Matthew Arnold was born on December 24, 1822, in Laleham, Middlesex, England. He was born to a family with strong educational and religious values. Dr. Thomas Arnold, his father, was a highly respected headmaster of Rugby School and a noted social reformer. Arnold attended Rugby School, where he received a rigorous education under his father’s guidance. Later, he went on to study at Balliol College, Oxford, where he developed a passion for literature and began to write poetry.
Arnold worked as an inspector of schools for over 35 years, beginning in 1851. This job was demanding and time-consuming. It offered him a firsthand view of British educational practices and informed his writings on education reform. Arnold married Frances Lucy Wightman. The couple had six children. But tragically, three of them died young. His family life and responsibilities influenced his views on society and the importance of cultural and intellectual development.
Arnold is best known for his critical essays, particularly Essays in Criticism and Culture and Anarchy. These works argued for the role of "culture" in fostering intellectual and moral improvement within society. Arnold coined the term "sweetness and light", emphasizing the combination of beauty (aesthetic pleasure) and intelligence as essential elements for personal and societal growth. This concept became a cornerstone of his critique against materialism and philistinism.
Through his essays, Arnold advocated for an education system that focused on developing critical thinking and cultural awareness rather than mere vocational training. His ideas about culture’s role in moral and intellectual betterment influenced educational philosophy in Britain. Arnold’s work left a lasting impact on English literature and criticism. His approach to cultural analysis and moral criticism paved the way for the field of cultural studies. Critics often consider him the first modern cultural critic, as he expanded the role of criticism to address societal issues directly.
"Culture and Anarchy" is a series of essays that addresses the social and moral issues of Victorian England. He critiques the social divisions and materialism of the time. He advocated for "culture" as a solution to societal decay. Arnold defines culture as "the best that has been thought and said in the world". For him, culture involves a pursuit of knowledge, refinement, and moral improvement. He warns against "anarchy", symbolizing the chaotic and disordered state he believed society was moving toward due to unchecked individualism, materialism, and class conflict. He sees culture as a unifying force that can overcome class divisions, moral degradation, and narrow self-interest by fostering a shared pursuit of truth and beauty.
Arnold uses "Barbarian" to describe the aristocracy and the upper classes. Barbarians value external displays of power, beauty, and refinement but lack true moral depth are some of the features of barbarianism. They focus on personal freedom, social status, and luxury. He criticizes the aristocracy for their superficial culture which he sees as rooted in self-indulgence and resistant to intellectual and moral progress.
The "Philistine" represents the middle class, particularly the newly wealthy industrial and commercial classes. Philistines prioritize material success, social respectability, and practical achievements over intellectual or spiritual values. Arnold argues that the Philistines are obsessed with self-interest and economic gain, neglecting higher cultural ideals and contributing to social inequality. He considers them a major source of societal "anarchy" due to their emphasis on profit over principle.
The "Populace" refers to the working class and lower strata of society. Arnold describes them as oppressed and marginalized. These often lack access to culture or intellectual development. While Arnold sympathizes with the challenges faced by the populace, he believes their potential for cultural growth is hindered by poor living conditions and lack of education. He also worries about their susceptibility to radical ideas, which he sees as a threat to societal stability.
Arnold advocates for a "pursuit of perfection" through culture. In culture, individuals and society work to transcend their class-based interests and embrace higher moral and intellectual standards. He believes that a collective focus on culture can dissolve class antagonism, improve social harmony, and guide individuals toward greater self-knowledge. He further criticizes "mechanism" (the focus on efficiency and industrial progress) as a societal obsession that distracts from true cultural and moral development.
Arnold defines culture as "the best that has been thought and said in the world". His perspective is rooted in a Hellenistic ideal, emphasizing moral and intellectual refinement through exposure to truth, beauty, and knowledge. Critics argue that Arnold’s view of culture is somewhat idealistic and exclusive, focusing mainly on high culture rather than a more inclusive, diverse set of cultural practices. Arnold positions culture as a corrective to societal issues—specifically, the disordered state he refers to as "anarchy". His view that culture has the potential to harmonize society is admired by some but criticized by others as naïve or elitist. Critics argue that Arnold overestimates culture’s ability to foster unity, especially in a society with vast class disparities and economic inequality.
Arnold’s critique of materialism and industrial "mechanism" addresses the increasing obsession with economic growth and productivity. He believes these forces devalue intellectual and moral development. This criticism is still relevant today, as some see it as a prescient warning against excessive consumerism. However, some believe Arnold’s dismissal of industrial advancement as antithetical to culture fails to acknowledge the potential benefits of modernization.
Arnold criticizes the aristocracy, whom he calls "Barbarians", for their preoccupation with external appearances, luxury, and personal freedom. He sees them as preserving traditional privileges without intellectual or moral advancement. Some critics argue that Arnold's depiction of the aristocracy is reductive and fails to recognize the potential for positive cultural contributions from this class. Arnold’s term "Barbarian" suggests a lack of appreciation for the aristocracy’s role in shaping societal values, such as charity or patronage of the arts. Arnold’s critique reflects his middle-class, intellectual background, which often contrasts aristocratic values with his ideal of intellectual culture. This lens can be seen as biased, as it tends to generalize and overlooks individual differences within the aristocratic class.
Arnold uses the term "Philistine" to describe the middle class, particularly the industrialists and businessmen. He criticizes their focus on material wealth, respectability, and practicality, which he believes lacks cultural and moral depth. Arnold’s term "Philistine" has endured, often representing those who prioritize material success over intellectual pursuits. Critics, however, argue that Arnold’s negative portrayal of the middle class overlooks the positive aspects of their work ethic and contributions to societal progress. Arnold’s dismissal of middle-class values can appear elitist, as he places intellectual culture above the practical contributions of the middle class. Some critics believe he underestimates the middle class’s potential for cultural and intellectual development, particularly as literacy and education were on the rise in Victorian England.
Arnold shows some sympathy toward the working class, whom he calls the "Populace". He acknowledges their hardships and limited access to culture. However, he also worries that they might succumb to radical ideas, which he views as potentially destabilizing. Arnold’s concern for social stability and his fear of working-class radicalism reflect the anxieties of his time. Critics argue that his views on the populace are somewhat paternalistic, suggesting a lack of faith in their ability to engage in culture without guidance from the higher classes. Arnold sees culture as a means to improve the lives of the working class through education and exposure to "sweetness and light". While this perspective is progressive in advocating for educational reform, it also implies that the working class requires guidance from "cultured" individuals, which some see as condescending.
Culture and Anarchy is praised for its eloquent critique of the Victorian era’s moral and social shortcomings. Arnold’s call for a unified cultural ideal resonates with readers who value intellectual and moral development over materialism and individualism. Critics argue that Arnold’s vision of culture is overly idealistic and exclusionary. His cultural hierarchy appears to favor "high" culture and intellectual pursuits, often at the expense of popular or working-class cultural expressions.
