Discuss the value of Aristotle's criticism

  The value of Aristotle's criticism

 

Answer

 Aristotle's Poetics is one of the greatest contributions to literary and critical theory. He was motivated to write it as a vindication of poetry on purely aesthetic grounds against its condemnation by his teacher, Plato. Stephen Helliwell remarks: " Aristotle, like all educated Greeks, knew a great deal of poetry intimately, but it does not seem to have been among his deepest concerns, and he turned his philosophical attention to it perhaps chiefly because he saw ways of justifying this traditional element of Greek culture against his own teacher Plato, who had condemned poetry as false, immoral and psychologically damaging.”

Aristotle based his observations on existing Greek literature. “He is, “says Gunter Raefs, in the first instance, a Greek summing up Greek experience.” He approaches the subject as the historian of poetry and the rules that he formulated were " not merely rules of Greek art but principles of art, it is because first, the Greek poets contain so much that appeals to universal human nature, and because next, Aristotle was able from the mass of literature before him to disengage and formulate this universal element. The laws that he discovers are those which were already impressed on the chief productions of the Greek genius. “Aristotle was the first critic to give us the theory of poetry as opposed to it practice. He was the first to highlight the universal aspect of poetry,

Its representation of truth. He was the first to challenge the ethical view of poetry, and assert that the primary function of poetry is to give pleasure. His interpretation of ' imitation ' is also his own. It is not twice removed from reality but an imaginative reconstruction of it, seeing the universal in the particular - comedy no less than tragedy and epic. The poetic truths are of a higher order than those of historical - a fact which Plato could not perceive. Aristotle was the first to relate literature with life and the first to state the philosophical value of poetry to mankind. He was also the first to stress the psychological element in literature: What kind of plot, character and style, for instance, please men. He was the first to emphasise the supreme importance of unity in a work of art. In short, we may say that Aristotle is indisputably the first of the systematic theorists of literary criticism, an early exponent of the historical and psychological methods. In the words of Saintsbury “it is impossible for anyone who undertakes the office of a critic to omit the study of Aristotle without very great harm.” Being the first scientific critic of literature Aristotle is the father of literary criticism. Although in literary criticism we have advanced at some points to farther positions, says Sanitsbury, “over most of the grounds we are still engaged in consolidating the territory which Aristotle occupied.”

 A lot of criticism of Renaissance was deeply influenced by Poetics, as is clear from the pronouncements of Sidney, Ben Jonson and many others. Renaissance criticism added little of any value to Aristotle; its chief business was to interpret him. The pseudo or neo - classicism of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was formed on the various interpretations of Poetics. “The authority of the Poetics was now second only to that of the Bible, and to disagree with Aristotle was a sacrilege and a blasphemy.” It was in the early eighteenth century that his influence and authority reached its zenith. During the Romantic era the attention was focused on the text of the Poetics, its merit was recognized and its limitations were freely acknowledged. Even in modern age, Aristotle is accepted as a man of “universal intelligence”. “Even - to - day”, writes F.E.Lucas , “the Poetics continues to be studied and prescribed as text book in schools and colleges all over the world, from California to Calcutta.” In the History of criticism its importance is unquestionable and unrivalled. " It is neither an infallible guide nor yet an antiquated text book , but for breadth of outlook and sanity of judgment , for sheer penetrating power into the mysteries of art , the work is unrivalled , and modern theorizing has still to reckon with the context of its discreet , unromantic pages . "