Principles of literary criticismRichards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
Philosophy
Principles of literary criticism
Richards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
Criticism
The localised advantage may be irresistible in its appeal; the
personality will not surrender it, no matter what, of greater
worth is forgone for its sake, or what possibilities passing
by are lost, unglimpsed in the enthralment.
[61] The degree of racial difference is peculiarly difficult to
estimate. In view of the extent of mixture which has taken place
it may be of great importance in considering even the art of
one culture or tradition alone. Cf. F. G. Crookshank, _The
Mongol in our Midst_.
[62] These types if they must be admitted, have not yet been described
satisfactorily. The defects of such attempts as those of Jung,
for example, are shown by the fact that individuals change so
readily and so freely from ‘type’ to ‘type’, being extrovert
one hour and introvert the next, rationalist and intuitive from
moment to moment. This is of course denied by the Zurich School
but not by the majority of observers. To point it out is not
to overlook much that is valuable in these distinctions. A satisfactory
classification would doubtless be very complex, and perhaps of
the form: An individual of Type A is extrovert under these conditions,
introvert under those, etc.
[63] _Biographia Literaria_, Ch. XIII. “The primary IMAGINATION
I hold to be the living Power and prime Agent of all human perception,
and as a repetition in the finite mind of the eternal act of
creation in the infinite I AM.” The luminous hints dropped by
Coleridge in the neighbourhood of this sentence would seem to
have dazzled succeeding speculators. How otherwise explain why
they have been overlooked.
[64] Coleridge’s distinction between IMAGINATION and Fancy was
in part the same as this. But he introduced value considerations
also, Imagination being such combination or fusion of mental
elements as resulted in certain valuable states of mind, and
Fancy being a mere trivial playing with these elements. The discussion
of this distinction will be postponed to Chapter XXXII, where
the different uses of the term ‘imagination’ are separated.
[65] It is useful in this discussion to distinguish between the
artist’s personality as involved in his work and such other parts
of it as are not involved. With these last we are not here concerned.
[66] A weakness of the modern Irish school (even at its best,
in Mr Yeats) or of the exquisite poetry of Mr De la Mare, may
be that its sensibility is a development out of the main track.
It is this which seems to make it minor poetry in a sense in
which Mr Hardy’s best work or Mr Eliot’s _The Waste Land_
is major poetry.
CHAPTER XXV
Badness in Poetry
Il faut dissiper un malentendu: nous sommes pourris d’art!
_Le Corbusier-Saugnier_.
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