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 prior place and treated (instead
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 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 against 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 Eassy 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 centre of the criticism. Wordsworth defends theme, language, formation
of poetry in his ‘Preface to Lyrical Ballads’ (1799), while Victorian Arnold
tries to use the formula of ‘touchstone’ method to differentiate between
classic piece of 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 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 now-a-days…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, view-point, 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 the theory. These isms are found everywhere, anywhere, anytime…only
thing you have to do is…to keep your senses open. Following such isms means
wearing a goggle of particular colour…you see the world in the same colour. It
shapes our attitude and vice-versa. How…?... In the upcoming discussion, we are
going to discuss about these ideas/theories/concepts…I hope you to enjoy
it. It is 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….
Thanks.
(Inconveniences related to syntax, grammar,
punctuation etc. are regretted.)
©ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
TO MR. ANIL AWAD
