A Study of Poetry’ is a critical essay by Matthew Arnold. In this essay Arnold criticizes the art of poetry as
well as the art of criticism. Arnold believes that the art of poetry is capable of high destinies. It is the art in
which the idea itself is the fact. He says that we should understand the worth of poetry as it is poetry that
shows us a mirror of life. Science, according to Arnold, is incomplete without poetry, and, religion and
philosophy will give way to poetry. Arnold terms poetry as a criticism of life thereby refuting the accusation
of Plato and says that as time goes on man will continue to find comfort and solace in poetry.
Arnold says that when one reads poetry he tends to estimate whether it is of the best form or not. It happens
in three ways- the real estimate, the historic estimate, and the personal estimate. The real estimate is an
unbiased viewpoint that takes into account both the historical context and the creative faculty to judge the
worth of poetry. But the real estimate is often surpassed by the historic and personal estimate. The historic
estimate places the historical context above the value of the art itself. The personal estimate on the other
hand depends on the personal taste, the likes and dislikes of the reader which affects his judgment of poetry.
Arnold says that both these estimates tend to be fallacious.
The historic and personal estimate often overshadows the real estimate. But Arnold also says that it is
natural. The study of the historical background of poetry and its development often leads to the critic
skipping over the shortcomings because of its historical significance. Historic estimate raises poetry to a
high pedestal and thus hinders one from noticing its weaknesses. It is the historic estimate that leads to the
creation of classics and raises the poet to a nearly God like standard. Arnold says that if a poet is truly a
classic his poetry will give the reader real pleasure and enable him to compare and contrast other poetry
which are not of the same high standard. This according to Arnold is the real estimate of poetry. Thus
Arnold appeals to his readers to read classics with an open eye and not be blind to its faults. This will enable
one to rate poetry with its proper value.
Arnold here speaks about the idea of imitation. He says that whatever one reads or knows keeps on coming
back to him. Thus if a poet wants to reach the high standards of the classics he might consciously or
unconsciously imitate them. This is also true for critics who tend to revert to the historic and personal
estimate instead of an unbiased real estimate. The historic estimate affects the study of ancient poets while
the personal estimate affects the study of modern or contemporary poets. Arnold applies the touchstone
method by taking examples from the time tested classics and comparing them with other poetry to determine
whether they possess the high poetic standard of the classics. He says that the poems need not resemble or
possess any similarity to the touchstones. Once the critic has lodged the touchstones in his mind in order to
detect the possession of high poetic quality he will have the tact of finding it in other poetry that he
compares to the touchstones. Arnold quotes Homer, Dante, Shakespeare and Milton in an attempt to
exemplify touchstone poetry.
Arnold then speaks about French poetry which had a tremendous influence on the poetry of England. He
differentiates between the poetry of northern France and the poetry of southern France. The poetry of
southern France influenced Italian literature. But it is the poetry of northern France that was dominant in
Europe in the twelfth and thirteenth century. This poetry came to England with the Anglo- Normans and had
a tremendous impact on English poetry. It was the romance- poems of France that was popular during that
time. But Arnold says that it did not have any special characteristics and lacked the high truth, seriousness
and diction of classic poetry and remain significant only from the historical point of view.
Finally Arnold speaks about the self-preservation of the classics. Any amount of good literature will not be
able to surpass the supremacy of the classics as they have already stood the test of time and people will
continue to enjoy them for the ages to come. Arnold says that this is the result of the self-preserving nature
of humanity. Human nature will remain the same throughout the ages and those parts of the classics dealing
with the subject will remain relevant at all times thus preserving themselves from being lost in time.