Critically comment on Arnold's definition of a Classic

Question: Do you agree with Arnold's definition of a Classic? Justify your answer.

The second-century Roman essayist Aulus Gellius distinguished literature into two categories-

(i) classicus and

(ii) proletarius.

The first term means for the upper classes, and the second one means for the lower classes. From the time of the Renaissance until the eighteenth-century works of Greek and Latin literature we considered as the models for "excellent". In the Modern period "classic' or 'classical' stands for either the excellent or of the highest poetic quality.

The term also connotes -'to do with ancient Greek or Roman Culture' or 'dignified, balanced and clearly ordered in the manner of certain Greek and Roman model. Now, we are to consider in which manner Arnold has dealt with the term "classic" in his The Study of Poetry. Pleading for a distinction between a classic and an ordinary poet, he states-

Everything depends on the reality of a poet's classic character.

He boldly says to sift a dubious classic; to explode a false classic, but to feel and enjoy as deeply as ever we can and also to appreciate the wide difference between a real classic and a commonplace piece of work. And this is the "great benefit" that one can expect from the study of poetry' in Arnold's opinion.

In the next step, Arnold refers to a yardstick for the real estimation of the degree and amount of the deeper enjoyment derived from a truly "excellent" poetry which is composed abiding by Aristotle's idea of a "higher truth" and a "higher seriousness". That very yardstick suggested by Arnold is the TOUCHSTONE METHOD that can assist a reader to reach the real estimation of poetry shedding the other two fallacious estimations-the historic estimate and the personal estimate.

To have entirely our anticipated rewards from poetry, we must remain cautious from "Charlatanism" that makes us forget the distinctions between "excellent poetry" and "inferior poetry. AND, this very faculty of differentiation "is of paramount importance." The true criticism of life can be derived from "excellent poetry only.

Matthew Arnold Again, Arnold claims that the best poetry "will be found to have a power of forming, sustaining, and delighting us, as nothing else can. And this is the most precious benefit that one can have from a poetical collection.

Also to comment upon the way to prepare our minds for reading poetry he states- A sense for the best as well as the really excellent and the strength to feel joy from it, must pervade our minds before and during our readings of poetry he states and this is the only method of "real estimation" of Poetry. Arnold firmly warns that: we must be watchful; otherwise, the real estimate, the only true one, must be replaced by two other kinds of fallacious estimations-

1. The historic estimate and

2. The personal estimate

Our poetic judgements thus turn fallacious due to the presence of exaggerated historic elements. This very judgement, on the other hand, can also turn erroneous due to the presence of overrated personal fallacies.

Source and Spheres of activities of these two erroneous fallacies: Both these fallacies are natural; they originate spontaneously in our minds. The historic estimate is sure to influence our judgment and our language at the time of dealing with ancient poets, and we like to eulogize in a hyperbolic tone. On the other hand, our poetic judgement is found to be affected by personal estimate when we deal with contemporary poets or modern poets.

So, a classic, in the opinion of Arnold. is meant for the upper class only, as everything depends on the true classic character of a poet.