What do you think?
Rate this book
The Function of Criticism at the Present Time
This scarce antiquarian book is a facsimile reprint of the original. Due to its age, it may contain imperfections such as marks, notations, marginalia and flawed pages. Because we believe this work is culturally important, we have made it available as part of our commitment for protecting, preserving, and promoting the world's literature in affordable, high quality, modern editions that are true to the original work.
48 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 2004
4 people are currently reading
216 people want to read
About the author
Matthew Arnold
1,361 books176 followersPoems, such as "Dover Beach" (1867), of British critic Matthew Arnold express moral and religious doubts alongside his
Culture and Anarchy
, a polemic of 1869 against Victorian materialism.
Matthew Arnold, an English sage writer, worked as an inspector of schools. Thomas Arnold, the famed headmaster of rugby school, fathered him and and Tom Arnold, his brother and literary professor, alongside William Delafield Arnold, novelist and colonial administrator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew...
Matthew Arnold, an English sage writer, worked as an inspector of schools. Thomas Arnold, the famed headmaster of rugby school, fathered him and and Tom Arnold, his brother and literary professor, alongside William Delafield Arnold, novelist and colonial administrator.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
July 26, 2020
"It is of the last importance that English criticism should clearly discern what rule for its course, in order to avail itself of the field now opening to it, and to pro− duce fruit for the future, it ought to take. The rule may be
summed up in one word,−−disinterestedness. And how is criticism to show disinterestedness? By keeping aloof
from practice; by resolutely following the law of its own nature, which is to be a free play of the mind on all subjects which it touches; by steadily refusing to lend itself to any of those ulterior, political, practical con−siderations about ideas which plenty of people will be sure to attach to them."I really enjoyed this essay. At times was difficult to follow but will give you more than a mere crumb of understanding on the function of criticism.
summed up in one word,−−disinterestedness. And how is criticism to show disinterestedness? By keeping aloof
from practice; by resolutely following the law of its own nature, which is to be a free play of the mind on all subjects which it touches; by steadily refusing to lend itself to any of those ulterior, political, practical con−siderations about ideas which plenty of people will be sure to attach to them."I really enjoyed this essay. At times was difficult to follow but will give you more than a mere crumb of understanding on the function of criticism.
September 1, 2015
A decent idea in theory; disinterestedness in the way we view literature, but the theory is so outdated. We know now in the current social climate that absolute non-bias, and complete moral objectivity are not obtainable goals. All we can do is hope to understand where we bring in our cultural, socio-economic, or religious backgrounds and attempt to work them into the understanding of the text. All in all Arnold has a decent idea in this theoretical argument, but lacks the ability to assimilate it into practicality and practice.
January 13, 2019
This is a classic-a 19th-century essay on the role of literary criticism. While Arnold refers to authors and controversies which are unknown to us today he does expound the role of the critic to stand above the practical issues of the day and to look at the literary work on more objective standards. This, to say the least, is not what critics today do. I do think though that this essay is well worth reading closely.
July 13, 2024
Arnold defends the position of criticism and puts forward several significant views in this essay. Critical activity is significant. Critical power may be lower than creative ability, but the finest criticism accomplishes a valued function.
Creation is not possible always; but criticism is. Arnold opines that poetry (or creative writing) is created out of materials and elements --- the raw material of experience or "Ideas." Discovering novel ideas is the business of a philosopher. The grand work of a literary production is one of amalgamation and elucidation, not of analysis and discovery. The man must join forces with the epoch or the moment. Thus great creative epochs in literature are rare, for all ages are not ages of great and inspired ideas. The "Theory of the moment" has its drawbacks. We have no means of discovering what ideas or events are "great", and, after all, it is the poet's interpretation which matters.
The critical power controls the ideas in all branches of knowledge such as religion, philosophy, science, history etc. The critic, consequently, creates an intellectual situation, which can be profitably used by the creative writer. When the critical reviewer brings these ideas within the reach of society, he is able to produce a kind of stir and growth everywhere in the social and intellectual atmosphere. It is out of this stir that creative epochs of literature begin to evolve. To create a flow of ideas is the main function of criticism.
Criticism is the exercise of curiosity. Inquisitiveness in its good sense is undeniably necessary in a critic. It is the business of criticism to know the best that is known and thought in the world. It is not a vulgar desire to pry into others' personal life and private affairs. Its business is to fashion a current of fresh ideas with uncompromising honesty and due ability. But its business is to do no more; it should leave alone questions of practical consequences and applications.
