Graduate 53: Arnold versus Wilde
I've mentioned both Matthew Arnold and Oscar Wilde in previous blog entries. They continue to fascinate me for their radically different perspectives on the world and for the modes of thought that they seem to represent.
The following material is from my final exam in Victorian Literature, a class that I took in the Spring of my senior year. The prompt called for me to write a dialogue between Arnold and Wilde, revealing and interacting with the salient points of their respective ideologies. Now my knowledge of either of these figures is extremely limited; a friend already pointed out some problems with "Senior 44: Art, Oscar Wilde." But if every statement in the fictitious dialogue below does not accurately reflect the actual thoughts of the individual, I think that I still capture something of their unique voices.
Dialogue is an interesting literary form. Peter Kreeft has recently published several very-engaging dialogues, and I think I would be so excited to master the technique and skill.
In the material below, one of the greatest challenges was to keep the conversation moving and avoid a stalemate. (I am moving away from presuppositionalism, but that world view model does contain compelling features that tend to make truly meaningful dialogue difficult. Hopefully I'll write soon about rationality and refuting the view that posits the existence of many irreducible and irreconcilably distinct world views.)
The other challenge was to not favor one side over the other. Because Wilde is somewhat indifferent to the topic of discussion, Arnold must motivate the discussion, and that can make him seem truculent and argumentative. I agree with Arnold but acknowledge that Wilde's position is, in some respects, difficult to refute. I try to be fair to both sides.
The material has not been edited for content from the original timed-exam form, so please be gracious with its inadequacies. I have included two of my teacher's critical comments in brackets.
--
Arnold: In literature may be found the hope of England in this new age. If we are to escape from anarchy and truly prosper than we must see things as they are. And a strong education in the classics will furnish us with the means to dispassionately evaluate our own age.
Wilde: I think that I almost could not disagree more. I also admire the classics - some of them, but I do not see what they have to do with our modern age. [I doubt Wilde would ever say that.--referring to the last phrase]
A: They represent the greatest heights of what the human intellect and spirit have achieved. We can only benefit from drawing on their wisdom.
W: Are you not impressed, then, by any of our modern authors?
A: Some, perhaps, but authors today seem not nearly concerned enough about the impact of their work on the masses. Many are after only easy money and giving the masses just the sort of drivel they want.
W: Tut, tut. There you go again about the impact of their work on the masses. And nothing could be further from the truth than the notion that any author's art has anything to do with them.
A: But certainly you are agreed that the state of the masses is problematic. What with everyone so preoccupied with their own interests and giving no thought to the common good. Unrest is on the rise and if we are not careful it will lead to civil war.
W: Well, I don't know anything about that. What you are describing is the concern of politicians and social reformers. I am an artist.
A: And you think that that fact removes you from any responsibility to work in the interests of your fellow man.
W: I think that it means I am concerned with art.
A: And what, pray tell, do you take to be the concern of art?
W: I don't understand the question.
A: What is the end of art? Certainly if it does not contribute to the good of mankind then it is worth nothing.
W: On the contrary, if I were only concerned with pleasing the mass of humanity, that would make my art worthless.
A: Then do you write for no one?
W: I write for myself.
A: And what do you get out of it.
W: The enjoyment of something beautiful.
A: And the people get nothing?
W: I suppose some may get something. That's really not my concern. I doubt if anyone ever got anything from a work of art that was not already in them.
A: But what hope, then, is there for change?
W: I'm not worried about that. Society will change.
A: And you?
W: I am already perfect. [A bit over the top, even for Wilde.]
A: A perfect man without any thought or concern for his fellow man? --it's not possible. I suppose all of England could go to the dogs and you would sit here and write about it.
W: I am an artist.
A: You are unbalanced. You mistake the artistic and aesthetic for the whole of the good life. You must learn to cultivate your whole character.
W: If it means becoming anything like you, I think I'll pass. I'm quite content with my 'bad' life.
A: I think that you don't know what you are saying.
W: Believe me when I say, "I do." You criticize me, as an artist, for failing to have the concerns of a politician. If I am unbalanced in one direction, it seems to me that you are unbalanced in the other.
A: I am prepared to acknowledge that in every age a society has certain tendencies that draw it away from a virtuous mean. As an antidote to that, I pull in the opposite direction.
W: Commendable.
A: And that is why I must exhort you to leave your self-centeredness and see the world as it is, in desperate need of reform. If you do, then you cannot help but see how your work touches the people and either contributes or detracts from their well-being.
W: If you address me as a politician, I do not understand what you say. If you address me as an artist, I applaud you on the character of your impassioned plea. It is well-delivered.
A: And do my words not touch your moral conscience.
W: They touch my heart beautifully. Much as your words about "sweetness and light."
A: And what will you do with them?
W: I will do what I do with all such words: create art.
A: And what of the uncultivated working man or the fanatical middle class man or the empty-headed aristocrat? "Sweetness and light" is their calling, they must move toward it.
W: If they are uncultivated, fanatical, or empty-headed, they probably will never appreciate your words. I suggest you be content with your audience.
A: I am not concerned with the numbers of my audience.
W: Then we do have something in common.
A: I'm concerned about the people's well-being.
W: And so we begin again.
--
Soon to come, a blog posting on the superior way of rationality.
