Q: Criticize “Culture and Anarchy” by Matthew Arnold. With References and Endings.
One of the most glorious essays, “Culture and Anarchy: An Essay in Political and Social Criticism is a series of periodical essays” by English essayist, Matthew Arnold. It was first published by Cornhill Magazine 1867–68, and collected as a book in 1869. In this course, Arnold’s famous piece of writing on culture established his High Victorian cultural agenda which remained dominant in debate from the 1860s until 1950s. It shows, “Harmony, refinement, critique, education, unity, reflection, evolution and dissonance.” He describes as the prevailing mood of England’s new democracy.
Arnold was an inspector of a primary school, who had brought him into contact with European thought, and he based much of his criticism of British society. His book attempts to explain the social turmoil of 19th-century Britain during the Industrial Revolution by redefining what is “culture”. Arnold’s anthropological definition of culture: the collective sum of all human enterprises such as philosophy, religion, art, music, and so on. Furthermore, “Culture and Anarchy” was highly influential, and particularly so in the twentieth century with John Reith, the man who established the BBC, guiding ethos, and its concepts of culture, and how to share it.
At the beginning of the essay, Arnold argues that “culture” is a process of self-discipline and moving away from self-centeredness in the whole society. He also argues, “Culture seeks to do away with classes; to make the best that has been thought and known in the world current everywhere.” His conceptualization of anarchy is rooted in the idea that British citizens have become too willing to trust in the machine of parliamentarian democracy to solve problems. In “Sweetness and Light”, he argues that culture is a study of perfection, and it originates from a love of perfection, not from curiosity. Although, the true culture works to perfect both individuals and humankind at large.
In “Doing as One Likes”, it discusses the dangers of anarchy and unchecked individualism. Here, he also explores how industrialism has negatively impacted the national psyche. Additionally, the book claims that they have given up their traditional “subordination and deference” and have embraced the “modern spirit”. In the third chapter, he examines the English class system. He divides the system into three sections: the “Barbarians” (the aristocracy), the “Philistines” (the middle class), and the “Populace” (the working class). Arnold believes, “The Barbarians have no idea of our spiritual sickness, the Philistines have no sense of its danger. The Populace, meanwhile, sees nothing at all; and perhaps the wiser they.”
In “Hebraism and Hellenism”, he discusses the difference between “Hebraism and Hellenism”, which he calls “two points of influence” in the society and culture. “The uppermost idea with Hellenism is to see things as they really are; the uppermost idea with Hebraism is conduct and obedience.” Arnold argues that Hebraism has been more dominant in English culture for a long time, and that it is now time for Hellenism to regain its ascendancy. According to Arnold, Hellenism is about thinking clearly and seeing things in their essence and beauty. In “Porro Unum Est Necessarium”, he examines the importance of Hellenism and its role in the English culture. He believes that Britain needs this type of personality which is less dogmatic and self-complacent.
The sixth chapter of “Culture and Anarchy” is titled "Our Liberal Practitioners". In this chapter, Arnold discusses the nature of freedom and the importance of inward and communal perfection. He also argues that freedom is more about service and duties than the idea of “rights”.
Throughout the essay, Arnold’s “Culture and Anarchy” was a response to the Protestant business mind set that dominated Britain during industrialization. He argues that culture is an ideal and collective pursuit. The first portion states that all classes in England lacked much in formal education. As Arnold saw that the State alone seemed capable of remedying the problems. The second portion affirms that the role of the State, both as governing power and as collective character of the nation, extends beyond the formal education. The third portion considers culture as both process and goal.
To conclude, Arnold’s essay “Culture and Anarchy” defines the “culture” broadly as the pursuit of perfection through intellectual and aesthetic development. It sees that Victorian England is threatened by “anarchy,” a lack of shared values and standards amidst rising democracy and industrialism. His ideas influences educational reforms in England, and promoting the concept of “liberal education” and shaping subsequent generations’ intellectual landscapes. He says that people’s advocate is “STRICTNESS OF CONSCIENCE” instead of ”SPONTANEITY OF CONSCIOUSNESS” which tends to enlarge our whole law of doing. According to Trilling, Arnold’s theory “does not hold up as a logical structure.”
“If one can become your best friend, then he or she can easily become your life partner.”__ Michael Jackson
Comments