Ancient rhetoric and poetic : $b Interpreted from representative worksBaldwin, Charles Sears
History
Ancient rhetoric and poetic : $b Interpreted from representative works
Baldwin, Charles Sears
Classical literature -- History and criticism -- Theory, etc.; Poetics -- History -- To 1500; Rhetoric, Ancient
[12] xxxv. Beside this may be set for contrast the bitter satire of
Lucian’s _Rhetorum præceptor_, which declares the practical equipment for
success in oratory to be effrontery, a loud voice, a store of strange
words, stock allusions, and sheer gab.
CHAPTER VI
THE _POETIC_ OF ARISTOTLE[1]
Veneration of Aristotle has been impatiently classed with “other mediæval
superstitions,” both by those who disliked authority and by those who
revolted against the inlaying and overlaying of his text with centuries
of interpretations. Since the Renaissance the _Poetic_ has, indeed,
fared in this regard somewhat as the Bible; and in both cases those
deviations from the original intention are widest, perhaps, which have
arisen from “private interpretation,” from missionary zeal more anxious
to read _into_ the text than to read _in_ it. What may be called on
the other hand communal interpretation, the consentient application of
Aristotle’s ideas to the typical problems of a whole group or period,
constitutes an important guide in the history of criticism. Both kinds
of interpretation imply in the original an extraordinary fertility. This
vitality, it is also clear, is of principles, of ideas set forth not
only as classifying, but as constructive. The principles have been from
time to time crystallized in rules; and some of the rules, having been
found restrictive or even inhibitory, have thereupon been flung aside.
But again and again a return to Aristotle’s _Poetic_ for orientation
of practise and of criticism has vindicated it as constructive. It is
not what Professor Dewey has lately called a “closed system.”[2] It
has exceptionally little of that mathematically abstract method which
Bergson[3] found unsatisfying for survey of human activities in time.
Rather its method is inductive. It examines how imaginative conceptions
have been so composed and so expressed as to kindle, direct, and sustain
the imagination of an audience; and its formulation is typically like
what modern science calls an hypothesis, that is a generalization
interpreting facts so far as they are known, and fruitful in their
further investigation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account