What is literature?

Literature is life. One must not forget it. When we talk about criticism in literature we must not forget that criticism with respect to literature is not based upon three pillars on which whole structure of literature stands and these pillars are truth, beauty and morality. One of the greatest critics of all times has said unless truth is naked it is more than difficult that one gets the originality. One of the greatest critics of all times Terry Eaglet on says Literature must indeed be situated within the field of general cultural production but such mode of such production demands a semi logy of its own.

Plato:
Lets not forget the greatest scholar of all times Plato who was against democracy from the core of his heart but he is animosity against Democracy was not on personal ground rather he had inherited it from his ancestors which his predecessors Socrates had been given death sentence. In his book Republic he has not missed even a single aspect of life whether it is poetry, education, justice or piety. Even in his book The law he says law is fundamental and must be practiced by Haves and Haves not. History of western philosophy by Bertrand Russell. Republic in which he describes an ideal well regulated community in which educational curriculum promotes respect for law, reason, authority and piety. One must not forget that Plato was greatly influenced with his predecessors in which Homers Iliad and odyssey are included. However poetry might accuse us of intensity and lack of culture, so we had better tell her that there is an ancient quarrel between poetry and philosophy. There are countless pieces

of evidence for this enmity between them but there are just a few itch master.

and baying at her

When we talk about truth and morality we must not forget that it was not only the trait of Plato, but later on it also shifted to his student Aristotle who presented it in his greatest piece of work named poetics. Aristotle cannot be labeled only for tragic hero or catharsis, rather in his other master pieces named ethics and politics we also see that he seems to be presenting the same phenomenon. He was the first sage who had declared that man is social animal and it is compulsory for social animal to spend his life with other communities in a friendly way. In his criticism he also points out that if people spend their life according to a code of conduct, they would be successful otherwise they may get distracted. If we look at the other book of Aristotle we come to know that in politics he has kept politics and ethics quite away from each other. This book of Aristotle covers maths, logic, physics, metaphysics, physical science, linguistics, poetry and ethics. (Philip Sydney) Situation and time keep on changing its universal as no body can deny this phenomenon Renaissance age which was an age of William Shakespeare and Christopher Marlowe. One must not forget Sir Philip Sidney stands high among them for his great piece of work known as The defense of poetry. Sidneys defense of poetry was actually a reply to republic by Plato. On the other hand we can say that Aristotles poetics. Sidney defense of poetry was actually a true depiction of England and learning.

Aristotle:
Hamartia in Aristotle can arise in three ways. The Hamartia is an error or miscalculation. It may arise in three ways. Firstly, it may be divided from an ignorance of some material fact

or circumstance. Secondly, the error of judgment may arise from a hasty or careless view of a given situation. The case is illustrated by Othello. In this case the error was avoidable but the hero does not avoid it. Thirdly, the error may be voluntary, through not deliberate. This happens in an act of anger or passion. Lear commits such an error when he banishes Cordelia. In the case of Oedipus all three errors are included. The defect of Oedipus lies in his proud self-assertion. But the ruin brought upon him is through the force of circumstance. The Hamartia in his case includes a defect of character, a passionate act, and ignorance. The tragic irony lies in the fact that the hero commits this error in blindness and in innocence, without any evil intention. But the result is disastrous. This is closely connected with perpetual, or the production of a result opposed to the one intended. Then comes the discovery of truth. In this connection Butcher remarks: Othello in the modern drama, Oedipus in the ancient, are the two most conspicuous examples of ruin wrought by character, noble indeed, but not without defects, acting in the dark and, as it seemed, for the best. Greek drama had for its heroes men of eminence and nobility. They held a position on exaltation in society. When such a man falls from greatness to misery, a nation as a whole is affected. The fall seems all the more striking because of the heros eminence. The concept was acceptable and relevant in a situation in which prominent men of the nobility were held to be representatives of the society. The concept is, however, outdated today. Modern tragedy has shown that tragedy is possible all its effectiveness even when the hero is ordinary and commonplace. Rank and nobility of birth are now irrelevant. But the man who is the tragic hero should, nevertheless be a man of eminence, not of rank and position,

