tailieunhanh - Lecture Literary criticism - Lecture 29: Function of critics

In every age there have been critics and there have been criticism but it is only after the publication of Arnold’s remarkable essay that numerous theories about the function of criticism has been constructed and more so in our own age. After Arnold the modern critic unlike their predecessors have theorized more about the role and the function of the critic than about the role of an artist. | FUNCTION OF CRITICS In every age there have been critics and there have been criticism but it is only after the publication of Arnold’s remarkable essay that numerous theories about the function of criticism has been constructed and more so in our own age. After Arnold the modern critic unlike their predecessors have theorized more about the role and the function of the critic than about the role of an artist Our age can be called the age of criticism and one of the dominant figures of our age is an example of this fact. He has theorized more about criticism than he has done actual criticism., and he has theorized more about the critic than about the artist. The function of criticism is the commentation and exposition of the works of art by means of written word. As definition it sounds remarkable but if we try to analyze it nothing substantial will come out of it. We are told nothing about the principles on which the commentation and exposition of the work of art has to be | FUNCTION OF CRITICS In every age there have been critics and there have been criticism but it is only after the publication of Arnold’s remarkable essay that numerous theories about the function of criticism has been constructed and more so in our own age. After Arnold the modern critic unlike their predecessors have theorized more about the role and the function of the critic than about the role of an artist Our age can be called the age of criticism and one of the dominant figures of our age is an example of this fact. He has theorized more about criticism than he has done actual criticism., and he has theorized more about the critic than about the artist. The function of criticism is the commentation and exposition of the works of art by means of written word. As definition it sounds remarkable but if we try to analyze it nothing substantial will come out of it. We are told nothing about the principles on which the commentation and exposition of the work of art has to be done Thus in case of every new critic there will be a new commentary on and a new exposition of every work of art. And who is the critic we should believe more than the others. Eliot denies that criticism is autotelic and he specifically asserts that it must always profess an end and view ,which he roughly defines as the elucidation of work of art and the correction of taste. Again the same difficulty does not qualify the statement further, and in itself it does not go to explain the function of the critic. Elucidation is an ambiguous phrase. Elucidation will itself vary according to the purpose of the elucidator. A poem aplay a novel can be very many things at the same time It can be reflection of the cultural climate of the age ,a document in the mental history of the author, a fable a piece of rhetoric , an insight into some human experience etc How a critic may choose to elucidate the work as any one of these things or as any two or so many as he thinks he can .