The Function of Criticism Summary

T. S. Eliot’s 1923 essay, ‘The Function of Criticism,’ is an important piece of writing about literary criticism. It builds on ideas from his earlier essay, ‘Tradition and the Individual Talent’ (1919). In this essay, Eliot focuses on the role of the critic rather than the act of creating new art, but he also compares creative and critical work in interesting ways.

Eliot begins by referring to his 1919 essay, where he argued that no writer’s work can be understood in isolation. Instead, it must be seen as part of a larger literary tradition. He believes that literature is about ‘order,’ and criticism also deals with maintaining order in understanding art.

Eliot presents an interesting idea: the best artists are those who can ‘surrender’ themselves to a broader artistic tradition, blending their work into the larger community of writers. A less talented artist, on the other hand, tries too hard to show their uniqueness. They constantly remind the audience of the small details that make their work different from others. Eliot compares this to an insecure person in a group who always tries to stand out, while a more confident person allows others to contribute and interact freely. In literature, a truly great artist trusts the tradition they are part of, rather than constantly seeking attention.

This idea applies to literary criticism as well. Eliot argues that criticism should have a clear purpose: to explain works of art and refine public taste. Unlike art, which can exist simply for enjoyment or deep reflection, criticism must serve a function.

Eliot then discusses the views of another critic, John Middleton Murry. Murry made a distinction between two approaches to literature: Classicism and Romanticism. Classicism values an external authority, a set of established principles outside the writer. Romanticism, on the other hand, trusts the ‘Inner Voice’—the writer’s personal intuition. Eliot calls this Romantic idea ‘Whiggery,’ referring to the old Whig political party, which opposed absolute monarchy.

The problem with trusting the ‘Inner Voice,’ according to Eliot, is that it removes the need for clear principles in criticism. If critics rely only on their personal feelings, they do not have to follow any consistent standards when evaluating literature.

On the other hand, some critics respect tradition and rely on the wisdom passed down over time. Eliot argues that great writers engage in a lot of critical work themselves. They revise, edit, and refine their work before considering it finished. Romantic critics often overlook this aspect of writing.

In the end, Eliot concludes that the most important quality of a good critic is a ‘highly developed sense of fact.’ The best critics present useful facts that help readers understand and appreciate a work of art. The main role of criticism, according to Eliot, is to clarify and explain literature in a meaningful way.

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Clouds Summary

The Clouds is a comedy by Aristophanes, an ancient Greek playwright who lived around 450–385 BCE. The play was first performed in 423 BCE at a festival called the City Dionysia, where it came in third place. Aristophanes later tried to rewrite it, but he never finished the revision. The version we have today is based on this unfinished rewrite. The story follows Strepsiades, an old man who wants to learn tricky arguments (sophistry) from Socrates to avoid paying his debts. The play explores important ideas, such as the conflict between old and new ways of thinking, the role of education, and the connection between gods and morality. Plot Summary Strepsiades is unable to sleep because he is worried about the debts his son, Pheidippides, has accumulated. Pheidippides loves horses and spends too much money on them, but he sleeps peacefully in the bed next to his father. Strepsiades thinks of a way to get rid of his debts. He wakes Pheidippides and asks him to enroll in a school c...
Read more

explain the irony in the chapter a letter to god

Explain the irony in the chapter a letter to god. Ans: The core irony of the story is  situational irony , where the outcome of an event is the opposite of what was intended or expected. The Central Situational Irony: The Helpers are Called Crooks This is the most powerful irony in the story. What happens:  The postmaster and his employees, touched by Lencho's faith, make a great effort to collect money to help him. They perform a selfless act of charity. The Ironic Outcome:  When Lencho receives only part of the money, he doesn't thank these anonymous helpers. Instead, he concludes that the post office employees must have stolen the missing amount. In his second letter, he calls them a "bunch of crooks." Why it's ironic:  The very people who were the answer to his prayer are accused of the crime of stealing from him. Their good deed is rewarded with an accusation. Dramatic Irony: The Reader Knows the Truth This occurs when the audience (the reade...
Read more

The Suppliants Summary

The earliest surviving play by Aeschylus is The Suppliants (also called The Suppliant Maidens ). This tragedy is the first part of a trilogy that was likely performed in the fifth century BCE . It tells the story of the fifty daughters of Danaus, known as the Danaides , who flee from Egypt to Argos to escape forced marriages to their cousins, the sons of Egypt. The play’s plot is straightforward. The Danaides seek protection from the king of Argos. Since they are asking for help, they are called “suppliants.” At first, the king is unsure what to do, so he asks the people of Argos for their opinion. The people decide to offer the Danaides asylum. Later, when a herald from Egypt’s sons arrives to take the women back, the king steps in to stop him. In the end, the Danaides find safety in Argos. From a literary perspective, this tragedy follows the traditional style of early classical drama. The chorus, made up of the Danaides, plays the central role. The entire action of the play r...
Read more