Oct.

2 notes

2




An overview of critical responses to a work of literature, from Contexts for
Criticism by Donald Keesay (see attachment).

Questions on Adam Bede:

What is “Methodism?”

From Britannica. com

Methodism, 18th-century movement founded by John Wesley that sought to
reform the Church of England from within. The movement, however, became
separate from its parent body and developed into an autonomous church. The
World Methodist Council, an association of churches in the Methodist tradition,
comprises more than 40.5 million Methodists in 138 countries.

Origins

John Wesley was born in 1703, educated in London and Oxford, and ordained a
deacon in the Church of England in 1725. In 1726 he was elected a fellow of
Lincoln College at Oxford, and in the following year he left Oxford temporarily
to act as curate to his father, the rector of Epworth. Wesley was ordained a
priest in the Church of England in 1728 and returned to Oxford in 1729. Back in
Oxford, he joined his brother Charles and a group of earnest students who were
dedicated to frequent attendance at Holy Communion, serious study of the
Bible, and regular visitations to the filthy Oxford prisons. The members of this

3
 group, which Wesley came to lead, were known as Methodists because of their
“methodical” devotion and study. …

Some months later, George Whitefield, also an Anglican clergyman who had
undergone a “conversion experience” invited his friend John Wesley to come to
the city of Bristol to preach to the colliers of Kingswood Chase, who lived and
worked in the most debased conditions. Wesley accepted the invitation and
found himself, much against his will, preaching in the open air. This enterprise
was the beginning of the Methodist Revival. Whitefield and Wesley at first
worked together but later separated over Whitefield’s belief in double
predestination (the belief that God has determined from eternity whom he will
save and whom he will damn). Wesley regarded this as an erroneous doctrine
and insisted that the love of God was universal. …

Under the leadership of Whitefield and then of Wesley, the movement grew
rapidly among those who felt neglected by the Church of England. Wesley
differed from contemporary Anglicans not in doctrine but in emphasis: he
claimed to have reinstated the biblical doctrines that human beings may be
assured of their salvation and that the power of the Holy Spirit enables them to
attain perfect love for God and their fellows in this life. Wesley’s helpers
included only a few ordained clergymen and his brother Charles, who wrote
more than 6,000 hymns to express the message of the revival. In spite of
Wesley’s wish that the Methodist Society would never leave the Church of
England, relations with Anglicans were often strained. …

Wesley’s ordinations set an important precedent for the Methodist church, but
the definite break with the Church of England came in 1795, four years after his
death. After the schism, English Methodism, with vigorous outposts in Ireland,
Scotland, and Wales, rapidly developed as a church, even though it was
reluctant to perpetuate the split from the Church of England. Its system centred
in the Annual Conference (at first of ministers only, later thrown open to
laypeople), which controlled all its affairs. The country was divided into
districts and the districts into circuits, or groups of congregations. Ministers
were appointed to the circuits, and each circuit was led by a superintendent,
though much power remained in the hands of the local trustees.
]
The Wesleyan Methodist Church grew rapidly, numbering 450,000 members by
the end of the 19th century. Its growth was largest in the expanding industrial
areas, where the Methodist faith helped workers—both men and women—to
endure economic hardship while they alleviated their poverty. Because their
faith encouraged them to live simply, their economic status tended to rise.
Consequently, Wesleyan Methodism became a middle-class church that was not
immune to the excessive stress on the individual in material and spiritual
matters that marked the Victorian age. …

The first woman was ordained to “The Ministry of Word and Sacraments” in
1974. This was the climax of many years of discussion and controversy. It
indicated a growing appreciation of the place of women in the life of the church.
The theological objections had been carefully considered and rejected before
the final step was taken.

4
John Stuart Mill (1806 –1873) was the leading defender of liberalism in
19th century Britain. He was the first member of the British Parliament
to call for women’s suffrage (voting rights).

Mill was an English philosopher, political economist, and politician. He supported
the moral philosophy of utilitarianism. He was a major figure of political liberalism.

He accepted many of John Locke’s ideas: people are rational, cooperative and
basically good. Government’s main role is to preserve individual rights and
freedoms. Mill modifies liberalism by including a utilitarian approach: actions are
good if they promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.

Mill believed that because people are basically good and rational, they are able to
choose what is best for them. Laws should be lenient enough to allow the majority
to pursue their happiness.

Mill was concerned about the “tyranny of the majority,” i.e., the possibility that the
majority can ignore or override the concerns and rights of minority groups in
society. The government should protect the rights of all citizens. Working out the
best and fairest ways to protect the rights of everyone can be complicated and
difficult.

Mill’s approach, and the reality of modern democratic government, involves a
tension between a government’s duty (1) to respond to a majority of individuals
who have voted for them and (2) to protect individuals who are part of a minority
from harm by majority groups.

Mill’s attempted to solve this dilemma by the use of what he calls “the Harm
Principle:” Individuals should be allowed to do what they want, so long as they
do not harm others.

Modern liberalism is greatly influenced by Mill. In fact, our basic conception of
freedom and the ways in which we try to balance individual and group rights are
both “Millian.”