as far as quality goes. There has got to be some sort of dignity which makes the fall from prosperity arouse sympathy in the spectator. Aristotle divided his time between visits his friend like Edmund Spensers. Sidney has displayed has displayed little interest in formulating the technical rules of poetry. Actually he wants to deal poetry in a broaden way to expand its spectrum; he is a synthesizer, not a trail blazer. Defense is a veritable encyclopedia of humanism. Along with it we can say that Sidney has discussed ethics of genre ranging from pastoral elegy, satire to comedy, tragedy and epic. Some parts of poetry deal with the current state of English literature. Sidneys art of poetry sets an agenda for the discussion of poetry that brings closer many of the learned common places an art of imitation. Sidney has best given his view point when he argues that right poets imitate to teach and delight, and to imitate borrow nothing of what is, hath been or shall be, but range only reined with learning discretion, into the divine consideration of what may be and should be.

Sir Philip Sidney:

At start we see that Sidney has justified his own praise for poetry, by citing John Pieter Puglia no who has praised horses and horsemanship. Sidney in An apology for the poetry is of the view that it is poetry which has enabled man to read and understand properly. He further speaks in favor of his topic that poets are father of learning. Even philosophers and historians have come up to us in the form of poets. Further Sidney declares that poetry has flourished in all ages and all countries. Even the most cruel Nations of word like Tartars and Red Indians have made their hearts soft by reading and understanding the poetry. Now, in further chapters we see that Sidney is giving reference of the greatest civilizations of world like Romans and Greeks Romans called

them Votes which means sage and in Greek the word poet means maker. It is the poet who opens new ideas and new dimensions for the later people to follow. He does not bind himself into the narrow stream of life, rather like a prophet he speaks of his heart. Then he also gives religious point of view and says that when Holy David himself is a poet, it would be wrong to condemn poets and poetry. Sidney has divided poetry into three broad divisions. Religious poetry, Phils, Phi cal and informative poetry, and true kind of poetry. Later he gives an emphasis on 3rd type of poetry and then further divides it into heroic, lyric, tragic, comic, iambic and pastoral etc. pastoral poetry deals with the lowliest life. Elegiac poetry arouses sympathy for the miserable. Satire laughs folly out of court. Tragedy reveals the wickedness of man in high places. Epic poem by Sidney is the best and accomplished piece of poetry. In the later part Sidney gives superiority of poetry to other branches of learning like science, astronomy and math. In this respect poetry is superior to history and philosophy. History deals with concrete examples of virtue but from these facts the readers themselves must derive the universal truth, and philosophy deals with abstracts which cannot be understood by immature people. At length we see that Sidney answers those questions which are raised on him poetry is mother of lies to this Sidney says that poet nothing affirms and he never lithe. When he is charged that Plato had banished poets from his ideal common wealth. Sidney says that Plato was not against poetry but he was against the abuse of poetry.

Dryden:
We must not forget about John Dryden who introduced himself in such period when England was under the clouds of corruption and restlessness. He was the dominating figure in a restoration period. One can divide his poetry under three headings political satires,

doctrinal poems and the fables. Absalum and Achitophel which is one of the greatest political satires of English language. Dryden has defended the king against the Earl of Shaftesbury who is represented as Achitophel. Drydens judgment is solid and sensible, His tone is cultured, urban and civilized and like that of Arnold and T.S Eliot his criticism benefits from his own wide range of experience. One of the greatest critics of all times Samuel Johnson says Dryden can rightly be said the Father of English criticism. In his work of Dramatic poesy Dryden presented a model of the new prose. He wrote in a simple, soft and clear way which was clear from all sorts of exaggerations.

Samuel Johnson
we must not forget that Samuel Johnson library include a great piece of work Dictionary of English language. Dictionary of English language can be called a full version of that age. During that age Adam Smith had also given his great book Wealth of Nations 1776. it was Adam Smith who called him Johnson knew more than any one alive. Johnson celebrates Shakespeares gifts in portraying character and disclosing the real tact about human nature. Above all he also clarifies that he has not violated the dramatic unity of the plays. The way preface to Shakespeare has been written, its a clear evidence that what has been longest known has been most considered, and what is more considered is best understood. If we go through his workRambler He makes a pungent criticism on novelists. He is of the view that novelists must use their talent to correct error and teach good conduct, it is not necessary for novelist to describe persons and situations. It is not necessary that how much these characters are true to life. As in Rambler Johnson says that the task of our present writers is very different it requires, together with that learning which is to be gained from books.

