics very low in comparison with their continental counterparts. Though Goethe and Byron possess equally productive resources, Goethe’s poetry was nourished by an intense critical effort providing true material, whereas Byron’s was not. The Romantic Movement in England did not possess the glow of life that Elizabethan society had, nor did it possess the force of learning and culture that German society had. So, for Arnold, the movement was poor and premature. But, we could see the prejudice of Arnold working on it.
Arnold, in his famous work Culture and Anarchy puts forth his arguments regarding culture and the general tendencies of the era. For him religion and literature are two indispensable parts of culture. He reverts to the classical age in his views. His literary criticism is always seen alongside his religious and social criticism. Arnold’s approach to literary criticism is clearly moralistic. In Functions of Criticism at the Present Time, Arnold says , criticism must maintain a position of ‘disinterestedness’, keeping aloof from “the practical view of things”, in order to have a clear thinking and world view. Logic runs counter to self satisfaction. By ‘self satisfaction’ Arnold means the problematic attitude of middle-class reformers. In literary scenario criticism was not considered as a higher form of art. The critical power is of lower rank than the creative truth. A free creative activity for Arnold is the highest function of mankind. This sense of exercising free creative activity produces great work of literature or art. He ponders this idea of criticism as a creative discourse in his essay Functions of Criticism. Functions of Criticism was first delivered as the lecture at Oxford University, on October 29, 1864 and later published in National Review in November 1864. Functions of Criticism at the Present Time was published in his first collection of critical writings in 1865. This publication was very important in Arnold’s career because during that time criticism needs that kind of a support. He was working on Culture and Anarchy and he had turned away from his career as a poet to focus on social and theological writings. The central argument of the essay is an immediate responds to what Arnold felt about the existing attitude of the society. The constructive, creative capacity was much more important than the critical faculty. Arnold’s counter argument was that “criticism prepares the way for creation”. For Arnold, works of Romantic poets after French Revolution and its earlier part of the century are creative but they lack the quality of great works. The explanation he gives is that French Revolution makes everyone obsessed with political and practical.
Arnold clearly echoes the Victorian tensions and he can be regarded as typical Victorian voice as far as his critical approaches are concerned. He made his own signature in the literary circle both with his criticism and with his literary contribution.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
·
Arnold, Matthew, and Samuel Lipman. Culture and Anarchy. New Haven; Yale UP, 1994. Print.
·
Abrams, M.H. A Glossary of Literary Terms. Arnold; Cengage, 2012. Print.
·
Abrams, M.H. The Norton Anthology of English Literature. 3rd ed. New York; Norton, 1974. Print.
·
Habib, M. A. R. A History of Literary Criticism: From Plato to thePresent. New Delhi: Blackwell, 2006. Print.
·
No comments:
Post a Comment