The Nature of Criticism - Herbert Read

The Nature of Criticism

- Herbert Read

              The Nature of Criticism is an essay in which he talks about the inclusion of scientific elements or emotional appreciation.

      There are many weapons which are used to criticise a work of an art, perhaps the only successful attempt was of Coleridge who tried to give literary criticism a scientific approach by relating it to the technical aspect of the process of philosophy. In traditional criticism, the structure of emotional analysis was important but now it has perished and everybody is trying to look at the rationality of art. 

       Any science covers a large variety of every field and he evaluates literature from that point of view. In order to analyse literature aesthetically, you may have to consider all the applications which are both social and ethical in nature. 

      We have therefore differentiated one kind of literary criticism to another which would result individualistic literary criticism. Taking into consideration psychology, it is only concerned with the process of mental activity. Whereas, literary criticism takes into count the product as per psychology ‘art is only an expression of mentality, and he does not takes into consideration of the literary values, whereas psychoanalysis involves the reduction of the symbols to its proper origin. 

         In art there are many symbols and according to Alfred “the attraction of a work of art arises from its synthesis”. As a matter of fact, general limitations of psychological criticism are evident and moving towards psycho-analysis and its relation to literary criticism. One must be aware of the fact that it is more concerned with literature than criticism. 

       One of the misuses of this kind of criticism is that no literature can come out. It has to deal with the experiences of life. On the basis of his understanding, he put forward three basic questions,

1) What general function does psycho-analysis give to literature?

2) How does psycho-analysis explain the process of poetic creation and inspiration?

3) Does psycho-analysis cause to extend in any way the function of criticism?

       According to Herbert Reade there are three people who can talk about psycho-analysis in the best way, there are Freud, Jung and Adler. 

       In terms of general function of literature Jung is only one of the there who writes about it in detail as we talk about the general principals of contrasting attitudes: 1) introversions 2) Extraversion. There is a strong division of self and therefore there is a lot of object, thoughts and feelings, ideas and things. Any contrasting attitude is an outcome of a specific activity which unites them and separates them. This activity according to Jung is fantasy and this situation is known as an antithesis. Therefore it can be said that a work of art requires fantasy for optimum imagination. 

Part – 2

        Coming to the second aspect, the social validity of any particular symbol is very important. Symbol in literature is more intelligent than the normal unconscious symbol of psychology. Any creative mind is capable of psycho-analysis and in any mind there are two contrary tendencies: 1) being conscious and 2) being imaginative

The central problem of literary criticism at present is the question between romanticism and classicism, the complexity between classicism and romanticism gives birth to the inspiration which is sometimes not at all conscious in nature. Modern psychologists explain inspiration as the activity of ideas which are combined together satisfactory to give the poetic inspiration. But it does not have any format to understand the emotions. Any inspiration is an outcome of effective procedure.

         First there are thoughts which get converted into ideas those are converted into mantle images which later on turn into physical forms which will either be selected or rejected. While convincing the images there are a lot of images going on together in one’s mind from which one either rejects or selects. Any creative work starts when any exact word or image is found. It is almost the same as the dynamic relationship between matter and the spirit and life and soul. From 15^th century onwards inspiration has become an aesthetic term. 

         The classical and the romantic writers were totally different in their attitudes but romantic writing was always subjective in nature which required psycho-analysis to be done. The basic form of psycho-analysis is about dealing with the artistic creation. Freud in his study said that fantasy turns into imagination and that later on into creation which is of option aesthetic value. 

        On this basis Freud explain the individual in three levels: 1. Id, 2. Ego, and 3. Super ego. In Id, there are no values, no good or no evil or no morality it is driven by pleasure. There is no idea of time, logic or anything else that can be termed as rational. The Ego is the main agent of reality. It unifies the basic mental process or processes and organizes it for moral and social aims. The superego is something very different from id and ego and it is absolutely followings the rules and regulations of the society. Superego strives for perfection which is related to the higher things in life therefore any work of art desires its inspiration from the id. Any work therefore is a product of the unconscious mind corresponding to the quality of conscious mind. 

 

       There is something known as the abnormal mentality of the artist for which the influence has to be understood and for that individual psychology is taken into consideration. In order to become an artist or to study an artist one has to do psychoanalysis because you may have to understand the neurotic tendencies of the artist. Psycho-analysis finds in art a system of symbols which represents a hidden relation and by analysing them you can understand testify the genuineness of symbol.

Part – 3 

        It talks about the question that does psycho-analysis modify in any way our conception of critics function. Clear modification is very difficult to achieve but it may give you an understanding of their attitude through the function of psychology. There are some questions which may have no answers, for example the case of Hamlet, who hesitates in seeking the revenge of his father’s murder. 

       According to Coleridge, Hamlet was a very kind hearted person and as a result he was not capable of taking any decision on it, therefore Robertson says that, 

“Hamlet cannot be understood from within.”