Johnson represents a temporary fusion which seems decisive and final of morality with the taste for solid and regular artistic hierarchies. As one must not forget that Johnson was a great enemy of sentimentalism, his very dictcitorial taste chins to all that is sure, tested and verified. He has a great crave not due to timidity and passiveness rather as a reflection of normality. His scale of literary value is no longer quite the same as that of pope: he differs from him in his estimate of Shakespeare, whom he feels and appreciates more intimately. His work Dictionary is also a great landmark in it Johnson wanted to write not only for the critics and also for the prolific readers, and he also wanted to mae an average between a literary Lexicon and a technical encyclopedia, his desire is quite more when he wants to preserve the purity and determine the sense of our English idiom. According to him, English language has deviated from its original character, its phraseology and even its structure have come nearer to French model. His taste is not shocked by the dramatic classics of Shakespeare.

William words worth:

William words worth considered one of the greatest pillars of all time with special reference to Romantic poetry. One of the greatest critics of all times is of the view that Had there been no Words worth there would have been no Romanticism. This statement can be validated from his theory presented by him in Preface to the lyrical Ballads. Critics have been asking a lot that what was the purpose of words worth to write preface to the lyrical Ballads. Obviously it has been answered in his book that Words worth actually wanted to select incidents from common mans life and to realte them in a selection of language used by men. Words worth along with his sister Dorothy words worth has been seeking the beauty of Nature around him. For him Nature has always been a teacher. If

teacher wants to teach and facilitate his students he must use a language of common or rustic man obviously rustic person in the period of words worth and even in todays period does like to understand things in a perfect but simple manner. Words worth is less original than his bold tone and manner suggest much of what he says about figurative language, poetic diction and the relationship between poetry and prose draws an array of 18th century. The truth is that when Words worth discusses his theory the poets language must be the language of a common man. We can see him following that piece of teaching in his greatest piece of work known as prelude. What he tries to stress is that no piece of art however important it may be can not flourish unless it is presented in a most simple way. Words worth heals and restore the feelings of persons, but when one reviews his poetry and prose as a whole, particularly that of his later career his point becomes hard to be understood. One can see that he even honors children and common men and even criminals and idiots. Before Words worth the age of Johnson which is also called age of reason was abundant with satire. Words worth thought it important that follies of that very age must be kept at a distance and his piece of work should be based upon the understanding of common mass, which is not only simple but also likes common language rather according to him Shakespeare succeeds quite better in comedy rather than tragedy.

Coleridge:
One of the greatest romantic poet and critics of all time is S.T Coleridge, who earns a great repute and status among English poets and critics. If Words worths repute got education due to preface to the lyrical Ballads, in the same way Coleridge made his name more famous due to Biographic Literaria. At one hand Words worth is of the view that poetic language should be language of a common or rustic person. In the same way Coleridges

opinion is quite different to it rather he is of the view that language must be refined and it must not be the language of a lay man. Biographia Literaria is a hastily assembled work, mixed modes and genres. It has every thing in it including Autobiography philosophy, literary theory and analytical literary criticisms well memoir of Words worth Coleridge also differentiates between Fancy and imagination. Actually Primary and secondary imagination do not differ from each other in kind, the difference between them is that of one degree. The secondary imagination is more active, more a result of violation, more conscious and more voluntary than the first one. On the other hand primary imagination is universal, while the other is only enjoyed by the artist when we go in detail and talk about the difference depicted by Coleridge, we get assurity that Fancy is not a creative power at all. It only combines what it perceives into beautiful shapes but like imagination it does not fuse and unify. If we try to differentiate between two in the form a scientific way, we may say that The difference between the two is the difference between a mechanical mixture and chemical compound. Thus imagination creates new shapes and forms of beauty by fusing and unifying the different impressions which it receives from external world. When we make a comparison between Coleridge and Words worth. Coleridge says that A man will not get benefit from rural life unless he has a natural sensibility and proper education. Coleridge agrees with Aristotles view that the characters of poetry must be universal and typical. Then Coleridge says every mans language varies according to the extent of his knowledge, the activity of his facilities and the depth of his feelings. Thats why words in poetry and prose may be the same but their arrangement is different. The difference arises from the fact that poetry uses meter and acquires a different arrangement of words.

