Arnold’s Cannons of Criticism

• Arnold defined criticism as “a disinterested endeavored to learn and propagate the best that is known and thought in the world.”The first principle of criticism ,according to Mathew Arnold ,is disinterestedness,which is to be attained by,keeping aloof from what is called the practical view of things”.The practical view so called ,id the view distorted by irrelevant considerations-political,social or religious.

• Arnold lamented: “Our organs of criticism are organs of men and parties having practical ends to serve , and with them those practical ends are the first thing and the play of the mind the second;so much play of mind as is compatible with the prosecution of those practical ends is all that is ended”

• The critic must therefore ,be free from all prejudices.He should not favor this or that opinion,this or that form of art.He must be the same to all men.To be self-centered or self-willed is absolutely incompatible with useful criticism.

• The true ideal of criticism is “disinterested objectivity”.The critic should have no strong bent in religion ,no special view in politics,no art of his own ,and no philosophy of his own,and no philosophic system to propagate,for all these things hinder ‘a free disinterested play of mind’ which alone can enable the critic to ‘dwell upon that is excellent in itself,and the absolute beauty and fitness of things.’To put it in the words of Scott James a critic”must be tolerant,dispassionate,balanced,curious,aware that “everything is possible and nothing certain”.

• Arnold recommends the study of the ancient Greek masters because they possess this quality of “disinterested objectivity” in an absolute degree.

• Disinterestedness ,then is the first and the greatest rule of criticism .With this goes knowledge.A critic cannot be disinterested unless he is well-equipped with knowledge-knowledge of the best that has been thought and said in the world- the best not from the stand point of a personal estimate or from that of a historical estimate,but from the standpoint of genuine intrinsic excellence ,unprejudiced by any consideration of personal likes and dislikes or by those of place and time.

• Arnold firmly adheres to the cosmopolitan view of criticism .He wants to lift criticism above the barriers of time and place.The critic must know the best that has been thought and said.Both in ancient and in modern times ,not only in his own language,but in the languages from which his native literature is derived,and in those which are producing literature concurrently.It is thus ,by the comparative method ,by seeing how others do what we also are impelled to attempt,that provinciality is avoided.

• Criticism must be a antidote to parochialism.He severely criticizes the provincial spirit in his essay on the Literary Influence of Academics.The provincial spirit ,he says ,exaggerates the value of its ideas for want of a high standard at hand by which to try them.Or rather .for want of such a standard,it gives no idea too much prominence at the expense of others;it orders its ideas amiss;it is hurried away by fancies;it likes and dislikes too passionately,too exclusively.

• Its admiration weeps hysterical tears,and its disapprobation foams at the mouth.So we get the eruptive and the aggressive manner in literature; the former prevails most in our criticism ,the latter in our newspaper.For ,not having the lucidity of a large and centrally placed intelligence ,the provincial spirit has not its graciousness ;it does not persuade ,it makes war ;it has no urbanity ,the tone of the city,of the center,the tone which always aims at a spiritual and intellectual effect,and not excluding the use of banter,never disjoins banter itself from politeness,from felicity

• Arnold criticizes the deficiency of the knowledge of the best (that has been thought and said in the world)in England.”We know ,as a nation laudable energy and persistence in walking according to the best light that we have ,but are not quite careful enough,perhaps, to see that our light to be not darkness”

• That is why Arnold insists on a vast knowledge – a knowledge which may show the critic the true light of reason .But Arnold was at the same time ,fully alive to the dangers of a vast load of learning.He does not recommend the learning of everything, he confirms himself only to the best .The critic has to use his own discretion.He has to select and assimilate the best.

• Sometimes a critic is tempted to magnify the achievements of a very minor poet simply because the poet happens to occupy an important position from the historical estimate.That is not just, not wise.

• Arnold sounds a warning against the historical estimate.A poet or a poem may count to us historically.The course of development of a nation’s language ,thought and poetry, is profoundly interesting ;and by regarding a poet’s work as a stage in this development we may easily bring ourselves to make it off more importance as poetry than in itself it really is ,we may come to use a language of quite exaggerated praise in criticizing it ;in short,to overrate it.

• The greatest bane of the critic ,according to Arnold,was however ,the all too common tendency to allow private preferences to color or modify dispassionate common sense view of things.He,therefore ,contends,against the personal element as well in critical judgment.

• A poet or poem may count to us on grounds persona to ourselves.Our personal affinities,likings,and circumstances have great power to sway our estimates of this or that poet’s work, and to make us attach more importance to it as poetry than in itself it really possesses because to us it is or has been ,of high importance .Here ,also we overrate the object of our interest,and apply to it a language of praise which is quite exaggerated.

• The greatest function of criticism ,then is to “see the object as in itself it really is.It should never relinquish its vision of what might be,or can be;it should simply satisfy itself with what is criticism must maintain its independence of the practical spirit and its aims.Even with well meant efforts of the practical spirit it must express dissatisfaction if in the sphere of the ideal they seem impoverishing and limiting.It must not hurry on the goal because of its practical importance .It must be patient, and know how to wait; and flexible,and know how to attach itself to things and to withdraw from them

• Criticism should perform , according to Mathew Arnold ,even more difficult things than this .It must be apt to study and praise elements that for the fullness of spiritual perfection are wanted .even though they belong to a power which in the practical sphere may be maleficent.It must be apt to discern the spiritual short comings or illusions of powers that in the practical sphere may be beneficent

• Another function of criticism ,according to Arnold “to create a current of true and fresh ideas.Its business is to do this with inflexible honesty, with due ability but its business is ti do no more , and leave alone all questions of practical consequences and applications ,questions which never fail to have due prominence given to them

• Scott James has rightly remarked the Arnold’s criticism,was on the way to become a branch of social reform.And perhaps it was for this reason that his doctrines readily took root in England,appealing to the practical English mind which he had himself so sternly criticized.It came to pass that the apostle of disinterestedness appealed to the apostles of betterment.Thus Arnold gave anew task to criticism to prepare a social atmosphere which will stimulate the artist – to make the best that has been written familiar to the public

• Hence the chief critical cannons of Arnold declares that it is the duty of a critic to develop the attitude of objective detachment or disinterestedness.Then he should learn and understand the best that is known in the world.He must see things as they really are.

• Thus equipped , with knowledge and the power of detached objectivity the critics second task is to hand on his ideas to others,convert the world to make the best ideas prevail.His work in this respect is that of a missionary .But ,thirdly, he is also preparing an atmosphere favorable for the creative genius of the future –promoting a current of ideas .The highest degree animating and nourishing to the creative powers.

• A critic ,according to Mathew Arnold, is a man of culture concerned with all aspects scientific and aesthetic.His function as a literary critic is therefore ,to promote that part of culture which depends upon knowledge of letters.Culture, for Arnold is also a moral aspect .It is a study of perfection which moves by force , not only of the passion for knowledge,but also of a moral and social passion for doing good.