Why literature matters

[Christopher Rhoades Dÿkema]

Carrol,
Please go back and reread CULTURE AND ANARCHY. What you describe is there, but
you will also find a strong critique of the values of unfettered capitalism, of
what we would now call the religious right, and a defense of an activist
government that works to improve the lives of the working classes. Also, part of
what he decried was the disorganized upheaval of the fairly recently
proletarianized. He has friendly things to say about other aspects of working
class life, including some that culturally formed the base of a stable and
well-organized English trade-union movement.

In some ways, Arnold, in 1969, was a kind of proto-Fabian, more than a
reactionary. The conservatives know him no better than you seem to.  Not to
glorify him, but his discussions of issues are interesting and more useful to us
than you think.

Christopher Rhoades Dÿkema

Carrol Cox wrote:


> >From "Why Literature?" by Mario Vargas Llosa in The New Republic
> >
> >  Awareness
> > of the existence of the forest creates the feeling of generality, the
> > feeling of belonging, that binds society together and prevents it from
> > disintegrating into a myriad of solipsistic particularities. The solipsism
> > of nations and individuals produces paranoia and delirium, distortions of
> > reality that generate hatred, wars, and even genocide.
> >
>
> I suppose one could paraphrase this as "Great Literature unites
> proletarian and capitalist in awestruck recognition of the profound
> humanity of capitalism." About what one would expect from _New
> Republic_.
>
> That also was the central message of Matthew Arnold's, _Culture and
> Anarchy_, a work inspired by his profound horror at a workers'
> demonstration in Hyde Park. That work is also the founding document of
> Modern Literary Criticism. The Great Professors have only rewritten it
> for each new generation. Llosa is a true Son of Arnold.
>
> Carrol