Arnold says that criticism should not have clandestine political or personal motives behind it. Detached appraisal fostered by literary criticism is of high expediency in society. Aiming at an ideal of perfection true criticism must not endorsed encourage such works as fall short of the perfect standard of excellence. An intimate and lively consciousness of the truth of what is said must always be retained.
Judgement is a subsidiary function of criticism for Arnold. It is knowledge which a critic must seek, for judgement has to be supported by fresh knowledge. The most satisfactory part of a critic's work is search for new knowledge which makes criticism "sincere, simple, flexible, ardent, and ever-widening its knowledge."
The significance of Arnold's views is obvious. He, for the first time in the history of English literature, speaks for the importance and value of criticism. He shows consistency in arguing out his theory. Poetry as well as criticism are concerned with ideas and in the pre-occupation with ideas lays the joy both of the creative and critical activities.
Arnold's advocacy of the necessity of the English literary critics trying to benefit by the democratic intelligence of the French Nation and the regimented vigour of the Germans is something worthwhile.
Unquestionably, in an altered environment, if the Aristocracy had not ceased to be an important limit of the social structure or if the common people, the mass of populace, had begun to count, Arnold might have expressed himself differently.
Overall, this Essay is a landmark in the History of Literary Criticism in English and the thoughts expressed here, are relevant for the people of all other languages and literatures.
Creation is not possible always; but criticism is. Arnold opines that poetry (or creative writing) is created out of materials and elements --- the raw material of experience or "Ideas." Discovering novel ideas is the business of a philosopher. The grand work of a literary production is one of amalgamation and elucidation, not of analysis and discovery. The man must join forces with the epoch or the moment. Thus great creative epochs in literature are rare, for all ages are not ages of great and inspired ideas. The "Theory of the moment" has its drawbacks. We have no means of discovering what ideas or events are "great", and, after all, it is the poet's interpretation which matters.
The critical power controls the ideas in all branches of knowledge such as religion, philosophy, science, history etc. The critic, consequently, creates an intellectual situation, which can be profitably used by the creative writer. When the critical reviewer brings these ideas within the reach of society, he is able to produce a kind of stir and growth everywhere in the social and intellectual atmosphere. It is out of this stir that creative epochs of literature begin to evolve. To create a flow of ideas is the main function of criticism.
Criticism is the exercise of curiosity. Inquisitiveness in its good sense is undeniably necessary in a critic. It is the business of criticism to know the best that is known and thought in the world. It is not a vulgar desire to pry into others' personal life and private affairs. Its business is to fashion a current of fresh ideas with uncompromising honesty and due ability. But its business is to do no more; it should leave alone questions of practical consequences and applications.
Arnold says that criticism should not have clandestine political or personal motives behind it. Detached appraisal fostered by literary criticism is of high expediency in society. Aiming at an ideal of perfection true criticism must not endorsed encourage such works as fall short of the perfect standard of excellence. An intimate and lively consciousness of the truth of what is said must always be retained.
Judgement is a subsidiary function of criticism for Arnold. It is knowledge which a critic must seek, for judgement has to be supported by fresh knowledge. The most satisfactory part of a critic's work is search for new knowledge which makes criticism "sincere, simple, flexible, ardent, and ever-widening its knowledge."
The significance of Arnold's views is obvious. He, for the first time in the history of English literature, speaks for the importance and value of criticism. He shows consistency in arguing out his theory. Poetry as well as criticism are concerned with ideas and in the pre-occupation with ideas lays the joy both of the creative and critical activities.
Arnold's advocacy of the necessity of the English literary critics trying to benefit by the democratic intelligence of the French Nation and the regimented vigour of the Germans is something worthwhile.
Unquestionably, in an altered environment, if the Aristocracy had not ceased to be an important limit of the social structure or if the common people, the mass of populace, had begun to count, Arnold might have expressed himself differently.
Overall, this Essay is a landmark in the History of Literary Criticism in English and the thoughts expressed here, are relevant for the people of all other languages and literatures.
Read
September 13, 2024In shaping culture and societal progress, Arnold explores the role of literary criticism by examining in a didactic tone the very purpose of criticism as an intellectual pursuit only achievable through disinterestedness and broad-mindedness.
________Arnold vs Wilde__________
In response to Arnold's essay, Wilde wrote that "it is criticism that makes us cosmopolitan" ("The Critic as Artist", p. 240). In other words, using one's critical eye outwardly will help the critic achieve a more refined and accurate approach towards the search for that ultimate creative power.
Nevertheless, whilst Arnold's focus was on "the true critic" (moral and intellectual responsibility), Wilde's opted for "the aesthetic critic" (art for art's sake).
