Orientation of Critical Theories M.H. Abrams

Orientation of Critical Theories | M.H. Abrams | Summary and Analysis

The essay ‘Orientation of Critical Theories’ is the first chapter of the book The Mirror and the Lamp by M.H. Abrams. In the book Abrams speaks about the two ways in which literature or literary theories try to interpret the human mind – first the mind as a mirror that reflects the external objects and second as a lamp that throws light at the objects it sees. The first approach is related to the mimetic theories of criticism and the second approach is related to the romantic ideal of the power of the mind to interpret what it sees. In this essay Abrams speaks about how different critical theories tend to display an orientation towards a particular element of a work of art by dividing these theories based upon their orientations.

This essay is divided by Abrams into five parts. The first part deals with the coordinates of art criticism. Abrams says that any critical theory consists of four elements with the help of which they comprehend art. The first element is the work of art and the second element is the artist. The third element is the source of the work, the objects or situations that the work describes or reflects or has some relation to. This is commonly referred to as ‘nature’ but Abrams uses the more inclusive term ‘universe’. The fourth element is the audience. Abrams arranges these four elements in a triangular diagram with the work of art at the centre and the universe, audience and the artist as the three coordinates. He says that any critical theory while dealing with all the four elements shows a significant orientation towards only one of these elements and judges the value of the work by focusing on one element as its principal criteria. Thus all critical theories can be divided into four broad categories depending upon their orientation towards the elements. The first category deals with the importance of the universe in the work of art. The second category deals with the influence of the work on its audience. The third orients towards the artist’s role in the process of creation of the work of art and the fourth category deals with the work as a singular entity. Abrams however says that the four elements vary according to the theories in which they appear.

The second part of the essay deals with mimetic theories. The critical theories that deal with mimesis are oriented towards the universe and its role in the work of art. This theory first appeared in Plato’s Republic. Plato’s theory of mimesis operates upon three categories – the ideal world, the physical world and the world of art. This theory holds that the physical world is an imitation of the Ideal world and art is an imitation of the physical world. Thus art is twice removed from reality. This idea is famously explained by Socrates in the tenth book of the Republic where he says that there are three beds – one the idea of the bed, second a physical bed made by the carpenter who imitates the ideal bed and the third is the bed painted by the artist. The bed of the artist is twice removed from the idea of the bed. Thus according to this theory all works of judged on the basis of their relation to Ideas. Since ideas are considered true and beautiful the distance of art from ideas emphasizes its distance from beauty and truth.

Aristotle’s Poetics is the next great work of criticism with a mimetic orientation. Aristotle defines poetry as imitation. He also distinguishes between different kinds of imitation based on the objects imitated, the manner of imitation, and the medium of imitation. With the help of these distinctions Aristotle is able to separate poetry from other art forms and then make distinctions between different kinds of poetry - epic, drama, tragedy and comedy. Similarly while focusing on tragedy Aristotle breaks it into distinct individual parts - plot, characters, thought, temperament, diction etc. - which constitute the whole. Aristotle's criticism thus not only concerns about art as art but also poetry as poetry, and each kind of poetry according to its individual characteristics. Thus it is seen that Aristotle's criticism also displays a slight orientation towards the work itself. Another characteristic feature of Poetics is that it evaluates art or specifically tragedy based on its effect upon the audience. Thus Aristotle's criticism is very flexible and cannot be easily classified into one form of orientation. Nevertheless the mimetic orientation remains the most prominent in Aristotle's criticism. It is however important to note that Aristotle's criticism does not pay much attention to the role of the poet's individual feelings or emotions in the creation of a work of art. In Poetics the poet appears only to be advised about how plot is to be constructed and how diction is to be chosen. Plato on the other hand considers the poet from the political point of view.

In the third part of the essay Abrams speaks about the theories that display an orientation towards the relationship of the work of art to its audience. Abrams terms these theories as pragmatic theories. Pragmatic theories view the arts as a means of achieving an end and judges the value of art based upon its success in achieving that end. For pragmatic critics poetry is a means to achieve certain responses from its readers. Sir Philip Sidney's ‘An Apology for Poetry’ is the first text that displays pragmatic criticism. According to Sidney the purpose of poetry is to teach and delight. Sidney judges the value of poetry by analyzing its effect upon its audience. He says that poets are different from historians because they communicate what may be or should be rather than what has been or shall be. Sidney raises the poet above philosophers and historians because it is only the poet who is the most successful in communicating with his audience. This is because he combines the fact of the historian and the morals of the philosopher and disguises it in a form that not only teaches but also delights.

