Culture and Anarchy

Arnold's central definition of culture in Culture and Anarchy is: 'the best that has been thought and known in the world.' This phrase is one of the most cited in the history of literary criticism and educational philosophy. It encapsulates Arnold's argument against two competing definitions of culture in Victorian England: the Puritan/Nonconformist definition (culture as religious seriousness and moral improvement) and the utilitarian/commercial definition (culture as material progress and industrial achievement). Arnold's definition is deliberately humanistic and universalist — 'the best' implies a standard that transcends class, nation, and creed; 'thought and known' emphasises intellectual and aesthetic achievement; 'in the world' insists on a cosmopolitan rather than parochially British or Protestant standard. Culture, in Arnold's sense, is not a possession of any class but a pursuit that any person can undertake — and it is precisely this openness that makes it the cure for the 'anarchy' (the absence of any shared standard of value) that Arnold diagnoses in Victorian England. For UGC NET: know the definition verbatim; know the full context (an argument against both religious and commercial definitions of culture); know the phrase's connection to Arnold's advocacy for a national curriculum and public education.

'Sweetness and Light' is Arnold's phrase for the two essential qualities of culture: sweetness (beauty, the aesthetic dimension — what Arnold calls the love of perfection) and light (intelligence, the intellectual dimension — the desire to see things clearly and whole). The phrase comes from Jonathan Swift's The Battle of the Books (1704), where it is used by a bee in an argument with a spider about the relative merits of ancient and modern learning: the bee represents classical learning (producing sweetness — honey — and light — wax for candles) while the spider represents modern learning (producing only its own web). Arnold borrows the phrase and gives it new content: for him, sweetness and light together constitute the opposite of the 'Hebraism' (earnest moral striving without aesthetic cultivation) that he sees dominating Victorian England. A culture of sweetness and light would be balanced — intellectually curious, aesthetically cultivated, and open to experience. For UGC NET: know the phrase 'Sweetness and Light'; know that it comes from Swift's The Battle of the Books (not from Arnold's own invention); know that it means beauty (sweetness) plus intelligence/clarity (light).

Hellenism and Hebraism are Arnold's two great opposing tendencies in human culture. Hebraism, in Arnold's usage, is characterised by conduct, strictness of conscience, and moral earnestness — the emphasis on doing, on obedience to a moral code, on the suppression of impulse in the service of right action. It is associated with Protestantism, Puritanism, and the Nonconformist tradition in England. Hellenism is characterised by consciousness, spontaneity of consciousness, and seeing things as they really are — the emphasis on knowing, on intellectual curiosity, on the free play of the mind over all subjects. It is associated with ancient Greek culture, the Renaissance, and the pursuit of beauty and truth without utilitarian purpose. Arnold argues that both are necessary for a complete human life — 'there is no opposition between them' in the ideal — but that Victorian England has catastrophically over-developed its Hebraism at the expense of its Hellenism. The cure for Victorian moral earnestness and commercial complacency is more Hellenism: more intellectual openness, more aesthetic cultivation, more willingness to question established certainties. For UGC NET: know the definitions of both terms; know that both are necessary (not that Hellenism is simply better); know that Arnold diagnoses Victorian England as over-Hebraised; know the cultural and religious associations of each.

In Chapter II of Culture and Anarchy, Arnold divides Victorian English society into three classes and gives them satirical names. The Barbarians are the aristocracy — a class with qualities Arnold grudgingly admires (personal courage, outdoor vigour, manners, charm) but whose characteristic limitation is indifference to ideas. They have been great in the past but have no capacity for leading a modern society that requires intellectual vision. The Philistines are the middle class — the dominant social class in Victorian England, associated with Nonconformism, commercial success, industriousness, and what Arnold calls 'faith in machinery' (the belief that material progress and institutional reforms are ends in themselves). The Philistine is earnest, hardworking, and self-satisfied; he is incapable of the 'seeing things as they really are' that Arnold demands. The Populace are the working class — a potentially dangerous force, newly enfranchised by the 1867 Reform Act, liable to what Arnold calls 'doing as one likes' (following impulse rather than right reason). Arnold does not despise the Populace as a class; he fears the absence of culture that makes their political participation dangerous. He hopes all three classes can be educated toward culture — but he is most concerned with the Philistines because they dominate Victorian England. For UGC NET: know all three names and their class associations; know that Barbarians = aristocracy, Philistines = middle class, Populace = working class; know the 1867 Reform Act context.

Arnold worked as an inspector of schools for the British government from 1851 to 1886 — thirty-five years — while writing his poetry and criticism. This institutional position gave his argument about culture a specific practical context: Arnold was not merely a literary critic reflecting on the state of civilisation but an administrator who saw daily the effects of an educational system that he believed was failing to transmit the best that had been thought and known. His advocacy for culture as a public, democratic project — available to all classes, not just the elite — was directly connected to his argument for a national system of state education modelled on continental (particularly French) examples. He reported on French and German education systems (Schools and Universities on the Continent, 1868) and consistently argued that England's lack of a national educational system — relying instead on Nonconformist and Anglican voluntary schools — was producing a citizenry incapable of the disinterested intellectual pursuit that culture required. Culture and Anarchy (1869) is therefore not only cultural criticism but educational advocacy: its argument that culture is the cure for anarchy depends on culture being teachable and transmissible through institutions. For UGC NET: know Arnold's role as school inspector; know the connection between Culture and Anarchy and his educational advocacy; know his reports on French and German education.