T.S Eliot:
T.S Eliot is one of the greatest critics of all time in his great piece of work The unification of sensibility and metaphysical poetry. Eliot is of the view that neither a mere feeling nor a complete thought can accomplish our thinking. There is no sensation which most of the time excludes thought. Sensibility can actually be called a mixture of thought and feeling as well as intellect and emotion. It includes sensitiveness, intelligence, but it is not just any more of them. When it is a matter of sensibility we can say in which thought and feelings are the same and the intellect has blended with passion. It enables a poet to explain a heterogeneous experience in a unified manner. Eliot is also of the view that unless poet experiences thought and does not express in poetry. It means that the attempt at unity must get failed. This is the reason that Eliot calls Donne and other metaphysical poets great poets in the line of English poetry. While giving opinion about the metaphysical poets Eliot says Tennyson and Browning are poets and they think; but they do not feel their thought immediately as a rose. A thought to Donne was an experience; it modified his sensibility. When it is a matter of Tradition we see that Eliot tries to modify past with the present and his concept of Talent tells that poet surrenders his subjectivity to an out world. As Eliot says Tradition is the outside authority to which the writer as well as the critic who explains the writers work has to surrender. According to Eliot past can not be seen separately from the present it has to be seen separately from the present it has to be seen in close relationship with present. The poet who enjoys the sense of Tradition will neither reject the past nor will he imitate it blindly. He assimilates past in such a greater way that it looks the part of present. There will be a development of mutual relationship of past and present. According to Eliot poem is a large number of

disparate feelings, emotions ideas and the greatness of poem lies in the intensity with which the fusion takes place. About Romanticism and Classicism Eliot says that the romantic idea and classic idea should not be taken seriously as they tend to distract from the essential truth of things. At length we say that romantic idea of inspiration does; however seem to appear in the theory of poetic process. The greatest happiness and the sense of creativity belongs to genuine creation.

Matthew Arnold:
Without the greatest critics of all time it would be quite unjustified if we discuss criticism without Matthew Arnold. According to himEnglish men are in need of classical qualities to attain harmonious perfection in morals and in literature. From 1855 onwards Arnold wrote incessantly in order to raise the intellectual and cultural level of his country men e.g. the study of Celtic literature, essays in criticism and culture and anarchy. In culture and anarchy he is of the view that culture is the minister of sweetness and light essential to the perfect character. In Essays in criticize Arnold has also tried to eliminate the dogmatic element from Christianity in order to preserve its true spirit. He is of the view that the critical power is of lower rank than the creative. He adopts a lot of assumption in his essays of criticism. As he is of the view that the grand works of literary genius is a work of synthesis and exposition, it is not based upon analysis and discovery. He says that there are two powers which work for a great piece of work. One is the power of man obviously that is writer and second is power of moment .It means when any great idea strikes the writer, it is the stir of the moment which makes a writer capable to produce a great piece of work .when we see some of the greatest work of Arnold, we see that he has shown his maturity .Arnold also discusses (French Revolution) though revolution had a

great impact but the effect of Voltaire and Rousseau was more solid than that of French Revolution. Later he talks about (Bishop Colenso and Renans together in her survey of the Religious state of Europe .Arnold also says that criticism must not be in haste rather it must try to keep its practical importance .Criticism must not be in haste rather it must try to keep its practical importance .Criticism must be well aware that how should it attach itself towards things and then how should it withdraw from them. Arnold makes a pungent criticism on English courts which do not perform their duty properly. At end Arnold is of the view that sense of creative activity is the greatest happiness and the sense of creativity belongs genuine creation.