John Ruskin and Matthew Arnold would both challenge Oscar Wilde’s assertion, “There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.” First and foremost, they would challenge how a work of literature or art could be rated as good in the first place. Utilizing Ruskin’s “The Savageness of Gothic Architecture” and Arnold’s “The Study of Poetry” to compare the criteria both used to classify something as either good or bad and lastly, considering if morality is completely foreign to defining the quality of something according to their texts.
Starting with Ruskin in his “The Savageness of Gothic Architecture” in where perfection is negative and mass produced, whereas imperfection is what art
…show more content…
First of all, the best poetry has three functions “forming, sustaining and delighting us” (1426). Consequently, he mentions two false estimates—the historic and personal—that could confuse one at the moment of classifying good poetry, but must ultimately be ignored. His theory is that one must let oneself be guided by an “infallible touchstone for detecting the presence or absence of high poetic quality” (Arnold 1428). The problem with his theory is that this touchstone, in essence, is a personal estimate. Thus, it is highly probable that he would have had a problem of ideology with what Wilde says, as the text must have matter and substance as well as diction and movement. Arnold would have great problems with Wilde’s statement, because it mirrors too much what he himself does when choosing which works are good or not based on classics that he considers to be the best, and using these as his touchstones. He would probably feel that what Wilde says is too simplistic, and quite possibly would resonate simultaneously too much and too little with his theories on what good poetry or literature …show more content…
. . the idea is the fact” (Arnold 1425). Therefore, if the idea behind the text is immoral, the text itself is immoral. When taken in regards that to Arnold the matter is incredibly important, “the substance and matter on the one hand, the style and the manner on the other, have a mark, an accent, of high beauty, worth, and power” (Arnold 1429). Thus, if to him the matter, substance and style were to not meet his standards the art would simply have no beauty, worth or power. Quite possibly if something is immoral the substance of the text would be lacking, regardless if the style and matter are done well. For example, Arnold mentions Chaucer as a great work of art, but he is unable to call it great because its matter is not serious. Therefore, in the case of matter, substance and style—in the latter, including diction and movement—it is important to be serious. If something were to be immoral, it would not be serious and thus would not meet his requirements for good
Some works show their true colors right away. Gene Edward Veith’s book, Reading Between The Lines, addresses philosophical ideas, literary sub genres, and reader criticisms in order to ascertain a Christian’s role in literature. He also goes through various historical periods and examines their more prominent works and schools of thought. While a select few of his conclusions about Christianity in relation to the arts have merit, others contain more damaging implications. Specifically, his statements regarding television represent inaccurate and offensive thinking.
This carried on in to the 18th century where more and more people dabbled in the gothic style with out a full understanding of how gothic architecture worked as a structural system. They confused stages of the gothic period, which were later defined by Thomas Rickman in is writing, and also used Classical forms such as pilaster and venetian windows. Many interiors were of a classical form a layout and some times other style were thrown in. Some gothic forms were even used on the exterior of building where they didn’t perform the function they were meant to. This shows how little the architects of the 18th century studied the mediaeval and how little they understood it.
Ruskin, John. “Grotesque Renaissance.” The Stones of Venice: The Fall. 1853. New York: Garland Publishing, 1979. 112-65. Rpt. in Classical and Medieval Literature Criticism. Ed. Jelena O. Krstovic. Vol. 2. Detroit: Gale Research Company, 1989. 21-2.
Art for Art's Sake: Its Fallacy and Viciousness. The Art World, Vol.2. May 1917. 98-102
John Gardner: Making Life Art as a Moral Process. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1988. 86-110. Rpt. in Twentieth-Century Literary Criticism. Ed.
Reid, Alfred. “Emerson’s Prose Style: An Edge to Goodness.” Style in the American Renaissance: A Symposium. (1970): 37-42. Rpt. in Nineteenth Century Literature Criticism. Ed. Laurie Lanzen Harris. Vol. 1. Detroit: Gale Research Inc., 1981. 306.
