Definitions of critic and
criticism: Defining criticism Arnold
says that “it is not the greatest of the activity to be carried out. It is not
as great as creativity.” And criticism is not creativity. Arnold starts an
essay saying- “ of all the literature of France and German, as of the intellect
of Europe in general, the main effort, for now, many years, has been a critical
effort; the Endeavour in all branches of knowledge, theology, philosophy, history,
art, science to see the object as in itself it is really is.” And adds “falls
and malicious criticism had better never been made.”
Here Arnold explains the
task of any critic. According to him, ‘a critic must perceive any work as it
is, For him the text should be the whole and he should be the whole and he
should never take help of any other text for its explanation.” He condemns the
false criticism (which is not original and is biased).
He believes that creator
of a text is greater than critic because- “creative activity is the true
function of man.” However, it is critic who draws the true meaning of the
particular work of literature.
Arnold defines the role of
critic as the one view an object as it is, to bring best ideas to the masses,
and to create an atmosphere that fuels the literary genius of the future.
Arnold assigns three
functions to critics: 1. A critic must
learn all the existing knowledge. 2. He must spread
that knowledge. 3.To create
conclusive environment of writing.
He states the role of
criticism is to make it inherently valuable and to rouse men for com-pliancy to
a state of achieving perfection. He believes that criticism is a way to
understand life and the world and can be linked to the satisfaction derived
from creative writing.
Disinterestedness of
critic: Disinterestedness means
critic should not show in certain topics and that topics are-
1.Prejudice against
barbarism. 2. The Aristocrats 3.Blind impulse of
populace (public) 4. Shun the
falsification ideas 5.He must pursue on
the ends of cultural perfection and remain influenced by the coarser appeal of
philistine.
Critic works for the
betterment of culture, he has to work for the great and good culture which will
be conclusive for everyone.
Function of criticism: 1.To create a
current of fresh ideas. 2.Criticism should make good judgement. 3.To bring out the
true meaning of a text.
Arnold believes that
Victorian culture/ period was missing new ideas, fresh and innovative ideas.
Criticism should be made on reality; judgement should not be made of personal
likes and dislikes. Criticism is aimed to bring out the good judgement of the
text. Critic should be learned man so that they can bring out correct meaning
of the text.
False standards of judgement: 1. Personal 2. Historical
A critic should not judge
a text on personal grounds. It should be unbiased. It is wrong to judge work
based on one’s liking it must happen that the worthy text might get wrong judgement due to it. Similarly, if we judge on historical ground there might be
text which was fit during renaissance, in society of that time but the same
work is not fit in 21st century because it might not meet the
requirements.
Power of man and power of
moment: According to Arnold, for a
production of a great literary work, “the power of man” and “the power of
moment” i.e. climate of great ideas must concur. If anyone of them is absent
then a great work of literature will never be produced. To explain this Arnold
took two poets as example Goethe and Byron. Both Goethe and Byron had great
productive power yet the work of Goethe is more productive than that of Byron
because the former had a rich cultural background which the latter lacked.
Shakespeare was not a deep reader. His fame and glory were only because his age
had a climate of great ideas.
He also says that French
revolution, with its writers like Rousseau and Voltaire, was more powerful that
the English revolution of Charles, English revolution is practically less
successful than the French revolution yet it is better than the letter as it “appeals
to an order of ideas which are universal, certain permanent.”
Epoch of concentration and
expansion: French revolution quieted the intellectual sphere and rushed into political sphere, losing its universal
application. French revolution was followed by ‘epoch of concentration’ (period
of single mindedness) and ‘epoch of expansion’ (period of creative ideas). The
works written on the French revolution are though great and well appreciated
yet they are biased as they combine politics with thought.
Arnold criticises the
literature produced during the Victorian age. According to him, there is a
failure of criticism due to the division of society and into small political
and religious groups that makes them incapable of seeing things in their true
states.
He cites the example of
various works which were written to promote the writer’s own political agenda.
e.g. - Edinburgh review
represents views of Whigs Quarterly Review- Tories, The times- rich Englishman.
He also criticises the
‘constructive’ suggestions for living presented by Bishop Colenso and Miss
Cobbe. For him, they have religious influence in their writings which are again
against the spirit of true criticism. He tells that common man lacks creativity.
Duty of criticism: Arnold says that ‘criticism
must maintain its independence from the practical spirit and its aims.’ It must
express dissatisfaction even with well meant efforts of the practical spirit if
in the sphere of the ideal they seem lacking. It must be patient and not hurry on
to the goal because of its practical importance, know how to wait, and know how
to attach itself as well as withdraw from things.
Conclusion: Arnold talks about a
person who regrets the loss of zeal which one existed but is no longer present
in contemporary society due to the influence of politics and religion on ideas.
Thus he gives voice to commoner’s
views to enhance the glory of the past. He advises the critics to adopt
disinterested behaviour towards criticism. They should take into consideration foreign
thought as well. Their judgement should be from their own mind without any
biases and should communicate fresh knowledge to their readers. The criticism is
capable of making progress in Europe taking it towards perfection.
In the end, he depends his
views on criticism and says the he views on criticism and says the he won’t
change his opinion for any person who deviates from the theory of criticism.
No comments:
Post a Comment