Pope - Critical of Critics

Pope- “An Essay on Criticism” 

Criticism, in Pope’s eyes, use to be a process by which critics advised authors and subsequently instructed readers on how to appreciate said authors. Everyone has an opinion but this does not mean everyone can be a critic nor is a critics job to influence mass opinion. Those who have the power to make or break a writer’s livelihood should be able to write themselves, should be well versed in the classics, and be able to understand unity and form; for, if they are more mediocrity than genius how then are they capable of distinguishing between that which is intellectually palpable and/or sublime and that which dissuades from the art form? Pope’s essay exudes a mastery of harmony and prose construction that helps give sway to the type of writing he felt should be admired. 

 “But you who seek to give merit and fame,

And justly bear a critic’s noble name,

Be sure yourself and your own reach to know,

How far your genius, taste, and learning go;

Launch not beyond your depth, but be discreet,

And mark that point where sense and dullness meet” (46-51).

      In addition, a sound critic must reside on a well-deserved moral foundation so as not to fall victim to pride: an emotion which distorts reason. That is to say, a critic should seek to understand the writers overall intent and derive merit and bestow advice based on intent. A critic should not bask in his ability to find small errors. Likewise, a critic should not love a piece for its beautiful use of language or rhythm if such language and melody results in nothing more than a chaotic and thus un-unified work. “True ease in writing comes from Art, not chance,/ As those move easiest who have learn’d to dance” (362-3).

Pope, like Longinus, felt that the best art was derived from a polished mind. I.E one well versed in nature, past works, and form. Pope privileged criticism and saw it as an avenue for growth. He reveled in writings that hint at a classical foundation; although, he advises critics as well as writers to not relish prose in parts (I.E. the past OR the present) but rather to have an understanding of the past so as to be able to approach the present in an intellectual manner. Pope was himself a well accomplished scholar and literary figure, despite a plethora of road blocks. He was persecuted for being catholic and thus was not allowed to study in English universities, vote, hold public office nor live in England. He was privately tutored and perhaps due to feeling disadvantaged was quite rigid with his studies and ideas. In addition, as a child he suffered from TB of the bones which stunted his growth and thus disallowed him to grow pas 4.5 feet. He suffered intense pain all his life due to his past ailment and yet continually pushed himself in the literary world. He translated and edited great works, was capable of making a living off his prose, and sought to redefine the writing of his era so as to bring about the greatness reserved for the Greeks in his present day. However, Pope, despite his amazing contributions to the literary art form, was heavily criticized in his time. With the advent of the printing press and the public cafes/taverns more people were writing, sharing, and critiquing up and coming works. These works and critiques were not always up to Pope’s standard and Pope seemed incapable of finding a middle ground with those he felt worked with smut writing. 

Personal Response: I, in many ways, agree with Pope. I believe literary critics must be able to write so as to better understand the art form and I also believe that writing, if it is to be marked as grand or sublime, should contain intent that elevates the mind. However, I do not believe that only literary critics should have a voice pertaining to the validity and purpose of a work. Is not a student, a blogger, or an individual rapt with opinion deserving of a voice? Pope believed that one should not blindly believe critics, this is true, but not for the reasons he noted (they could be wrong), but rather, because a global and a communal discourse is critical in an intellectual world, no matter what the subject being discussed pertains to. As for all works needing to be that of a grand type, I most aggressively disagree. Every work may not be literature but this does mean that that which is not of an elevated art form need be overlooked. The written word is a platform for the sharing of ideas and should never conform to one notion or another. Plus, I enjoy a cheap read every now and then as such works entertain me at times when I do not wish to be elevated.  This may be why at 23 Pope wrote a work that is being read hundreds of years later where as I, at 23, am writing a blog about him versus writing my own great work, but, such is life. 

Pope, Alexander. "An Essay on Criticism." The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism 2nd Ed.

        New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, 2010.133-153. Print.