Blessings all,
--
God is in this place,
And that reality, seen and understood by the grace of God in Christ Jesus through the work of the Holy Spirit, makes all the difference in the world.
The following material is from my final exam in Victorian Literature, a class that I took in the Spring of my senior year. The prompt called for me to write a dialogue between Arnold and Wilde, revealing and interacting with the salient points of their respective ideologies. Now my knowledge of either of these figures is extremely limited; a friend already pointed out some problems with "Senior 44: Art, Oscar Wilde." But if every statement in the fictitious dialogue below does not accurately reflect the actual thoughts of the individual, I think that I still capture something of their unique voices.
Dialogue is an interesting literary form. Peter Kreeft has recently published several very-engaging dialogues, and I think I would be so excited to master the technique and skill.
In the material below, one of the greatest challenges was to keep the conversation moving and avoid a stalemate. (I am moving away from presuppositionalism, but that world view model does contain compelling features that tend to make truly meaningful dialogue difficult. Hopefully I'll write soon about rationality and refuting the view that posits the existence of many irreducible and irreconcilably distinct world views.)
The other challenge was to not favor one side over the other. Because Wilde is somewhat indifferent to the topic of discussion, Arnold must motivate the discussion, and that can make him seem truculent and argumentative. I agree with Arnold but acknowledge that Wilde's position is, in some respects, difficult to refute. I try to be fair to both sides.
The material has not been edited for content from the original timed-exam form, so please be gracious with its inadequacies. I have included two of my teacher's critical comments in brackets.
--
Arnold: In literature may be found the hope of England in this new age. If we are to escape from anarchy and truly prosper than we must see things as they are. And a strong education in the classics will furnish us with the means to dispassionately evaluate our own age.
Wilde: I think that I almost could not disagree more. I also admire the classics - some of them, but I do not see what they have to do with our modern age. [I doubt Wilde would ever say that.--referring to the last phrase]
A: They represent the greatest heights of what the human intellect and spirit have achieved. We can only benefit from drawing on their wisdom.
W: Are you not impressed, then, by any of our modern authors?
A: Some, perhaps, but authors today seem not nearly concerned enough about the impact of their work on the masses. Many are after only easy money and giving the masses just the sort of drivel they want.
W: Tut, tut. There you go again about the impact of their work on the masses. And nothing could be further from the truth than the notion that any author's art has anything to do with them.
A: But certainly you are agreed that the state of the masses is problematic. What with everyone so preoccupied with their own interests and giving no thought to the common good. Unrest is on the rise and if we are not careful it will lead to civil war.
W: Well, I don't know anything about that. What you are describing is the concern of politicians and social reformers. I am an artist.
A: And you think that that fact removes you from any responsibility to work in the interests of your fellow man.
W: I think that it means I am concerned with art.
A: And what, pray tell, do you take to be the concern of art?
W: I don't understand the question.
A: What is the end of art? Certainly if it does not contribute to the good of mankind then it is worth nothing.
W: On the contrary, if I were only concerned with pleasing the mass of humanity, that would make my art worthless.
A: Then do you write for no one?
W: I write for myself.
A: And what do you get out of it.
W: The enjoyment of something beautiful.
A: And the people get nothing?
W: I suppose some may get something. That's really not my concern. I doubt if anyone ever got anything from a work of art that was not already in them.
A: But what hope, then, is there for change?
W: I'm not worried about that. Society will change.
A: And you?
W: I am already perfect. [A bit over the top, even for Wilde.]
A: A perfect man without any thought or concern for his fellow man? --it's not possible. I suppose all of England could go to the dogs and you would sit here and write about it.
W: I am an artist.
A: You are unbalanced. You mistake the artistic and aesthetic for the whole of the good life. You must learn to cultivate your whole character.
W: If it means becoming anything like you, I think I'll pass. I'm quite content with my 'bad' life.
A: I think that you don't know what you are saying.
W: Believe me when I say, "I do." You criticize me, as an artist, for failing to have the concerns of a politician. If I am unbalanced in one direction, it seems to me that you are unbalanced in the other.
A: I am prepared to acknowledge that in every age a society has certain tendencies that draw it away from a virtuous mean. As an antidote to that, I pull in the opposite direction.
W: Commendable.
A: And that is why I must exhort you to leave your self-centeredness and see the world as it is, in desperate need of reform. If you do, then you cannot help but see how your work touches the people and either contributes or detracts from their well-being.
W: If you address me as a politician, I do not understand what you say. If you address me as an artist, I applaud you on the character of your impassioned plea. It is well-delivered.
A: And do my words not touch your moral conscience.
W: They touch my heart beautifully. Much as your words about "sweetness and light."
A: And what will you do with them?
W: I will do what I do with all such words: create art.
A: And what of the uncultivated working man or the fanatical middle class man or the empty-headed aristocrat? "Sweetness and light" is their calling, they must move toward it.
W: If they are uncultivated, fanatical, or empty-headed, they probably will never appreciate your words. I suggest you be content with your audience.
A: I am not concerned with the numbers of my audience.
W: Then we do have something in common.
A: I'm concerned about the people's well-being.
W: And so we begin again.
--
Soon to come, a blog posting on the superior way of rationality.
Blessings all,
--
God is in this place,
And that reality, seen and understood by the grace of God in Christ Jesus through the work of the Holy Spirit, makes all the difference in the world.
posted by Metaphysician_delta | 3:30 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home