The difference between Liberal criticism and -isms….

The difference between Liberal criticism and -isms….

If we start to study the traditional criticism and modern/recent/contemporary criticism, particularly after 1950s…we can notice many changes and differences in-between the two. Traditional criticism is also known as Liberal Criticism. In such criticism, the genre (poetry, drama, fiction etc.) finds a prior place and treated (instead of say…criticized) liberally. It means that the critic can take any form or piece of literature and start to analyze it from his viewpoint. Take the example of ancient Greek Literature… Plato or Aristotle… they have chosen Drama as well as an epic form (Which is called ‘Poetry’ in amalgamation) to make the part of criticism. Liberal criticism is the output of some reaction to another criticism. Take the example of Plato’s ‘Dialogue’ …it was a reaction to the contemporary presentation in the genre like Drama or the depiction of the Gods, people, and society in the epic. So he ‘banished the poets from his ideal commonwealth’. Plato’s attack was the abuse of the poetry and Aristotle defended poetry through his ‘Poetics’… by giving appropriate illustrations and examples. The same thing is with English Criticism also. The first major piece of English Criticism is Sidney’s ‘An Apology of Poetry’ (1579) in which he says that he is a writer and it is his profession. It is his duty to defend his profession from the Abuse. He defends the poetry against the attack of Stephen Gosson who deliberately and ridiculously dedicated his essay ‘The School of Abuse’ to gentleman Sir Philip Sidney. Dryden, the father of English Criticism also defended literature from his own viewpoint in ‘An Essay on Dramatic Poesy’ (1668). He deafened how English is superior to French in every respect and how contemporary modern playwrights are benefited with the experience from the ancient writers... Then we have Pope’s ‘Essay on Criticism’ and Dr. Johnson’s ‘Lives’ and ‘Preface to Shakespeare’. Dr. Johnson’s ‘Preface to Shakespeare’ is the direct justification of the plays and techniques used by Shakespeare. Here the writer and his work are at the center of the criticism. Wordsworth defends theme, language, the formation of poetry in his ‘Preface to Lyrical Ballads’ (1799), while Victorian Arnold tries to use the formula of ‘touchstone’ method to differentiate between a classic piece of the genre and ordinary writing. In the sense of Liberal Criticism, T. S. Eliot is far ahead due to his coinage of new phrases and concepts. Objective Co-relative, Conceit, Unification of Sensibility etc. are the terms gifted by him to the literary world. His easy, ‘Traditional and Individual Talent’ tries to fuse between the contribution by the traditional writers in the literary field and how skillfully an individual can use it to enlighten the world of literature. His essay ‘The Metaphysical Poets’ points out that the poets of the Age of Reason were completely failed to follow the ‘Unification of Sensibility’ while Metaphysical poets were the great achiever in this sense. Eliot’s ‘Hamlet and His Madness’ completely rejects the high artistic status to Shakespeare’s play ‘Hamlet’ due to lack of Objective Co-relative and he charges it with artistic failure. ‘What is Classic?’ completely deals with Virgil and his ‘being of the last classic’. I.A. Richards rejects the idea of outside influences in the text and decides to be ‘practical’ in criticizing a text. There are many more critics who are abode to the concept called Liberal Criticism. But the trend changed rapidly in the 20th Century and every critic has started to find the roots in some –isms.

We always hear –isms…like Marxism, Fascism, Nazism, Nationalism, Feminism, Modernism, Post-modernism, Structuralism, Post-Structuralism, Historicism, Colonialism, Post-colonialism, Absurdism, Surrealism, and Dadaism and nowadays…it is Presentism. What are these isms? Where are they come from? First, let me give you a well-known example. There is a glass of water…filled half with water. The optimist says ‘It is half-filled.’; the pessimist says, ‘No. It is half-empty.’ But virtually speaking it is fully filled - with water and air. He must be realist or rationalist. Four isms come here…optimism, pessimism, rationalism, and realism. These isms are nothing but the approach, attitude, viewpoint, the way of looking to the things and ideas and your perception about them. There is no need for you to refer the heavy canon of literature to understand the concept of these isms. Practices come first, then generalization and then come to the theory. These isms are found everywhere, anywhere, anytime…the only thing you have to do is…to keep your senses open. Following such isms means wearing a goggle of particular color…you see the world in the same color. It shapes our attitude and vice-versa. How…?... In the upcoming discussion, we are going to discuss these ideas/theories/concepts…I hope you to enjoy it. It is a universal truth that ‘Playing with language is learning language’…similarly…Play with literature and learn the theories…easily….
I dedicate all this discussion to my English Teachers who ‘risked’ teaching me….

Next post will be on Structuralism, Post-structuralism, and Deconstruction

Thanks.
(Inconveniences related to syntax, grammar, punctuation etc. are regretted.)
©ALL RIGHTS RESERVED TO MR. ANIL AWAD

Anil Awad

English NET/SET Consultant

9922113364 (Also WhatsApp)

9423403368 (BSNL)

anilawad123@gmail.com