Culture and Anarchy

Assignment paper no – 6

Topic – Culture and Anarchy: An essay in political and

                Social criticism

Roll no – 31

Prepared by – Shital Italia

Submitted to – Smt.S.B.Gardi Department of English

                                     M.K.University Bhavnagar.

Culture and anarchy: An essay in political and social criticism – by Mathew Arnold.

Introduction:

                Culture and anarchy is a controversial philosophical work written by the celebrated Victorian poet and critic Mathew Arnold., composed during a time a time of unprecedented social and political change, the essay argues for a restructuring of England’s social ideology. It reflect Arnold’s passionate conviction that the uneducated English masses could be molded into conscientious individual who strive for human perfection through the  harmonious system of education must replace the programmed which emphasize rigid individual moral conduct at the expense of free thinking and devotion to community.

Major concept of this essay.

                     Arnold does not create specific fictional character to express his ideas in culture and anarchy, he dose impulse his essay with narrative persona that can best be described as a Socratic figure. This sagacious mentor serve as a thematic link between each of the chapter, underscoring the importance of self knowledge in order to fully engage the concept of pursuing human perfection. This mentor also identifies and classifies three group is the barbarian, or the aristocratic segenement of society, who are so involved with their archaic tradition and gluttony that they have lost touch with the rest of society which they were once responsible. The second group for whom Arnold persona serves his most scorn criticism is the philistine or the selfish and materialistic middle class who have been guided into a torpid state of puritanical self centeredness by nonconforming religious sect. the third group is the populace or the disenfranchised, poverty stricken lower class who have been let down by the negligent barbarians and greedy philistine. For Arnold, the populace represents the most malleable and the most deserving, social class to be elevated out of anarchy through the pursuit of culture.

What is culture and anarchy?

                Arnold introduces the principle theme of culture and anarchy directly in the essay’s title. Culture involves an active personal quest so forsake egocentricity, prejudice and narrow mindedness and to embrace an equally balanced development of all human talent in the pursuit of flawlessness. It is a process of self discipline which initiates a metamorphosis from self interest to conscientiousness and an enlightened understanding of one’s singular obligation to an all inclusive utopian society.

According to Stefan Collin

                                  “Culture is an ideal of human life, a standard of excellence and fullness for the development of our capacity, aesthetic, intellectual and moral”

Anarchy represents the absence of guiding principle in one’s life which prevents one from striving to attain perfection. This lack of purpose manifests’ itself in such social and religious defects as laissez fair commercialism and puritanical hierocracy. Arnold emphasize on egocentric self – assertions has devastanding impact on providing for the need of the community; indeed it can only lead to a future of increased anarchy as the rapidly evolvinis the ideas modern democracy secures the enfranchisement of the middle and lower classes without instilling in them the lead for culture. Inherent in Arnold’s argument is the idea of Hebraism and Hellenism. Hebraism represents the action of people who are either ignorant or resistant to the idea of culture. Hebraists subscribe to a strict, narrow minded method off moral conduct and self control which does not allow them to visualize a utopian future of belonging to an enlightened community. Hellenism signifies the open minded, spontenious exploration of classical ideas and their application to contemporary society. Indeed Arnold believes that the idea promulgated by such philosopher as Plato and Socrates can help resolve the moral ethical problem resulting the bitter conflict between the society, politics and religion during the Victorian age. As serious as Arnold’s message is, he elect to employ the device of irony to reveal his philosophical point to his reader. Through irony, satire and urban humor, the authors deftly entertain his reader with example of educational travesties, he wittily exposes the enemies of reform and culture, and he beguiles his reader with self detracting humor in order to endear them to his ideas.

Culture as study in perfection

Culture as a great help of out of our present difficulties; culture being a pursuit of our total perfection by means of getting to know, on all the matters which most concern to us.

     “The best which has been thought and said in the world”.

Through this knowledge, turning a stream of fresh and free thought upon our stock nation and habits, which we now follow staunchly but mechanically. This and this alone all inward operation, is the scope of the following essay, and the culture we recommend is, above all an inward operation.

EXAMPLE-      Arnold has given an example of American culture. The news daily

                          TIMES had praised the advancement of America as “America without religious establishment, seem to get ahead f us all, even in light and the thing of the mind”. But by not laying the foundation of culture, America has created intellectual mediocrity, their vulgarity of manners, their superficial sprit, their lack of general intelligence.

              Culture which is the study of perfection, leads as Arnold in the essay shown, “to convince of true human perfection as a harmonious perfection developing all sides of our humanity; and as a general perfection developing all parts of society. For if one member suffer the other member must suffer with it; and the fever there is that the true way of salvation, the hander that way is to find.

