CHAPTER I LITERARY PRINCIPLES 1.—LITERATURE AND ITS MISSION A direct statement of the principles on which Brownson based his literary criticisms is not to be found in his writings; else the effort expended in these pages would be superfluous. But no critic can pass judgment on works of art, literary or otherwise, to any great extent, without writing sentence after sentence which indirectly at least points to the standard fixed in his mind. Of course, such statements, being applications to some individual, specific work, cannot stand singly as adequate utterances of general principles. On account of the different viewpoints from which they were pronounced, they might appear to contain contradictions rather emphatic; but these are greatly toned down when the various statements are taken as a whole and considered in their context as they naturally should be. It is from statements of this sort that we must ascertain what was Brownson's ideal of literature. Given this ideal, the merit of any single specimen depends on the extent to which it conforms with, or approaches, the model. Thus an exposition of the principles of criticism adopted by Brownson resolves itself into an elaboration of his idea of what true literature and true art should be. When we speak of ideal qualities to which every piece of literature should conform, this does not mean that there is an absolute ideal of literature in actual existence. A piece of literature indeed has an entity of its own, and can be considered apart from all else; but in reality it is closely connected with its suroundings, with humanity, with the world at large, and cannot be properly judged apart from these. There is then, according to Brownson, no 'general literature, which teaches nothing special' (xix 205). Such a literature is as unreal as is man without men and the human race without individuals. (Ibid.) Hence literature is always specific and means something that is 'specifically related to man as a moral, religious, or social being' 7 (xix 205). And this must always be held in mind by the critic if he wishes to arrive at an adequate judgment concerning any piece of writing. Literature therefore should not be considered apart from its surroundings. It should never be sought for its own sake (xix 208); in fact, not even for the sake of the 'pleasures of wit, taste, and imagination it may bring.' (Ibid.) Works that have no end beyond that of satisfying the literary taste of readers are not worthy of the labor of the critic (xix 364). These are rather hard words. They seem to call for direct instruction in literature, and therefore need some modification or explanation. Brownson concedes well enough that the aim of literature is primarily to please and not to instruct. Works that aim principally at instruction are the professional works of the sciences, and these are not included under the denomination of polite literature, or belles-lettres (xix 493). The latter, though specific, must address not one specific class of men, but rather the 'common sentiments of all cultivated readers.' (Ibid.) Poetry in particular, and under this term in a general way is included the novel, has as its first object to move and to please (xix 226). And the writer who uses it primarily for conveying instruction or defending doctrines is destroying the proper relation between content and form in art (Ibid.); he is exceeding the purpose of the medium which he employs. Still there should be instruction in all literature; but it is to be conveyed in the manner in which, for instance, the symphonies of Beethoven are said to be instructive (xix 304). If a more direct instruction is sought, even this must be very general, of the kind that will appeal to persons who differ widely in their individual views (xix 304). Always, however, must it be remembered that mankind in general refuses instruction unless it is given in a pleasing form (xix 366); and that a chief purpose of popular literature is to afford pleasure and recreation during hours of weariness and relaxation from severer labors or studies' (xix 588). Form, therefore, the garb in which the writer dresses his thought, is of great importance; and never should it be considered a matter of indifference (xix 366). In fact, the more beautiful and appropriate the form is, the more commendable is the work (xix 213). Even from a religious or moral stand point is this true. Everything that is worth doing is certainly worth doing well; and an author has no right at all 'to send out a literary production, great or small, without having made it as perfect in its kind as possible in his circumstances' (xix 213). Both the moral and the literary viewpoint condemn productions that are crude and hasty. (Ibid.) In the matter of rendering his work as appropriately beautiful as possible, the author has free rein; no restriction is laid on him (xix 213). Still, important as the form is, it cannot be considered the be-all and endall of literature. Works considered from the standpoint of form alone, as mere 'literary productions,' have no value (xix 318). If then the purpose of the writer is not merely to create a work of art (xix 68), the question naturally arises: What end must he have in view in producing a piece of literature? Literature, answers Brownson, is a form of human activity; it is 'the exponent of the life and character of the people who produce it' (xix 497), the expression of man's interior life (xix 267), and can therefore have no end except one that is in accordance with the true end of man (xix 68). This, indeed, is the only restriction imposed upon an author, that his motive be one which subserves the great and solemn purpose of man's existence (xix 213). No matter how high the literary merits of a production may be, it cannot be commended if it inculcates a false doctrine or is unwholesome in its tendency (xix 104). But this principle is not merely a deduction from the fact that literature is a form of human activity and is therefore subject to the laws that guide the latter. Literature should be considered not only in its origin, but much more in its last stage, in the goal at which its activity consciously or unconsciously arrives. It must be considered, therefore, in its influence, and thus it reveals itself as a power that will exert a strong effect for good or for evil (xix 460). Literature develops the energy of the soul, elevates sentiments, and broadens views (xix 22), if applied rightly; and if not, its influence on man is equally pernicious. In no sense can it be claimed that literature is independent of all moral, social, and religious doctrines except in purely mental abstraction. Persons that try to give concrete entity to this abstraction, to pure literature as such, making it a kind of Platonic idea that exists independent of the ethical or social conditions that surround every activity of |