  

      According to Jung, a psychological explanation can give the answers, though the understanding of complexes known as Oedipus and Electra. This can in a way give answers to the reasons of his father’s murder; one can apply this theory to literary criticism and discover the strange and unfamiliar areas of human mind. In this way, psychoanalysis tries to resolve the conflict and allow us to come to a common stand point. 

        According to Jung, there are two fundamental types: 1) Extraverted and 2) Introverted. From the both of them, one is visible and other is imaginary. Therefore, psychoanalysis should take up a position and must try to broaden the horizon of criticism. Understanding is the outcome of experience which can be both individual as well as collective, but according to hung the minds builds up turn into some kind of myth or religion through which they find expression in literature. 

       Therefore we can say that psycho-analysis has to look into the myths for actually understanding the poetic imagination and it can only be done by building a hypothesis. The mind of the psycho-analysis has to unite everything in order to criticise any particular work and solve the problem. 

Reference: Literary Criticism A Reading by  B. Das and J. M. Mohanty

The Imagination - I. A. Richards

The Imagination

- I. A. Richards

            

            According to I. A. Richards there are six different and distinct sense of the word ‘Imagination’. Richards has discussed various meanings and concepts of the same word and considered the same concept in the most important.

Six senses of Imagination

             If we take all the parts of imagination separately,

 1. The production of vivid images and that too visuals.

 2. Imagination means use of figurative language and the wholeness of experience along with its variety. 

3. In a narrower sense, it is the sympathetic reproduction of other people’s state of mind, particularly their emotional state. 

4. Inventiveness, that means bringing together elements which are not ordinarily connected, is another sense.

5. Ordering of experience in a relevant manner, value consideration are implied, but the value may be limited or conditional. 

6. The most important one is the synthetic and the magical power to which the name “imagination” is given.

1. Production of Image

                      

           The first concept of imagination is production of image. It is the basic as well as the most difficult part of the process of imagination.

It has a sense of novelty and a sense of freshness with, 

1 old and familiar object

2 more than usual state of emotion

3 more than usual order (not in usual presentation)

4 It has the power to delight

2. The use of figurative language

                    

            People who naturally employ metaphor and simile in their speech especially when it is “Unusual kind” are same to have imagination. This may or may not be accompanied by imagination in other senses. Metaphor and simile the two may be considered together have a great variety of functions of speech. For example,

Shelly’s “Dome of many-coloured glass...”

is only example which springs to mind. Figurative language works as the tool which leads to the imagination.

“The freedom of my writings has indeed provoked an implacable tribe but I was safe from the strings, I was soon accustomed to the buzzing of the hornets” – Gibbon

              

             Metaphor is a semi-surreptitious method by which a greater variety of elements can be wrought into the fabric of the experience.

3. The narrower sense

                   

          A narrower sense is that in which sympathetic reproduction of other people’s state of mind, particularly their emotional state, is what is meant. ‘You haven’t enough imagination’ the dramatist says to the critic who thinks that his persons behave unnaturally. This kind of imagination is plainly a necessity for communication.

4. Inventiveness in imagination

                  

           Inventiveness, the bringing together of elements which are not ordinary, connected, is another sense.

                 

           It has the power to modify a series of thoughts by and predominant thoughts and feeling. Taking into consideration Coleridge, he considers ‘poetics’ as essential amongst all of other valuable characteristics. Poet is poet because of,

1 The availability of experience

2 Width of the field of simulation

3 Completeness of unique response (it should be naturally different)

                         

         A poet unlike any ordinary person looks at the things with a different perspective. Poet has the superior power to order the experience where as in a common man, impulse interfere emotions combined into a stable poise for a poet. Suppressions are carried out beautifully and as a result the thought process is different.

                     

         The selection of the topic by the poet should be out of the box, sometimes extremely different from what a poet habitually do. Everything that a poet sees has different perspective to it.

5. The scientific imagination

                       

          We have that kind of relevant connection of things ordinarily thought of as disparate which is exemplified in scientific imagination. This is an ordering of experience in definite ways and for a definite end or purpose.

6. The sense of musical delight

                   

           The original formulation was Coleridge’s greatest contribution to critical theory.

“The sense of novelty and freshness, with old and familiar objects; a more than usual state of emotion, with more than usual order”

                  

         'The sense of musical delight... with the power of reducing multitude into unity of effect, and modifying a series of thoughts by someone predominant thought or feeling’– These are the gifts of imagination.

                   

       A poet is not nearly looking at the beauty, it’s all about organizing them into a heighten experience.  According to Coleridge,

“The sense of musical delight is a gift of the imagination”

Tragedy and Imagination

       

       There are two emotions in tragedy pity and tragedy.

