Arnold is said to be the first modern critic. He is the founder of sociological literary criticism and criticism as we know it today. He was the first to warrant a critical theory that could be beneficial to both authors and society. For Arnold, there was no clear distinction between “culture and critical values [which] seem to be synonymous…” (Lakshmi). Arnold highlighted this point in Culture and Anarchy by using Greek stratifications of social class to demonstrate a comparison between ancient civilization and the modernity of Victorian England. “Sweetness and Light” is an extended allegory of the classification of Greek society.
The text is modeled according to Plato’s Socrates, with the narrator teaching difficult concepts to the reader, albeit not via dialogue. The narrator represents a “sagacious mentor [who] serves as a thematic link between each of the chapters, underscoring the importance of self-knowledge in order to fully engage the concept of pursuing human perfection,” (Anon.). The Socrates-like narrator points out the classifications and divisions of each group’s role and participation in culture. The classifications of the types of people in Victorian England are represented by the Barbarians, Philistines, and Populace.
Barbarians, in Greek society, were everyone who was not Greek. There were two forms of barbarians; they were the uncivilized and the noble savage. Arnold likens the Barbarians to “the aristocratic segment of society who are so involved with their archaic traditions and gluttony that they have lost touch with the rest of society for which they were once responsible” (Anon). Arnold felt that the conservatism of the aristocracy made them sheltered and primitive, unaware of the progression of Victorian England. Given the primary definition of a Greek barbarian, Arnold most likely doesn’t view the aristocracy as truly English. The Barbarians are not the only group who is isolated from Victorian English culture.
The Philistines were a race of people mentioned in the Old Testament as well as in ancient Greek texts. They were part of a great migration, destroying civilizations who were known in Cyprus, Crete, and other Greek isles. According to Dr. J Bosland, “The Philistines are viewed as participants in the great migration of the period round 1200 B.C., which caused the fall of so many empires,” (Bosland), but they were also the catalyst for a new culture. Their “pottery, architecture, military power, and certain similarities with Homer's Greek heroes” (Bosland) are most likely the basis for Arnold’s labeling of the middle class.
He addresses “the selfish and materialistic middle class who have been gulled into a torpid state of puritanical self-centeredness by nonconforming religious sects” (Anon). Arnold feels this class is tricked into ignoring the true purpose of culture. These might be the disparagers to whom he refers at the beginning of the of the text. This class may be the reason he makes his argument for the expansion of the English meaning of curiosity. This group tries to buy into the power and conservatism of the aristocracy thus further repressing the lower-class.
The Populace, to Arnold, is the only redeemable class. The Populace represents “the disenfranchised, poverty-stricken lower class who have been let down by the negligent Barbarians and greedy Philistines. For Arnold, the Populace represents the most malleable, and the most deserving, social class to be elevated out of anarchy through the pursuit of culture” (Anon). According to Arnold, these people are really only worthy of redemption because of their lack of involvement and inability to monetarily succumb to the anarchy perpetuated by the barbarians and philistines.
Arnold attempts to outline the pursuits of culture and anarchy. Arnold defines culture as the collaboration of both pursuing the passion for doing good -finding the will of god- and scientific passion, which is in pursuit of knowledge. Culture is a collective activity in which everyone must participate in order to gain knowledge and understanding. Culture, in order to work as a collective, requires all individuals to “forsake egocentricity, prejudice, and narrow-mindedness and to embrace an equally balanced development of all human talents in the pursuit of flawlessness,” (Anon.). To have an effective, useful culture is to fulfill the purpose of mankind, and it cannot be done by focusing on individuality. (Arnold 827-829).
In contrast, anarchy has the individual as the nucleus. Anarchy is described as “the absence of a guiding principle in one's life which prevents one from striving to attain perfection. This lack of purpose manifests itself in such social and religious defects as laissez faire commercialism and puritanical hypocrisy,” (Anon.). By focusing on other things as ends in themselves, one has no need to strive for something better; there is no need no search outside one’s own paradigm, and this narrow-minded focus on the self ignores the community as a whole. Focusing on the self “can only lead to a future of increased anarchy as the rapidly evolving modern democracy secures the enfranchisement of the middle and lower classes without instilling in them the need for culture,” (Anon.).
Arnold states culture is the study of perfection. This idea is very similar to Plato’s conviction that our existence is to remember the world of the Forms through serious study via one’s being and society. Arnold felt strongly that only by reflecting on the ideals of Plato could resolve occur for the moral and ethical conflicts that arose from the clashing realms of society, politics, and religion. He explains that by focusing on a “perfection which consists in becoming something rather than having something, in an inward condition of the mind and spirit, not in an outward set of circumstances,” (Arnold 829), something like focusing on the pursuit and understanding of the Good, civilization has a use and the purpose of man will be fulfilled.
Works Cited
Anon. Culture and Anarchy: An Essay in Political and Social Criticism Matthew Arnold.
Enotes. 2010. Web. 02 June 2010.
http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/culture-anarchy-an-essay-political-social
Arnold, Matthew. “Culture and Anarchy: From Chapter 1. Sweetness and Light.” The Norton
Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Ed. Leitch, Vincent B. Norton: New York (2001)
Print. 825-832.
Bosland, J. The Philistines. 1999. Web. 04 June 2010. http://www.bga.nl/en/articles/filist1.html
Lakshmi, S. N. Radhika. Matthew Arnold as a Literary Critic. Web. 02 June 2010.
http://www.literature-study-online.com/essays/arnold.html
No comments:
Post a Comment