Principles of literary criticismRichards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
Philosophy
Principles of literary criticism
Richards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
Criticism
The permanence of poetry is a subject closely connected with
the foregoing. Just as there is a prejudice in favour of work
with a wide popular appeal, so there is another in favour of
work which lasts, which has “stood the verdict of the centuries”,
or is thought likely to stand it. Both are in part due to critical
timidity; if we cannot decide ourselves, let us at least count
hands and go with the majority.
But circumstances which have nothing to do with value sometimes
determine survival, and work which is of great value must often perish
for that very reason. It never gets printed, none will look at it or
listen to it. And immortality often attaches itself to the bad as
firmly as to the good. Few things are worse than _Hiawatha_ or _The
Black Cat_, _Lorna Doone_ or _Le Crime de Silvestre Bonnard_, and some
of the greatest favourites[74] of the anthologies figure there through
their ‘bad eminence’.
There are, however, reasons for connecting persistence of appeal
with a certain type of structure, and, which is more interesting,
instant fame with a failure to appeal to subsequent generations.
Work which relies upon ready-made attitudes, without being able
to reconstitute similar attitudes when they are not already existent,
will often make an appeal to one generation which is a mystery
to the generations with different attitudes which follow. But
this disadvantage from the point of view of permanence of communication
does not necessarily involve any lack of value for those to whom
the experiences are accessible. Very often, of course, it will
accompany low value; but this need not be so.
The permanence of some art has often been an excuse for fantastic
hypotheses. Such art has been thought to embody immortal essences,
to reveal special kinds of ‘eternal’ truths. But such debilitating
speculations here no less than elsewhere should be avoided. Those
are not the terms in which the matter may best be discussed.
The uniformity of the impulses from which the work of art starts
is a sufficient explanation of its permanence. Where the impulses
involved are only accidentally touched off through being temporarily
in a heightened state of excitability, we may reasonably expect
that there will be little permanence. As a catchword will work
one year like magic, since certain attitudes are for social reasons
ready poised on a hair-trigger adjustment, and the next year
be inoperative and incomprehensible, so, on a larger scale and
in less striking degree, men’s special social circumstances often
provide opportunities for works of art which at other times are
quite inadequate stimuli. There are fashions in the most important
things as in the least, but for the artist to profit by them
is usually to forgo permanence. The greater the ease of communication
under such conditions the greater the danger of obsolescence.
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