Culture and Anarchy by Mathew Arnold
Introduction
Culture and anarchy
is a notorious philosophical work written by the celebrated Victorian
poet and critic Mathew Arnold. This essay was first published in
‘Cornhill Magazine’ during 1867-’68. Its full name is “Culture
and Anarchy: An Essay in Political and Social Criticism”.
What is culture and
anarchy?
Frist we can define
what is the meaning of Culture. Here are some definitions of Culture.
Culture....,
In Latin, Culture
had a range of meanings…………
Inhabit
Cultivate
Protect
Honour with
worship etc.
Later on, culture
began its complicate modern history etc. Culture was a new social and
intellectual movement.
· Culture
refers to the cumulative deposit of knowledge, experience, beliefs,
values, attitudes, meanings, hierarchies, religion, notions of time,
roles, spatial relations, concepts of the universe, and material
objects and possessions acquired by a group of people in the course
of generations through individual and group striving.
· A culture
is a way of life of a group of people
· Culture is
a collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members
of one group or category of people from another.
· The term
‘Culture’ which originally meant the Cultivation of human mind
and soul.
Arnold’s Views on Culture
According to his
views, he says that,
“Culture is a
study of perfection”
Culture is the
process, means it is always going on. And also it is not static but
it is changeable. It is study of social and moral perfection. And
Arnold says that culture is internal thing. As power of God remains
within, similarly culture also remains within.
Arnold sees culture
as a study of perfection.
He says:
“To conceive of
true human perfection as a harmonious perfection, developing all
sides of our humanity; and as a general perfection, developing all
parts of our society. For if one member suffers, the other member
must suffer with it; and the fewer there is that follow the true way
of salvation. The harder that way is to find.”
Arnold considers
that one should see the moral, social and beneficent characters in
culture. Culture remains within us in the form of manner. The culture
is the only thing that differentiates human from animal. It makes
perfect our humanity. Culture has nothing to do with religion or God.
But at some they are a part of the culture. One cannot possess
culture but surely one can have personal mental growth by culture.
Culture conceives perfection.
Culture as the
folk-spirit having a unique identity, and culture as cultivation of
waywardness or free individuality. The first meaning is predominant
in our current use of the term "culture," although the
second still plays a large role in what we think culture should
achieve, namely the full "expression" of the unique or
"authentic" self. Culture is music, literature, painting
and sculpture, theater and film. A Ministry of Culture refers to
these specific activities, sometimes with the addition of philosophy,
scholarship, history.
Culture is not the
frivolous or useless thing, but it has a very important function to
fulfill for mankind. Here Arnold says about the purpose of the
culture. That is to keep the mark of human perfection. According to
Arnold “Culture is harmonious perfection, developing all sides of
humanity as a general perfection”
Culture:
sweetness and light
Arnold considers
that, Culture is also connected with the idea of Sweetness and Light.
The Greek word ‘aphuia’ means well grown or graceful. He connects
the idea of culture with sweetness and light. He explains the idea
with the help of Greek words ‘aphuia’ and ‘euphuia’. Here the
man ‘euphyes’ is going towards ‘sweetness and light’
Anarchy
· A state of
society without government or low.
· A state
without any government control.
· Freeform
government society
.
· Anarchy
refers to a society, entity, group of persons or single person
without recognition of authority.
· A state of
lawlessness or political disorder due to absence of governmental
authority.
Anarchy- According to Arnold
Anarchy means
“utopian societies of individuals who enjoy complete freedom
without government.” the term ‘anarchy’ refers to a society
without a publicly enforced government or violently enforced
political authority. When we use in this sense, anarchy may or may
not be intended to imply political disorder or lawlessness.
Arnold in this
chapter he talks of one’s freedom. And this freedom is sung very
much by Englishmen. But yet, they never thought about end of such
freedom for which it is to be desired. Arnold accepts the idea of
personal freedom, but he tells about complete freedom. Arnold thinks
in this way:
Arnold and three classes:
He
has divided the society of England into three classes and analyzes
them with their virtue and defects. His scrutiny of three classes of
his time proves him good critic.
1:- The barbarian
• Free
minded
• Liberty
• Rich
class people
•
Fashionable
• Free to
live and think
• More
Civilized
The barbarian or we
can say that the aristocratic class. 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. Their external styles in manners, accomplishments and powers
are inherited from the Barbarians.
2:- The Philistine
•
Money-Makers
• Commerce
• Idea
about business
•
Industrialist
•
Tea-meeting etc.
