Science and poetryRichards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
History
Science and poetry
Richards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
English poetry -- 20th century -- History and criticism; Poetry
Habits that have endured for many thousands of years are not easy to
throw off--least of all when they are habits of thought, and when they
do not come into open conflict with changing circumstances, or do not
clearly involve us in loss or inconvenience. Yet the loss may be great
without our knowing anything about it. Before 1590 no one knew how
inconvenient were our natural habits of thought about the ways in which
a stone may fall; yet the modern world began when Galileo discovered
what really happens. Only persons thought to be crazy knew before 1800
that ordinary traditional ideas as to cleanliness are dangerously
inadequate. The infant’s average ‘expectation of life’ has increased by
about 30 years since Lister upset them. Nobody before Sir Ronald Ross
knew what were the consequences of thinking about malaria in terms of
influences and miasmas instead of in terms of mosquitoes. The Roman
Empire might perhaps have still been flourishing if someone had found
this out before A.D. 100.
With such examples all about us we can no longer, in any department
of life, so easily accept what was good enough for our fathers as good
enough for ourselves, or for our children. We are forced to wonder
whether our ideas, even upon subjects apparently of little practical
importance, such as poetry, may not be dangerously inadequate. It
becomes indeed somewhat alarming to recognize, as we must, that our
habits of thought remain, as regards most of our affairs much as
they were 5,000 years ago. The Sciences are, of course, simply the
exceptions to this rule. Outside the Sciences--and the greater part of
our thinking still goes on outside the Sciences--we think very much
as our ancestors thought a hundred or two hundred generations ago.
Certainly this is so as regards official views about poetry. Is it not
possible that these are wrong, as wrong as most ideas of an equally
hoary antiquity? Is it not possible that to the men of the future our
life to-day will seem a continual, ceaseless disaster due only to our
own stupidity, to the nervelessness with which we accept and transmit
ideas which do not and never have applied to anything?
_The average educated man is growing more conscious_, an
extraordinarily significant change. It is probably due to the fact
that his life is becoming more complex, more intricate, his desires
and needs more varied and more apt to conflict. And as he becomes
more conscious he can no longer be content to drift in unreflecting
obedience to custom. He is forced to reflect. And if reflection often
takes the form of inconclusive worrying, that is no more than might be
expected in view of the unparalleled difficulty of the task. To live
reasonably is much more difficult to-day than it was in Dr. Johnson’s
time, and even then, as Boswell shows, it was difficult enough.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account