Although the nature of their paths may differ in methodology, it is agreed that it's all about freeing one's mind by "not doing, but being, and not being merely, but becoming" (idem, p. 220)– either through a pragmatic approach (Arnold's) or a paradoxical stance (Wilde's). They also share an appreciation for the inevitable interdependence between art and criticism as explored in both essays.
In the aims of guiding society, Arnold praised the idea of sharing knowledge with one another to strengthen that pursuit of elevate collective thinking ("it is by communicating fresh knowledge (...) that the critic will generally do most good"). Wilde – whose ideas focused on the critic as an individual and an artist in their own right – criticised that someone who devotes their life to preaching others is unable to ever find that intellectual growth (of which Arnold refers to as cultural refinement and improvement). Nevertheless, "modern journalism" is explored through Gilbert – a fictional character in his essay – and defines it as that which serves as a bridge between the literate and the uneducated (idem, p. 229).
__________
On a last and more personal note, "Arnold was essentially a great teacher (...) [he had] the ability to skillfully convey to us the conviction on which all his arguemnts are based." My soul is curious to read documented evidence of this. Guidance??
________Arnold vs Wilde__________
In response to Arnold's essay, Wilde wrote that "it is criticism that makes us cosmopolitan" ("The Critic as Artist", p. 240). In other words, using one's critical eye outwardly will help the critic achieve a more refined and accurate approach towards the search for that ultimate creative power.
Nevertheless, whilst Arnold's focus was on "the true critic" (moral and intellectual responsibility), Wilde's opted for "the aesthetic critic" (art for art's sake).
Although the nature of their paths may differ in methodology, it is agreed that it's all about freeing one's mind by "not doing, but being, and not being merely, but becoming" (idem, p. 220)– either through a pragmatic approach (Arnold's) or a paradoxical stance (Wilde's). They also share an appreciation for the inevitable interdependence between art and criticism as explored in both essays.
In the aims of guiding society, Arnold praised the idea of sharing knowledge with one another to strengthen that pursuit of elevate collective thinking ("it is by communicating fresh knowledge (...) that the critic will generally do most good"). Wilde – whose ideas focused on the critic as an individual and an artist in their own right – criticised that someone who devotes their life to preaching others is unable to ever find that intellectual growth (of which Arnold refers to as cultural refinement and improvement). Nevertheless, "modern journalism" is explored through Gilbert – a fictional character in his essay – and defines it as that which serves as a bridge between the literate and the uneducated (idem, p. 229).
__________
On a last and more personal note, "Arnold was essentially a great teacher (...) [he had] the ability to skillfully convey to us the conviction on which all his arguemnts are based." My soul is curious to read documented evidence of this. Guidance??
January 25, 2024
É, em geral, uma boa introdução à defesa do papel do crítico. Contudo, sinto que a ênfase ultrapassa a questão da objetividade (deveras pertinente), para chegar a uma noção de imparcialidade que creio ser inalcançável. Demonstra uma verdadeira crença no papel do intelectual afastado do resto da sociedade, baixa cultura, e puramente desinteressado. Tirando estes pontos, dos quais me afasto pessoalmente, é um texto importantíssimo no que toca ao papel do crítico e à sua relação com o autor.
September 21, 2017
Love Arnold's concept of criticism as a 'current of ideas' for its own sake, autonomous from but ideally facilitating the practical and the artistically creative.
January 15, 2019
Another favourite!
October 7, 2019
Arnold is dated for sure but I think his commentary on the importance of criticism is invaluable...
December 12, 2022
“...the man is not enough without the moment”
June 4, 2024
Interesante y bien escrito, pero no amé sus ideas.
March 18, 2017
Nice enough essay. It was on my to-read for ages, I can't think why.
January 18, 2016
arnold exists within a particularly privileged space; a space in which criticism can be separated from its practical, social and political implications and a space in which the elite, those who can choose to step away from mundanities of everyday life, can engage in disinterested and aloof exercises of thought regarding culture.
there's something exhausting about his attempts to moralise intellect and denigrate passion, posit natural or providential change as a replacement for instrumented revolution, present an argument for criticism without constructive action. he desires and is afraid of change, he supports the provision of education to all but suggests that it is fruitless, he looks towards the promised lands before telling us that we are doomed to die in the wilderness. i have no time for him.
there's something exhausting about his attempts to moralise intellect and denigrate passion, posit natural or providential change as a replacement for instrumented revolution, present an argument for criticism without constructive action. he desires and is afraid of change, he supports the provision of education to all but suggests that it is fruitless, he looks towards the promised lands before telling us that we are doomed to die in the wilderness. i have no time for him.
February 29, 2016
useful. But I didn't quite enjoy it I daresay
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews