The Dichotomization of Conflict in an "Essay on Criticism"

In an almost Nietzschean struggle between the Dionysian and Apollonian, Alexander Pope's "Essay on Criticism" pits Nature versus Wit, Author versus Critic, and Modernists versus the Ancients. However, through his narrative, he paints himself as the heir apparent to the Ancients' literary throne. Apparently, Addison and Steele agreed. The Spectator named an "Essay on Criticism" "a Masterpiece in its kind." (Mack 185)

Pope addresses the nature of education on the common man and the natural inclination of the learned student to divert from Divinely given wit and become a critic by means of judgment through the erring guise of an education.

So by false Learning is good Sense defac'd;

Some are bewilder'd in the Maze of Schools,

And some made Coxcombs Nature meant but Fools.

In search of Wit these lose their common Sense,

And then turn Criticks in their own Defence.

(Pope 25-29)

However, Pope is also trying here to create an air of structure and divine precedence in the world of arts and letters. Education as we see can change the principle talents and gifts one has inherited from the Divine or as Pope refers to it as "the Light." Authors are bestowed a certain ability; however, as they become educated and learned, they become critics or try to write above their dominion and foist learned judgments and tastes upon literature and the arts. Their milieu is limited in scope to the natural abilities given by Divinity. However, as human nature dictates and as Pope, an ardent, outspoken critic himself of the Enlightenment believes, man, even a reasoned, educated man of the Enlightenment, cannot rise above their divinely given talents. (Hotch 476)

Like Kings we lose the Conquests gain'd before,

By vain Ambition still to make them more:

Each might his sev'ral Province well command,

Would all but stoop to what they understand.

(Pope 64-67)

Pope, although trying to rein in the ambitious Coxcomb, warns that man must follow his god given "Nature."

One Science only will one Genius fit;

So vast is Art, so narrow Human Wit;

Not only bounded to peculiarArts,

But oft in those, confin'd to singleParts.

(Pope 59-63)

However, as Pope is instructing to follow Nature, he is doing something interesting and dichotomous with these two couplets. He is presenting an either/or argument within the works and compares the vastness of arts with the narrowness of human wit. (Park 863)

First, he contrasts the words Science and Genius. The contrasting of the pair is pre-Nietzschean in nature if we look at the structure of science as an outward growing pretext of trial and error. If we examine the nature of Science as a constructed growth of knowledge, it is the antithesis of Genius. Science by nature builds itself upon the constructs of experience-Series A leads us to Series B and so forth. As Pope outlines in the Alps passages, the young writer only sees and understands what is before him; however, he cannot grasp and wrap his brain around, if you will, the vastness of the scholars and writers that came before. The plastic and scientific nature of those that came before are the Nietzschean Apollinian construct of literature and criticism that came before. The critic is simply furthering the outward extension of those learned before and not delving into an individual, original thought.

However, when Science juxtaposes with the nature of Genius, we must examine the fount of expression that comes with the original concept of pure art, genius, or originality. However, although the nature of Genius should be a derived through the natural extension of individual expression, Pope argues the growth of Genius comes, as Coleridge too believes, from the Divine, or once again, as Pope describes it, as "the Light." Coleridge and Pope agree with Nietzsche that the inspiration of Wit does come from a metaphysical somewhere; however, the Divine inspiration of Pope and Coleridge comes from a pious, wrathful god as opposed to the birth of originality, which comes from the partying bacchanalian pagan Dionysian rage in the Nietzschean sense of the Birth of Tragedy.

Pope's greatest and most daring diametric contrast comes between the vastness of the arts to the narrowness of human wit. If we recall the plastics argument of the nature of Science, we have to examine lines 86 through 91.

Those Rules of old discover'd, not devis'd,

Are Nature still, but NatureMethodiz'd;

Nature, like Liberty, is but restrain'd

By the same Laws which first herself ordain'd.

Pope, ever the teacher and critic himself, is trying to teach the young Coxcomb that believes his 'art' is greater than the masters that came before is living a fallacy and he owes all that came before for the production he feels is original art. The masters, as Pope will argue, although inspired by true Nature, simply build upon the foundation for inspiration, which was originally built by those that came before and by proxy simply contribute to the base of the Alpine foundation upon which they build. The growth and extensions of their arts build a base for our young Coxcomb to rest upon. Once the desire of inspiration hits him, there are very few Wits that spring forth with originality that make them truly a Nature, or Divine, inspired artist, he has simply been rewarded by the vastness of those that came before and did not actually contribute something new, but however, rested simply upon the Alpine vastness of his masters. Very few artists, authors, learned critics, or erring Coxcombs actually contribute outside of the vastness of art and contribute an original Wit or thought to the diasporas of the human intellect and that in which we call Art and erect an Alp in the distance for future authors to climb and overcome.

Finally, in the comparative couplets, he examines the ability of a writer to succeed in both genres, criticism and pure writing. He argues that not only are writers "confined to the peculiar Arts, [B]ut oft in those, confin'd to singleParts." In a sense, one gets the notion that Pope believes one may only write and succeed in one of the decided bifurcation of the writing arts, either criticism or creative writing. However, he also suggesting here a spilt in the types of criticism a critic may study his particular art. Some critics, he extends, prefer their tastes to the form or content of a writer's work. However, the satirical rhetoric here misses the point when it comes to the nature of tasteful criticism. He argues against the disingenuous nature of education, however, he does not make the stretch to lambaste those that 'learned' their taste through education and gained their taste and knowledge of language arts through the directed readings of educators and mentors. He continues with the art of language, style, and content. Here he does not give the critics an out. He acts them based on the art of taste and Wit comes with the baggage of accoutrement adorning the words and making the writing more of a play of words rather than subject. Pope, unknowingly, was commenting on and debunking the Post-modernists well before they even placed ink to paper. Finally, he takes the critics that rely on the rhythm, rhyme, and beat of a poets work as the utmost favor of aesthetic success.

Moreover, he illustrates the power of the critic over the intention and taste of the general reading population. A favorable review, a well-placed person with the right connections, and a work of words with masterful adornments can, although not be true to Divine Nature, but may be a simple, beautifully written piece that gains popularity due to the critic's words. Here Pope quips and chastises the critic and warns,

Good-Nature and Good-Sense must ever join,

To Err is Humane, to Forgive, Divine.

(Pope 524-525)

Pope tries to marry Nature and Sense in an "Essay on Criticism." As Patricia Spacks says, it "is an ambitious attempt to unify the disparate, to demonstrate the operations of the unified sensibilities. Pope starts with an intellectual subject and with a traditional set of attitudes towards it. By the resources of figurative language, he attempts to connect this subject with the widest reaches of the human experience." (Spacks 106)

However, Pope not only illustrates the dichotomy between criticism and wit this is a treatise of the nature of education in the Arts. Can we teach Art, taste, and the aesthetic? Moreover, is education in the arts more or less important than Natures given talents?

Works Cited

Hotch, Ripley. "Pope Surveys His Kingdom: An Essay on Criticism." Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900 13 (1973): 474-87.

Mack, Maynard. Alexander Pope A Life. Boston: W. W. Norton & Company, 1986.

Park, Douglas B. ""At Once the Source, and End":Nature's Defining Pattern in an Essay on Criticism." PMLA 90 (1975): 861-73.

Pope, Alexander. "Essay on Criticism." Poetry and prose of Alexander Pope. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1969. 37-57.

Spacks, Patricia M. "Imagery and Method in "An Essay on Criticism." PMLA 85 (1970): 97-106.