This investigation’s purpose is to analyze the changes in the architectural technique of the Romanesque style of architecture and come to a conclusion as to whether the shift in technique led to the rise of the more grandiose Gothic architecture in Europe. All art is inspired and the influences that caused the change in technique will also be investigated. In order to come to a conclusion I read books on the two styles I compared, studied some examples of each form of architecture through photographs, and listened to a few podcasts on the topic. Many of the sources were used were found online except for the book A Concise History of Western Architecture by R. Furneaux Jordan.
Regarding architecture of the era of Industrial Revolution, John Ruskin, a co-founder of the Arts and Crafts movement towards simplicity argued, ‘’ you should not connect the delight which you take in ornament with that which you take in construction or in usefulness. They have no connection, and every effort that you make to reason from one to the other will blunt your sense of beauty... Remember that the most beautiful things in the world are the most useless; Peacocks and lilies for instance.’’
There is a difference between a great piece of art and a good piece of art. A good piece of art dazzles and influences its audience. While a great piece of artwork is not confined to time, but influences generation after generation. Literature is a great piece of artwork. It tends to influence its audience no matter the time period; whether it was written in the middle ages or in the millennium. Literature offers something that is ageless and always applicable. It is a story with an agenda to teach its audiences. After all, as the Nun’s priest says in his epilogue, “For everything written, says St. Paul Is written, surely, to instruct us all.” (Chaucer 218). Literature like the Canterbury Tales gives a reader access to moral lessons that are applicable to life. These lessons include the dangers of flattery and that appearances can be deceiving.
Historically, Wilde was a staunch—even notorious—advocate of Aestheticism: a doctrine popular throughout Europe in the late nineteenth century which held that “art exists for the sake of its beauty alone, and that it need serve no political, didactic, or other purpose” (Britannica). Indeed, David Cooper in his Companion to Aesthetics argues that the doctrine “asserts not merely that a work of art should be judged only on ...
Scott, Lynn. "Beauty, Virtue and Disciplinary Power:" Midwestern Miscellany 24 (1996): 9-23. Rpt. in Contemporary Literary Criticism. Ed. Janet Witalec. Vol. 173. Detroit: Gale,2003.Literature Resource Center. Web. 14 Mar. 2011
Jacobsen, Aaron H. Art and Architecture of the Middle Ages. Barbarian Art of Christian Europe, Romanesque Art, Gothic Art.
I argue for an interpretation of Kant's aesthetics whereby the experience of the beautiful plays the same functional role in the invisible church of natural religion as Scripture does for the visible churches of ecclesiastical religions. Thus, I contend, the links that Kant himself implies between the aesthetic and the moral (in the third Critique and the Religion) are much stronger than generally portrayed by commentators. Indeed, for Kant, experience of the beautiful may be necessary in order to found what Kant views as the final end of morality — the ethical community — since human moral psychology requires embodiments of moral ideas. Finally, I seek to modify Martha Nussbaums' argument in Poetic Justice (1995) for the increased use of the literary imagination as a means for improving public moral reasoning in this country, with the Kantian insight that aesthetic autonomy is the key to any aesthetic-moral link.
Ruskin believes that what we like defines who we are. People are only in right moral state when they have come to like doing it. If they still enjoy immoral things, they are still in a vicious state. Art, like people works similar. Tastes for any art is not a moral quality, but taste for good ones is. A work of art may look good to the eye, but if it is an expression of delight in a prolonged vile thing, the delight is an immoral quality, and therefore a bad taste. A Greek statue however expresses delight in the perpetual contemplation of a good and perfect thing. This is entirely a moral quality, it is the taste of the angels.
Poetry is often regarded as a highly respected art of writing. Emily Dickinson was regarded as one of the greatest poets of the 19th century for her observations of religion, nature, medicine, and music. William Shakespeare's plays can be regarded as a style of poetry and is credited for several words in the English dictionary. However, the style of Walt Whitman is considered as one of the greatest poets that ever lived. However, his writing styles were not regarded without consequence. The writing styles of Walt Whitman, in his day, were considered a highly controversial topic. However, because of his topics, Walt Whitman is indeed the ultimate poet.