Criticism is not, we
think, an essay, nor a sermon, nor an oration, nor a chapter in
history, nor a philosophical speculation, nor a prose-poem, nor an
art-novel, nor a dialogue. In fact, it can be nothing in the world
but- a criticism. But if it were all that Arcturus imagines, it is not
very clear why it might not be equally "imaginative, or "dramatic"-
a romance or a melodrama, or both. That it would be a farce cannot
be doubted.
It is against this frantic spirit of generalization that we protest.
We have a word, "criticism," whose import is sufficiently distinct,
through long usage, at least, and we have an art of high importance
and clearly ascertained limit, which this word is quite well enough
understood to represent. Of that conglomerate science to which Mr.
Mathews so eloquently alludes, and of which we are instructed that
it is anything and everything at once- of this science we know
nothing, and really wish to know less; but we object to our
contemporary's appropriation in its behalf, of a term to which we,
in common with a large majority of mankind, have been accustomed to
attach a certain and very definitive idea. Is there no word but
"criticism" which may be made to serve the purposes of "Arcturus"? Has
it any objection to Orphicism, or Dialism, or Emersonism, or any other
pregnant compound indicative of confusion worse confounded?
Still, we must not pretend a total misapprehension of the idea of
Mr.
Pages:
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146