The middle class,
known by their wisdom, expert of industry and found busy in
industrialization and commerce. Their eternal inclination is to the
progress and prosperity of the country by building cities, railroads
and running the great wheels of industry. They have produced the
greatest mercantile navy. So, they are Empire builders. In this
material progress, the working class is with them.
• Hard
working
• Narrow
minded
• Bad
activity
• Poverty
• Slum area
• Orthodoxy
• Rigidity
This class is known
raw and half developed because of poverty and other related diseases.
This class is mostly exploited by the barbarian and philistine. The
author finds democratic arousing in this class because they are
getting political consciousness and are coming out from their hiding
places to assert an English man’s heaven born privilege of doing as
one likes, meeting where he likes, breaking what he likes.
“Doing as one
likes” is an outcome of middle and working class. But at some
extent it brings chaos and anarchy in society. He says that business
and trade is highly represented by our middle and working class. They
do too much hard work.
Arnold considers
that their people are rough and uncultivated. And so, there must be
system of law and discipline. In short Arnold says that freedom or
personal freedom is necessary, but not on the shoulder of chaos or
anarchy. Arnold’s point is that, one must think in proper, right
way. One must have clear sight to see things in their real forms.
There are also other
forms of anarchy that attempt to avoid the use of coercion, violence,
force and authority, while still producing a productive and desirable
society. Anarchy is also a technical issue of economic science.
The idea of personal
freedom is brought up by Englishman. And with it they have the
concept of anarchy inherently. In politics the slogan of middleclass
was this:
There were two sides
in politics also. They two were giving different ideas or concepts of
personal liberty. On one side this personal freedom privileged
aristocracy. And the middle class people were tempted by the
political idea of personal freedom. The mass put blind faith in it
and the modern spirit of anarchical tendency took shape. So, the
MASS, the working classes of Arnold’s time started asserting their
right to do what they like, meet where they like and enter where they
like.
Hebraism and Hellenism
Arnold talks about
the great idea to know and the great energy to act. Both are the most
potent forces, and they should be in harmony by the light of reason.
So, they are Hebraism and Hellenism.
Hellenism
- Spirit of mind
- Spirit of Greek
- Open minded
- Knowledge
- Thought for Practical
- Follow the platonic Idea etc.
Hebraism
- Spirit of thought
- Spirit of Bible
- Narrow mindedness
- Religious
- Thought only for God
- Follow the biblical idea
The final aim of
Hellenism and Hebraism is the same as man's perfection and salvation.
Arnold further discusses that,
“The supreme idea
with Hellenism or the Greek Spirit is to see things as they really
are, and the supreme idea of Hebraism or the Spirit of Bible is
conduct and obedience.”
Hebraism and
Hellenism both are directly connected to the life of human beings.
“Hellenism keeps
emphasis on knowing or knowledge,
Whereas Hebraism
fastens its faith in doing.”
The aim of both is
the partaking of divine life with knowledge and action. He describes
that the Bible reveals the truth which awards the peace of God and
liberty. Hellenism face to face with Hebraism. Hebraism was renewed
and purged, but Hellenism of Renaissance lost its moral character.
One thing must be viewed that Hellenism is of Indo-European growth
and Hebraism is of Semitic growth. Those who belonged to
Indo-European stock showed their natural affinity to Hellenism.
“Hellenism
acquires spontaneity of consciousness with a clearness of mind, and
Hebraism achieves a strictness of conscience with its clarity of
thought. In brief, Hebraism shows stress on doing rather than
knowing, and follows the will of God. Its primary idea is absolute
obedience to the will of God.”
Arnold talks about
the idea of immortality as illustrated by St. Paul, the Christian
saint and Plato, the Greek philosopher, but the both have left
something unexplained. So, the problem of human spirit is still
unsolved in both Hebraism and Hellenism.
Renaissance
re-established Hellenism and man's intellectual impulses in Europe
and Puritanism embraced the blessings of both Hellenism and Hebraism.
The defeat of Hellenism by early Christianity and the defeat of
Hellenism by Puritanism was the result of Renaissance stress on the
progress of humanism and science.
Conclusion
In the essay Matthew
Arnold categorizes six different terms such Culture, Anarchy,
Sweetness, Light Hellenism and Hebraism so with the help of these
different terms he has described his views on Culture in which he
also says that Culture and Anarchy both are different thing and at
last he also explains the difficult terms like Hellenism and
Hebraism.
No comments:
Post a Comment