Pity - The impulse to approach

Tragedy – The impulse to retreat

                  

         Combination of both pity and terror leads us to catharsis threw which we recognize tragedy. Suppression is important for awaking of sense. Although suppression is required for tragic experience, the mind does not shy away from anything, it does not protect itself with any illusion, it stands uncomforted, un-intimidated alone and self-reliant.

                 

        The essence of tragedy is that it forces us to live for a moment without personal emotions. When we succeed we find, as usual, that there is no difficulty; the difficulty came from the suppressions and sublimations. The balance of tragedy is not in the structure but in response. It is not an indication that ‘all’s right with the world’ or that ‘somewhere, somehow, there is justice,’ it is an indication that all is right here and now in the nervous system.

                 

       Aesthetic state of emotions is very important in imagination especially in poetry. Accidental circumstances and personal interest which may seen ordinary but develop into extra-ordinary.

Organizing of impulses is also equally important.

1 by exclusion and inclusion

2 by synthesis and elimination

        A very great deal of poetry and art is content with organized development of comparatively special and limited experience with a definite emotion or emotions. For example emotions are, Joy, pride, love, admiration and hope. 

There are three different modes,

1. Melancholy

2. Optimism

3. Longing

Structuring in terms of experience,

“Break, Break, Break”

And

“Ode to a Nightingale” 

           Both the poetry is different, not because of subject but the difference is the relation of several impulses. In the first poem the set of impulse run parallel where as in the second poem there is extraordinary. It is believed that ‘irony’ more often than not is a constant experience in poetry. It brings out much more facts of the personality than through any other defined emotion.

          One has to see all around in imagination. Some interest is required, but the more you are impersonal the more you are completely involved.

Reference: Literary Criticism A Reading by  B. Das and J. M. Mohanty

The function of criticism - T. S. Eliot

The function of criticism

- T. S. Eliot

       This essay is an outcome of the controversy created in the year 1919. It is actually a response to Murray’s essay on Eliot’s essay of “Romanticism and Tradition”. 

      In this essay he showcases the relationship between past and the present, in the world of literature one cannot say that which of them is superior in nature because both are depended as well as independent in nature.

      The past should be altered by the present as much as the present is directed by the past. Any writer and his/her importance are considered by looking into the tradition. According to Eliot,

“Criticism can never be an auto-telic activity”

      Eliot says, criticism is the analysis of the works of literary nature. Criticism always has to be about something and its goal should give proper explanation of all the literary texts. Sometimes critic differs from each other because of their personal biases. Eliot believes that all the critics should co-operate in order to criticise a particular text. Any criticism and the method of criticism should be according to the nature of the work.

      In the second part of this essay, Eliot talks about Murray’s view on classicism and Romanticism. According to Murray,

“Classical writer cannot be a romantic writer.”

      Eliot does not agree with this matter that English people are romantics and French people are classics. 

     In the later part of this essay Eliot discusses the problem in criticism and goes against the view of Matthew Arnold. Matthew Arnold differentiated between critical and creative writing. According to Eliot criticism is also of equal importance and any critic has to be creative in order to criticise text. Some of the critics are capable of criticizing their own works. They believe that with the criticism their work becomes more correct and structured. He continuously argued that critical and creative writings cannot be separated. (Matthew Arnold) 

  

     According to Eliot the most important qualification of any critic is that he or she should be able to recognize the importance of facts and that is a rare quality. The critic should get into the details of the texts. Any critic or artist should surrender and sacrifice him or herself in order to get meaning of the texts. He or she should make sure that they are united together for a common agenda. This is the quality of the first rate artist whereas the second rate artist does not believe in this and works in completely opposite direction.

      Art always has a pre-decided conclusion by the illustration of the works of art and the correction of taste. It may happen that there are differences in opinion but all the differences should be respected or should be worked upon in close connection.

      In the third part, Eliot completely was against the views of Murray as it is all about the discovery of some common principle in order to achieve perfection in art. The artist who believes in the inner voice is not only aware about the tradition and the wisdom and the experiences but also of the present which can be extremely advantageous.

      In the fourth part, as we have written earlier, there is no difference between a critical writer and a creative writer, both of them are almost the same as the larger part of the labour of an author in composing is in the critical labour and any writer who can criticise his own work is the highest kind of criticism. 

Qualification of a good critic:

- In order to be a good critic one has to develop an extraordinary sense of fact about the work of art, the conditions, the settings and mannerism. 

- Any critic has to be good in comparison and analysis about the theme, plot and technical aspects like the structure and the content of all of them, they should be taken together in order to interpret it.

- Facts are not always beneficial because they can be misleading. Facts should be in close connection to what you are writing upon.

- A good critic has to be extremely objective in nature and should have a scientific attitude by following all the above mentioned points.

- Eliot strongly believes in all the concepts of individuality and originality but in a different manner that is by respecting the tradition and its co-operation to design the present.

Reference: Literary Criticism A Reading by  B. Das and J. M. Mohanty