FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   3   4   5   >>  
as a thrilling response to art, falls back upon Hutcheson in minimizing the importance of art and making it secondary to moral knowledge. Armstrong, while describing taste as the sensitive discrimination of degrees of beauty and deformity, bases this discrimination not on artistic, but on moral qualities. [Footnote 2: _Ibid._, II, 134.] The complete transition from classic to romantic premises of taste is characterized by the separation of art from morals. This step neither Cooper nor Armstrong takes. But they do exhibit tendencies which explain how the shift was made possible. Both writers insist on a felt response to a work of art. Cooper emphasizes that this response must be to the whole work. This assumption implies that a work of art is an entity complete in itself; it makes possible the argument that art conveys artistic, not moral knowledge. Cooper, by stressing sensibility as an effect of taste, suggests the Wordsworthian notion that the poet is more sensitive than other people. Armstrong, in addition to his hostility to formal criticism and his confidence in the natural man, reveals three other tendencies which later eighteenth-century critics elaborated. Like Edward Young in his _Conjectures on Original Composition_, 1759, Armstrong opposes slavish imitation of ancient models and declares that the writer should "catch their graces without affecting it [them]" so that his "own original characteristical manner will still distinguish itself."[3] Armstrong emphasizes exquisiteness of perception as the basis for taste: the more exquisite the mind, the more is it able to discriminate among the various degrees of the beautiful and the deformed. Although later critics repudiate Armstrong's moral discrimination, they transform it into a refined discrimination of aesthetic qualities. Finally, by suggesting that the man of genius differs from the man of taste by his ability to handle a medium, Armstrong implies the possibility of a technical criticism in terms of the writer's craft, apart from moral judgment. [Footnote 3: _Ibid._, II, 168.] Although the works of Cooper and Armstrong elicited contrasting popular reactions--_Letters concerning Taste_ running into four editions from 1755 to 1771 and Armstrong's writings, with the exception of _The Art of Preserving Health_, never winning much public favor--neither writer exerted a strong critical influence. Cooper did not reassess or change significantly the ass
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   3   4   5   >>  



Top keywords:

Armstrong

 

Cooper

 

discrimination

 

response

 

writer

 
tendencies
 

critics

 

Although

 

complete

 

emphasizes


implies
 

criticism

 

sensitive

 

degrees

 

qualities

 

artistic

 

knowledge

 
Footnote
 

possibility

 

transform


beautiful

 

deformed

 

thrilling

 

repudiate

 

medium

 

suggesting

 
differs
 
genius
 

ability

 
aesthetic

Finally

 

handle

 

refined

 
characteristical
 

manner

 

original

 

affecting

 

distinguish

 
technical
 

discriminate


exquisite

 

exquisiteness

 

perception

 

public

 

winning

 

Preserving

 
Health
 
exerted
 

strong

 

change