THE LITERARY BACKGROUND The literary scene was as murky, baffled and chaotic as the social scene when

T.S. Eliot appeared at the scene. The literary activity suffered from almost a decadence and chaos. However, out of this chaos, new ideas and news dimensions were being introduced here and there. Modern Criticism: Its Novelty and Variety Twentieth century literary criticism in England offers a bewildering variety of critical theory and practice. New discoveries in psychology, anthropology, sociology, economics, etc., have brought about a revolution in critical methods with the result that modern criticism is quite different from criticism in the 19th century. Critics like I.A. Richards, T.S. Eliot, F.R. Leavis, William Empson, have provided entirely new interpretations of old writers, and presented them in an entirely new light. The full significance of their achievement is yet to be realised. Traditional Criticism: Arnold and Pater However, at the turn of the century there were two traditionsthe Matthew Arnold tradition of intellectual, abstract or scientific criticism, and the Aesthetic, Impressionistic tradition of Walter Pater that held the day. While Arnold made high seriousness and criticism of life the tests of poetry, Paters criticism was aesthetic or impressionistic: while Arnold made art subservient to life. Pater advocated the theory of art for arts sake. Arnolds influence was an all-pervasive and continuing one. That is why Eliot once remarked that we seem still to be living in the critical tradition of Arnold. Pater, on the other hand, has been a source of inspiration for the Bloomsbury group of critics, as EM. Forster, Virginia Woolf, Lytton Strachey and Clive Bell. According to these critics, the enjoyment of art and the appreciation of beauty is the greatest good of human life, and art, therefore, must be freed from the shackles of morality. Their criticism is impressionistic, they assess a work of literature on the basis of the pleasure that it affords them. Academic Criticism: Lack of Originality These two traditions continued into the 20th century, and were a constant source of inspiration. But in the opening years of the century, we do not find any original critic, with a definite and individual point of view. Literary criticism is largely academic, the work of distinguished university professors. They are eminent scholars, they painstakingly collect facts, biographical, historical and social, and evaluate a writer on the basis of these facts, but they lack a precise point of view. Chief among these scholar-critics are George Saintsbury, Edward Dowden, A.C. Bradley, Oliver Elton, W.B. Ker, W.J. Courthope, etc. There is another group of scholars who devote their attention to textual emendation. Distinguished scholars, like Furness, Dover Wilson, Gregg, Pollard, try to reach an authentic version of old texts. T.E. Hulme: His Influence The only original criticone who has had considerable influence on T.S. Eliot, as also on the whole course of criticism in the centuryis T.E. Hulme. His point of view is religious, classical and tragic. With the existentialists, he believes that tragedy is the central fact of human life. In this way, he at once rejects both the romantic concept of poetry as inspiration and the Victorian and Darwinian faith in unlimited progress. Thus his point of view is anti-romantic and anti-humanistic. He advocates the need of order and discipline, and thus becomes a champion of classical revival in literature, which Eliot also advocates. Eliot strengthened the reaction against romanticism and humanism and did much to bring about the classical revival. Further, Hulme pointed out that poetry should express the vague, fleeting impressions passing through the mind of the poet, and this can only be done when the verse-form is made loose and flexible. He thus became a powerful advocate of verse libre or free verse. He also advocated that the poet should express his concepts through the use of solid, concrete and clear images, and in this way, he became a source of inspiration to Ezra Pound and other poets of the Imagist School. Foreign Influences: Marx After World War I, English insularity was broken and ideas and influences from Europe began to flow in and affect the course of literary criticism in England. First, there was the influence of Marx and his concept of class struggle. Writers were analysed and interpreted in terms of class-conflict. For example, David Daiches in his book Society and Literature shows how economic trends are reflected in literature; Cristopher Caudwell studies, Shakespeare, Milton, Wordsworth, Coleridge, and the other romantics, against the background of social and economic changes. Aestheticism of Pater is thus rejected and literature is viewed as a social activity reflecting the changing social and economic patterns. Croce: Expressionism: Surrealism Secondly, there was the potent influence of the Indian critic Benedetto Croce. According to his theory, vivid pictures are constantly rising in the mind of the poet, and he must express them spontaneously and fully as they arise in his mind, without any attempt at organisation. This is known as Expressionism. Expressionistic writing is bound to be broken and fragmentary in keeping with the fragmentary and chaotic nature of the vague sensations fleeting through the consciousness of the poet. The teaching of Croce had a far-reaching impact on creative and literary activity in England. Closely allied with Expressionism is the French theory of Surrealism. Surrealism attributes artistic creation to dreams and the influence of spirits who inspire the artist with his forms and images. Herbert Read in one of those critics whose works reveal the influence of this creed. The Psychologists: Their Influence

These influences were joined in and strengthened by the teachings of modern psychology, specially those of Freud, Jung and Bergson. Freud believed that suppression of the sex-instinct results in frustration and neurosis, and art is but a sublimated expression of this neurosis. Psychological theories were used for an analysis and interpretation of past writers and their works. Thus Hamlet has been interpreted in the light of Freuds theory of the Oedipus Complex. The motives and processes that lead to a particular work of art were studied and thus new dimensions were added to literary criticism. Similarly, the impact of literature on the mind of the readers is sought to be explained in Psychological terms. I. A. Richards is the most outstanding of the critics of the psychological school. According to him, the pleasure of literature arises from the fact that it brings about a healthy equilibrium between the instincts and impulses of the readers. The New Critics As the century advanced, specially after the World War II, the most potent single influence was that of the New Critics The term was first used by J.E. Spingarn, and though the New Criticism had its origin in the writings of T.E. Hulme, it is now mainly an American movement. Its chief exponents in America are Kenneth Burke, John Crowe Ransom, Allen Tate, Richard Blackmur, Cleanth Brooks, etc. In England its leading representatives are I.A. Richards, T.S. Eliot, F.R. Leavis, William Empson, etc. Their Methods The New Critics are opposed to the biographical, historical, sociological and comparative approach of conventional criticism. All such considerations are regarded as extrinsic and irrelevant, and a work of art is judged solely on its own merits. A poem, a piece of literature, is the thing in itself, with a definite entity of its own, separate both from the poet and the socio-cultural milieu in which it is produced. The emphasis is laid on the study of the text, and its word by word analysis and interpretation. The music of a poem, its imagery and versification, its total structure, must be taken into account to arrive at its meaning. Words must be studied with reference to their sound, and their emotional and symbolic significance. New criticism is predominantly textual, and the new critics have rendered valuable service to literature by their study and interpretation of literary classics. While Eliot has his affinity with the critics of the New School, he is against too close a scrutiny of a work of art. The poem is the thing, and it must be studied in itself, but he is against the lemon-squeezer, critics who press words too closely. Conclusion English literary criticism in the 20th century is a mixed medley of the old and new: much that is traditional persists along with what is new and experimental. Thus historical criticism survives in the works of scholars and professors like David Cecil, CM. Bowra, Ifor Evans, etc., and the moral concern of Arnold is to be seen in the critical creeds of D. H. Lawrence and Middleton Murrey. While it is too early to assess the worth and significance of the New Critics, who today hold the field, there can be no denying that they have raised the standards of literary discussion, and opened out promising vistas. T.S. Eliot takes his position in the van of these critics.