rature; it belongs to the household of literature. Though it does
not deserve to rank with the great creative forms of literature, such as
the epic, the drama, or the novel, it is capable of a high degree of
excellence. Some of the greatest English writers, as we have seen, have
been critics. Not a few of the critical essays of De Quincey, Macaulay,
Carlyle, Arnold, Lowell, and others, have an honorable place in the
literature of the English-speaking world.

Literary criticism has a distinct value for three classes of persons. To
the young student it gives a clear insight into literary form, and
cultivates his taste for literary excellence. To the author it is at
once a stimulant and wholesome restraint; it rewards him for what is
good and chastises him for what is bad. To the public it is useful in
pointing out what books are worth reading and in showing the principles
by which a work is to be judged. It elevates the popular taste and
intelligence.

+12. Materials of Criticism.+ All literature is, in some sense, material
for criticism. It may be examined, tested by critical laws, and its
worth estimated in the class to which it belongs. But as a rule literary
criticism is confined to literature in the narrower sense; that is to
say, to literature that aims at artistic excellence. This includes the
various forms of poetry and the principal kinds of prose,--history,
oratory, essays, and fiction. These various kinds of literature, in
their higher forms, aim at presenting their subject-matter in such a way
as to minister to the pleasure of the reader.

+13. Molding Influences.+ In criticising it is important to recognize
certain general molding influences in literature. Among the most potent
of these influences are _race_, _epoch_, and _surroundings_. We cannot
fully understand any work of literature, nor justly estimate its
relative excellence, without an acquaintance with the national traits of
the writer, the general character of the age in which he lived, and the
physical and social conditions by which he was surrounded. These
considerations, independently of specific critical canons that determine
intrinsic excellence, must be taken into account when the critic wishes
to decide upon the relative value of a work. It is evidently unjust to
demand in writers of an uncultivated period the same delicacy of
thought, feeling, and expression that is required in the writers of an
age of refinement and intelligence. The indec