                 Culture is considered not merely as the endeavor to see and learn this. But as the endeavor also to make it prevail, the moral, social and beneficent character of culture become manifest.

“The kingdom of god within you”- religion

     Culture: sweetness and light

                                       For Arnold, culture is connected with the idea of sweetness and light. He tries to explain this idea with the help of Greek words aphuia and euphoria. The euphoria is the man, who stands towards sweetness and light the aphesis, on the other hand is our philistine. The immense spiritual significance of the Greek is due to their having been inspired with this central and happy idea of the essential character of human perfection: and Mr. Bright’s misperception of culture as a smattering of Greek and Latin, comes itself, after all from this wonderful significance of the Greek having affected the very machinery of out education, and is in itself a kind of homage to it. In this making sweetness and light to be character of perfection culture is of like spirit with poetry, follows one law with other.

 The pursuit of perfection then, is the pursuit of sweetness and light. He who works for sweetness and light works to make reason and the will of god prevail. He, who works for hatred, works only for confusion. Culture hates hatred; culture has one great passion, the passion for sweetness and light.

Anarchy in society

                       According to Arnold ‘freedom of doing as one likes,’ it was one of those thing which English thus worshipped in itself, without enough regarding the ends for which freedom is to be desired. He agree with the prevalent notion that it is a most happy and important thing for a man merely to be able to do as he likes. But the problem is “on what he is to do when he is thus free to do as he likes, we do not lay as so much stress”. Even though the British constitution and liberal preciseness like Mr. Bright forcibly say that – “British constitution is a system which stops and paralyses ant power in interfering with the free action of individual that the central idea of English life and politics is the assertions of personal liberty”.

Arnold has divides the society in to three class the is

1) Aristocratic class

2) Middle class

3) Working class

            Three great of England are the aristocratic, the middle class and the working class. Arnold advises the virtuous mean and would like to point out the express and the defect of all these three classes of English people.

A)   The aristocratic class

                   The aristocratic class Arnold calls the barbarian. They are champion of personal liberty and often anarchical in their tendencies yet they have their own individualism field, sport and manly exercises are a fashion with them. The sense of chivalry of the barbarians makes the aristocrats practice politeness in the action and manner. All these outward qualities such as politeness in and grace in manner come directly included by the aristocrats from the barbarians. Even the culture of the aristocrats is skin deep, external lacking in inward virtue.

B)    The middle class

                      The philistines are the middle class, according to Arnold. By philistine, in its original German sense, is meant the uncalculated people like most of the shopkeepers. The philistines are worldly wise men, captains of industry busy in trade and commerce. As a notion of shopkeepers, philistines have brought all economic prosperity and progress in the country. They built cities, they have made railroads and lustily they have produced the greatest mercantile navy the world has ever seen.

C)    The working class

                      The working classes who help the empire builders are the populace in Arnold’s parlance poverty and squalor has dogged the footsteps of the populace wherever they are engaged in running the whets of industry. They are raw and half develop. They are being exploited by the philistine and the barbarians so long. Now there is a satire and an awakening among the populace. Democratic awakening has downed upon their poverty and Aqualon. The people of this class are becoming politically conscious and are coming out from the obscurities to assert “an Englishman’s heaven- born privilege of doing as he likes, meeting where he likes, bailing what he likes braking what he likes”.

                      Thus Arnold finds a sort of caste system in England consisting of the barbarians the philistines and the populace.

         Yet there is something of a common dominator in all the three classes. A common basis of human nature from that above the basis of culture must be founded sweetness and a light.

Aim of Hebraism and Hellenism

                        The final aim of both Hebraism and Hellenism is man’s perfection or salvation so the aim and end of both Hebraism and Hellenism is admirable. And Hellenism is too seeing thing as they are and Hebraism is conduct and obedience. Right thinking and right action both are motivated by the desire of the body; and at the bottom of this design lurks a desire in man for reason and he the will of god and. So in the ultimate analysis Arnold find that “the governing ideas of Hellenism is spontaneity of consciousness that of Hebraism, strictness or conscience.”

                     Again the emphasis of Hebraism is a doing more then knowing, and doing in Christianity is doing the will of god. On the other hand Hellenism means thinking ciearly, seeing thing in their think of the original sin of man so through Hebraism again you get a sense of sin and a consequent to free yourself from the body of the sin. Not either of them says Arnold is a law unto itself but each in its own way contribution to human development.

                                                                                           Thank you