In broad terms, liberalism is considered to be dominant in any modern state that
puts the liberty of the individual at its centre. Thus, even conservatives and many
socialists today are “liberals” in the sense of wishing to protect individual freedoms.
Conservatives in the United States (for example) are often identified as “neo-
liberals”.

A quotation from On Liberty:

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be
good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to
refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they

5
are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion... Nor is it enough that he should
hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state
them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear
them from persons who actually believe them...he must know them in their most
plausible and persuasive form.”
― John Stuart Mill, On Liberty


Matthew Arnold (1822-1888) will be considered in two aspects: (1) a poet
who registered the problems of “modernity” and (2) an educational theorist
who still influences the curricula of contemporary Canadian high schools and
universities.

(1) His famous poem, “Dover Beach” (from 1867, the year that Canada became a
nation) is a record of the 19th century agony over the “death of God”.

The sea is calm to-night.
The tide is full, the moon lies fair
Upon the straits; - on the French coast the light
Gleams and is gone; the cliffs of England stand,
Glimmering and vast, out in the tranquil bay.
Come to the window, sweet is the night-air!
Only, from the long line of spray
Where the sea meets the moon-blanch'd land,
Listen! you hear the grating roar
Of pebbles which the waves draw back, and fling,
At their return, up the high strand,
Begin, and cease, and then again begin,
With tremulous cadence slow, and bring
The eternal note of sadness in.

Sophocles long ago
Heard it on the Aegean, and it brought
Into his mind the turbid ebb and flow
Of human misery; we
Find also in the sound a thought,
Hearing it by this distant northern sea.

The Sea of Faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furl'd.
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long, withdrawing roar,
Retreating, to the breath
Of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear
And naked shingles of the world.

6

Ah, love, let us be true
To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.

This poem shows some aspects of what people mean by “modernity” (loss of
religious faith; a feeling of being lost in an uncaring universe; personal relations as
more important than social groups).

(2) Arnold’s 1869 series of essays (published as Culture and Anarchy) addresses the
social and cultural crisis of mid-19th century Victorian England.

The Industrial Revolution had created huge, dynamic and unpredictable changes in
British society. Increases in wealth were astounding, but very unevenly distributed,
so class conflict was rife and the spectre of social unrest, perhaps revolution,
threatened.

In other words, England was threatened by anarchy (non-order, disorder, chaos) in
the form of class warfare. Further, the dominant ideology of the day, Liberalism,
undermined social cohesion and the sense of community. Liberalism puts such an
emphasis on the individual and on freedom of the “doing what one wants” type that
lasting aesthetic, moral values are in danger of being swept away, or at least
undervalued.

Arnold has names for the three main classes in his society:

1. Plebeians: the working class, which suffers from ignorance.

2. Philistines: the middle class, which suffers from smugness, pomposity, too
much money to spend on silly stuff, and pretension – i.e., they value art only
as a sign of social standing.

3. Barbarians: the upper (aristocratic, not bourgeois) call, which suffers from
irresponsibility, carefreeness, and self-indulgence (fox-hunting is their idea
of a really good time). Arnold calls them “barbarians” because they are the
descendants of the Germanic tribes who overran Europe in feudal times and
earlier.

Although religion was a major force in Victorian society, loss of faith was also
common, partly because of how Darwin’s ideas were interpreted. As a result,

7
religion was less of a “glue” for society. Arnold suggests “culture” as, in certain
respects, a replacement for religion.

Something important to note as context for Arnold’s understanding of “culture:”
there are two major views of culture:

1. the “anthropological” view of culture: the system of beliefs, rules of
behaviour, cultural production, etc., that belongs to a particular group. This is
a “neutral” view of culture.

2. the “high” definition of culture. Beethoven is culture, Lady Gaga is not. This
definition is much contested these days, in the Humanities and elsewhere,
but it hasn’t disappeared.

Arnold is thinking mostly of this second definition of culture (“high” culture). He
argues that “culture” is the answer to “anarchy.” He speaks of culture in quasi-
religious terms: it will “perfect” human beings; it will give not only “light”
(knowledge) but “sweetness” (the beauty and consolation of the arts).

What will “culture” offer?

(1) a shared body of cultural material that all classes will learn about and that,
therefore, will serve as shared body of knowledge and allusions. Culture will be help
the classes unite or at least manage to reduce their inherent hostilities.

(2) a source of moral and spiritual sustenance. Culture is less dogmatic than a
religious creed, but nevertheless it provides a sphere in which people can think
about the large issues of existence and have access to beauty.

(3) the breadth of mind that a knowledge of culture brings will allow people to
escape from narrow prejudices, limited beliefs, too much faith in “business” or “my
religious denomination” or “my country” (all of which Arnold subsumes under the
rubric of “machinery”).

When Arnold was writing, England (unlike France) did not have a system of national
public schools. Arnold thought that it was crucial that England move to such a
system.

In his projected system of national schooling, a curriculum based on “culture,”
which Arnold defines as “the best which has been thought and said,” would
provide the glue that might hold society together, in practical (no class war) and
“spiritual” ways.

You can perhaps imagine some of the criticisms directed at Arnold’s idea of culture
as propagated by schools and universities today.