The Function of Criticism - T. S Eliot

 Introduction of T. S Eliot 

Thomas Stearns Eliot ( 26 Sep 188 - 4 Jan 1965) was a poet, essayist, publisher, literary critic and editor. Considered one of the 20th century's major poets, he KS a central figure in English-language Mordenist poetry. In 1948 he won the Nobel Prize in literature. 

Introduction of the Essay 

'The Function of Criticism' was published in 1923 by T. S Eliot, perhaps the most important Poet-crtitic of the mordenist movement. It is the follow up of Elliot's previous essay 'Tradition and the Individual Talent' from four years earlier. 

This essay was written as a response to John Middleton Murray's work "Romanticism and Tradition" in which Murray challenged the ideas of T. S Eliot presented in his previous work "Tradition and Individual Talent".

 Traditional and Individual Talent (1919)
                       ↓  
       Romanticism and Tradition 
                       ↓
      

       The Function of Criticism (1923)

Analysis of the Essay 

The function of criticism is a kind of sequel to Elliot's 1919 essay 'Tradition and the Individual Talent'. In that essay, Eliot had argued that no artist has their meaning alone and that every great artist uses the literary tradition in the creation of their new work of art. 

In many ways this essay I'd a riposte on what we might call 'Romantic' approach to artistic creation, which is founded on the idea that all great artists need to do is "look within" wait for inspiration, or trust their "inner voice".

Eliot by contrast, adopts 'classical view' made by T. E Hulme following the distinction between romanticism and classicism in his essay, that is, every great artist looks outside of, and beyond themselves in the creation of a new work of art. 

It is believed that -

"Criticism is an auto-telic activity".

However, it is quite a wrong statement because criticism always has to be about something and it's goal should be to give proper explanation of all the literary texts. Elliot argues that those should consider criticism as an auto-telic activity should be strictly criticised. 

Some critics like Mathew Arnold says that art may have some other purpose like moral, religious and cultural, but according to Eliot art need not to be aware of these purpose/end rather it performs it's function better by pleasing audience and explaining the texts. 

This Essay is divided into four parts 

1. Deals with Elliot's views on criticism and critical work of art. 

2. Deals with Murry's views on Romanticism and classicism and Elliot's contradiction with it. 

3. Deals with Elliot's criticism to Murry. 

4. Deals with relationship of criticism with the creative work of art. 

✴️Part  I

◾Eliot says that criticism has one and only definite purpose that is to explain the work of art and the correction of taste. 

◾Sometimes critics differ from eachother because of their personal biases bit Eliot says that criticism is an impersonal process and criticism should be grounded in facts. He beloved that true purpose of a critic is to present the facts related to the work so that the reader can also make judgement and give their opinions about the work of art, but the facts should be related to the work itself and not about it's writer. 

◾The critic must be knowledgeable about the facts related to work of art that is themes, structure, origin etc. 

◾A critic should have good knowledge about the pas writers.

◾However, the ultimate aim of every critic should be to enlighten the reader through the text.

◾A critic should never be a blind follower of other critics and they should try to make difference with other critics in order to became better than others.

✴️ Part II

◾In the second part of essay, Eliot talks about the Murry's views on classicism and romanticism. 

◾According to Murry - 

"Classical writer's cannot be a romatic writer" . 

 

Murry believed that classicism and romanticism can't go side by side because both are different from each other. Murry futhur says that classicism is the feature of French and romanticism is the feature of England and as he's from England romanticism is more important to him. 

Eliot criticizes this thinking of Murry as he does not give important to classicism. Murry believes that a critic should hear and follow his/her inner voice and no restrictions to follow the rules. Murry said that rules are made to be broken.

Eliot criticizes Murry's attitude for rejecting the dignity of others. Eliot objected by stating that concept of inner voice is like doing what one likes. 

◾Furthur, Eliot defines the difference between classicism and romanticism and says that romanticism is fragmented and immature, while classicism is comolete and mature. Thus,  according to him classicism is better than romanticism. 

✴️Part 3

◾According to Eliot function of critism is to search for some common rules or principles for the perfection of art and this function can only be served when the tradition of art is followed.

◾Thus, someone believing in the concept of  'inner voice' could not value criticism. Eliot calls inner voice "whiggery" which means liberal.

✴️Part IV

◾In the fourth part, Eliot says that some people like Arnold and Murry consider criticism better than the creative work of art, but Eliot criticises these type of people. 

◾According to Eliot - 

Criticism only exists when there's a creative work. 

◾Eliot gives equal importance and says that any critic has to be creative in order to criticise text. 

◾Eliot says that creative art can be produced only through criticism which includes analysis, judgments and knowing about the merits and demerits. 

◾According to Eliot, the highest kind of criticism is that which is done by the writer himself. With the criticism of their work the critics become more correct and structured.

◾He continuously argues that critical and creative writings cannot be seperated.

Qualifications of a good critic 

◾In order to be a good critic one has to develop an extraordinary sense of fact about the work of art, the condition, the setting and the mannerism.

◾Any critic has to be good in comparison and analysis about themes, plot and technical aspects like structure and the content.

◾Facts are not always beneficial because they can be misleading. Facts should be in close connection to what you are writing upon. 

◾A good critic has to be extremely objective in nature and should have a scientific attitude by following all the above mention points. 

Thanks for reading .❤✨

Hope this helps ! 🥂