The classical theory of rhetoric can be viewed as the origin of pragmatic theories as rhetoric is universally regarded as a powerful instrument of persuasion among an audience. Horace discusses this theory in his work Ars Poetica. Horace advises poets to write poetry with the aim to blend usefulness with pleasure. To teach, to please and to move are the three aesthetic effects to be achieved upon a reader. Pragmatic criticism is mostly concerned with formulating rules, guidelines and methods for achieving the desired effects upon the audience. The rules are often derived from the qualities present in classical literary works which have stood the test of time or from an understanding of psychology. These rules help the artist in the process of creation and the critic in the process of evaluation. Most eighteenth century critics believed in the strength of these rules. Therefore describing and demonstrating rules and guidelines became a popular trend in the critical texts of that time. Richard Hurd's ' Dissertation of the idea of universal poetry ' is another critical text concerning pragmatic criticism. According to Hurd universal poetry is the art whose purpose is to provide the maximum amount of pleasure possible. In order to achieve this effect Hurd proposes three properties - figurative language, fiction and versification. According to Hurd, since the aim of poetry is to gratify the mind of the reader, knowledge of the mind is important while establishing these rules.

Johnson’s "Preface to Shakespeare" is one of the most important texts dealing with pragmatic criticism. Johnson combines the mimetic criteria of evaluation with the aesthetic effects upon the audience in order to judge works of art. Johnson says that Shakespeare holds before his readers a faithful mirror of manner and life. But Johnson also states that the aim of poetry is to instruct as well as please. Therefore the fact that Shakespeare has survived the test of time as a poet whose works are read for little reason other than pleasure is proof that a work of art that truly imitates nature will continue to please its audience for a long time. Shakespeare's ability to hold up a mirror of life to his audience is the major criteria upon which Johnson judges the effect of his works on the audience. Abrams notes that the pragmatic orientation has been the principal aesthetic attitude of western criticism beginning from Horace up to the eighteenth century. However with the development of science and increased knowledge of psychology particularly after the influence of the works of Hobbes and Locke in the seventeen century, the poet and his mental capacities gradually became the focal point of criticism and the orientation of critical theories turned from the audience to the artist.

The fourth part of the essay deals with the critical theories oriented towards the relation between the work and the artist which Abrams calls the expressive theory of art. The expressive orientation is found in the works of Longinus in his discussions of the sublime which according to Longinus has its sources in the poet's thoughts and emotions. However Abrams considers the year 1800 marked by the publication of Wordsworth's Preface to the Lyrical Ballads as the date when the expressive orientation begins to surface in English literary criticism. The expressive theories are a product of the Romantic Movement which emphasized on the power of the poet's mind. According to the expressive theory a work of art is an external manifestation of internal thoughts and feelings. The creative process is a result of the impulses of feeling combined with the poet's thoughts and perceptions which is the primary source of his works. The poet also converts aspects of the external world into poetry with the help of his mind. The poet’s mind therefore is the central point of attention in an expressive theory. The expressive theories evaluate poetry by trying to figure out whether the diction and figures of speech are a natural outcome of the poet's emotions or a deliberate effort. The expressive theory tries to answer the questions of sincerity and authenticity of poetry along with the poem's correspondence to the actual feeling and state of the poet's mind.  The work of art is no longer viewed as a mirror of the universe but as an insight to the poet's mind.

In the fifth and last part of the essay Abrams discusses the objective theories of criticism which isolate a work of art and evaluate it as an independent entity. The orientation of objective theories is thus towards the work of art alone irrespective of its source, artist or audience. One of the early attempts at objective criticism is seen in Aristotle's Poetics. Aristotle tries to analyze tragedy by considering it as an individual whole consisting of parts such as plot and characters. The objective orientation begins to emerge significantly in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Some critics tried to understand a poem as a 'heterocosm' i.e. a whole, independent world complete in itself. This aim of critics to consider a work or poem as a singular element without any external reference is termed by historians as ' art for art's sake'.

Thus it is seen that Abrams divides critical theories into four categories based upon their orientation - first the mimetic theories which orient towards the universe, secondly the pragmatic theories concerning the audience, thirdly the expressive theories focusing on the artist and finally the objective theories revolving around the work of art itself. However towards the end of the essay Abrams returns to Romanticism and its expressive theories. This is because it is during the Romantic period that the critical theories begin to view the mind of the poet not as a mirror of nature but as a 'lamp' which sheds light on its own creation. Abrams' return to Romanticism justifies the purpose of his book where he tries to explain the two ways in which a poet's mind is interpreted- as a mirror and as a lamp.