Given that Matthew Arnold uses "Hebraism" to refer to strains in British, Christian society, how did you understand the place of 'Jewishness' in this text? What (especially) did you make of the section from which I took the blog title for today---the section in which he discusses the "science" which has taught us about the differences in race and temperament.
Arnold goes out of his way to argue that Hellenism and Hebraism both strive for perfection and must be in balance. Does he exemplify this balance? What do you make of his calls for a return to Hellenism? Finally, what is the place of real Jews in Arnold's transcendent idea of 'culture'? In fact, is there any place for difference in 'culture'?
Please feel free to address any of these ideas.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Arnold opens his essay by stating that “Culture is then properly described not as having it origin in curiosity, but as having its origin in curiosity, but as having its origin in the love of perfection; it is a study of perfection” (91). Thus Culture is viewed as Britain’s answer out of their present difficulties and sin. Arnold also argues that “no people in the world have done more and struggled more to attain this relative moral perfection that our English race has” (100). Thus the English are struggling to perfection and in essences becomes a model of perfection that others should emulate. However, for a nation or group of people to be cultured and have perfection they must also strive for equality. In the beginning of the chapter Hebraism and Hellenism it states that a nation has to walk into the best light and make sure that their light is not darkness. The darkness could stand for sin of the pagan or as a critic on the English as a whole and their treatment of the “other”. Or when they force others to conform to their standards or shun others because they do not conform, thus they no longer exhibits the quality of being cultured. Page 170 does clearly situate the Jews in this essay when they are associated with conscience, which is an association of Hellenism and Hebraism, and “entrusted with the oracles of God”. However, further in the text it states that Christianity followed Judaism and “that wisdom of the old Pagan world was foolishness compared to it” (170). I am confused on if they are claiming one if Judaism is the pagan religion and through Christianity only can one achieve perfection and Culture or the balance between Hellenism and Hebraism? And if Arnold is separating the Jews, he himself is not cultured because he is limiting them to ethical limitations and culture calls for a human universe where people are not limited by class and ethnicity. But Arnold wants the Christian Church to teach culture, isn't that being limited? I am sort of confused about this entire essay and the ideals it conjures.
The other day we talked about bringing other subjects to the table that relate to the work at hand. I'm going to take a chance at that in responding to Andrea's comments on the English perfectionism.
In David Burns, M.D.'s book Feeling Good, the representation of perfectionism is compared to that of "average": "'Averageness' is another kind of illusion, but it's a beningn deception, a useful construct." Additionally, the illogic of the English in considering themselves above the Jewish is illuminated in a 21st century definition, a transcendent concept, of perfectionism: "'Perfectionism' is man's ultimate illusion. It simply doesn't exist in the universe. There is no perfection. It's really the world's greatest con game; it promises riches and delivers misery." (353)
This ties to Arnold's analysis on British culture in the 19th century because it shows a common human fallacy. Arnold sheds light on this issue from a societal standpoint, while Burns provides psychological insight.
If I had to summarize what Arnold is saying I would say he is pointing out the "hebraism" is more than just racially deep. He talks about the puritan decent from religion in the sixteen hundreds. This group held strong to their strict moral values while sociey fell to its "hellenistic" motives.
Race, culture and what we think belongs inherently to these is erased. Suddenly you have to look beyond imagined boudaries and focus on the person. The being that exists without the trappings of intellegent society. Our desires to thrive for perfection in which ever way we choose.
The terms , "hellenistic" and "hebraism" are historically linked to periods in "human" history when man was instantly tagged by his beliefs. To me this is what the problem is when you say "Jewish". Are you Jewish because its what you believe or are you jewish because its something your born with.
Post a Comment