Whiteheart 1

Ashley Whiteheart #7873

Dr. Jones
ENG 495
5 May 2016
Literature as a Speaking Picture
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God
(John 1:1). Here, God refers to his own son as the Word a single distinct unit of meeting in
language. It is clear that language is of significance to the Almighty. God chose to preserve his
message in the written word. From this, we can gather that language has meaning it is capable
of revealing truth. God is also a God that recognizes and appreciates beauty. When we look at the
creation he spoke into existence, we see colors, intricacies, vastness, wonder. In his Scripture we
find sublimity. Not can language communicate truth, but it can contain beauty as well. We gain
the most from literature when we appreciate its beauty and recognize its truths.
Aristotle was perhaps one of the first philosophers to acknowledge truth in literature. His
predecessor, Plato, asserts that poetry at best is an imitation of truth, and at worst, it is evil (1314). Aristotle counters Platos stance on imitation, stating instead that we learn from imitation.
He notes that imitation is part of our nature that it is implanted in man from childhood (Sec.
4; 21). Imitation, Aristotle says, distinguishes us from animals in that we are the most imitative
of living creatures (Sec. 4;21). Aristotle writes that our earliest lessons are learned through
imitation, and that no less universal is the pleasure felt in things imitated (Sec. 4;21). Lessons
that we learn through imitation through poetry are no less true than lessons we learn through
firsthand experience. When we approach literature as a powerful agent of truth, we glean so

Whiteheart 2
much more than if we read it only for enjoyment. To experience all that literature has to offer, we
must seek out its truth.
Aristotle acknowledges that poetry, imitation, possesses truth, but he takes this a step
further, declaring Tragedy as the ultimate form of imitation. He defines tragedy as the imitation
of a serious action. Furthermore, Aristotle notes that the most important part of the tragedy is the
plot, or the arrangement of incidents (Sec. 6;23). He writes, But most important of all is the
structure of the incidents. For Tragedy is an imitation, not of men, but of an action and of life,
and life consists in action [] (Sec. 6;24). Aristotle places the action of the plot above the
thought and the characters. He states that a tragedy can take place without characters, but not
without action. He describes what this action should look like in his discussion of the law of
probability and necessity. The law of probability and necessity that each action of tragedy leads
to the next action, until the end when by necessity, the action can go nowhere else.
Aristotle states that the poet is not to relate what has happened, but what may happen
what is possible according to the law probability and necessity (Sec. 9; 26). In this way, the poet
is higher than history. History tells what happens, while poetry tells what may happen.
Aristotle writes, poetry tends to express the universal, history the particular (Sec. 9; 26). When
Aristotle refers to the universal here, he is referring to truths of human nature. In literature, even
ancient literature, we can find truth in it that transcends time and culture.
One example of the truth we can find in literature is in Shakespeares Othello. The tragic
hero, Othello falls into the villainous trap of Iago. Iago, in an attempt to take Othellos political
position, convinces Othello that his wife, Desdemona, is having an affair. Iago arranges to frame
Cassio as Desdemonas lover. He creates situations that make Cassio look guilty to Othello,
eventually planting Desdemonas handkerchief in his room. Othello rashly accepts Iagos

Whiteheart 3
accusations as truth and kills his wife before realizing that she was innocent. Although Othello
was written in the English Renaissance, we can take truths from this tragedy and apply them to
our lives. Othello is too quick to mistrust his wife. He never confronts her about the matter; he
assumes the worst of her. He also trusts Iago too easily. As modern readers we can apply these
truths in our own lives by having discernment when choosing who to trust and who to let close to
us, trusting our spouses, and confronting people when we hear rumors about them. In every piece
of literature there is some universal truth that we can learn from.
Literature not only shares truth, but beauty as well. The classical philosopher Longinus
discusses the principle of sublimity in his essay On the Sublime. He admires passages of
poetry (or oratory) that move the reader to ecstasy (Sec. 1;48). These passages, sublime
passages, evoke passion and move the reader great heights of feeling or even to action. Longinus
acknowledges the power of language, not just in speaking truth, but in moving the soul (Sec. 12;48-9). He also notes elements of writing that make it sublime first and most important being
great conceptions followed by passion. He asserts that these qualities of sublimity are the result
of genius rather than art. He lists other qualities of sublimity that can be crafted such as diction,
noble phraseology, and the cause of greatness (Sec. 8;52-3).
An example of sublimity that Longinus gives in his essay is that of Ajax pleading to
Zeus. Ajax says, Zeus, sire, do thou the veil of darkness rend, / And make clear daylight, that
our eyes may see: / Then in the light een slay us -. (Sec 9;55). In this passage Ajax begs Zeus,
not for preservation of life, but for light to fight with honor. Ajax does not desire that his life be
saved, he desires to die with his eyes open, with honor. As a reader, this passage is inspiring. It
moves us to admiration and gusto as we feel Ajaxs plea and acknowledge his craving for honor.
Literature is full of beauty and inspiration.

Whiteheart 4
One poet that combines the ideas of beauty and truth in literature is Sir Philip Sidney. In
his An Apology for Poetry he claims that literature both teaches and delights. He also asserts
that poetry is the most reliable source for moral instruction because it preceded both history and
philosophy the two competing liberal arts of Sidneys day(105-6). He also argues that because
poetry is a speaking picture, it is the best teacher of moral instruction (106). Building on
Aristotles comparison of history and poetry, Sidney asserts that history has examples of truth,
but no precept or universal truth to tie the example to. Philosophy, on the other hand, has
precepts but no examples. It is hard to glean truth from what the philosophers say because there
is no picture of how the universal truth should be lived out. Poetry, however, has both the precept
and the example. It assigns pictures to the wordish description: which doth neither strike,
pierce, nor possess the sight of the soul as poetry does (110).
One of my favorite books, Redeeming Love, showcases Sidneys philosophy. The book is
a piece of historical fiction based on the book of Hosea. In Hosea, God commands Hosea to
marry Gomer, a prostitute and to love her despite her repeated unfaithfulness. God uses Hoseas
story to symbolize his relationship with Israel his chosen nation who continues to turn away
from him. Really, Sidneys point can be seen in Hoseas story alone, but Francine Rivers
illustrates the point even more clearly in her novel. God could have just told the people of Israel
that they were unfaithful and that they needed to change this would be a universal truth, but
without the example of Hoseas story it is dry and distant. It makes no impact. Through Hoseas
story, the concept of what exactly the Israelites are doing to God is made clear. Through Hoseas
hurt and constant forgiveness, the Israelites can see how broken they are and how gracious God
is. That example makes the truth of Gods statement exponentially more powerful.

Whiteheart 5
Francine Rivers takes this a step further even by developing the story into a novel and
writing from the prostitutes point of view. As a woman reading that book, the impact of what I
do to God on a daily basis hit me hard. Reading this story made me understand how much I need
God and how much I dont deserve the mercy that he extends. I enjoyed reading the book, the
story kept me fascinated and I could hardly make myself put it down. The book both taught and
delighted. The development of the main character Angel was exquisite and the picture of
redemption that Rivers painted taught more about sin and grace than any sermon ever could.
John Dryden builds on Sidneys assertions on poetry in his essay An Essay of Dramatic
Posey. In this essay, four critics debate the criteria for good poetry. Before debating, they
collectively decide what a play should be A just and lively image of human nature,
representing its passions and humours, and the changes of fortune to which it is subject, for the
delight and instruction of mankind. (141). From the start of Drydens essay, we know that he
shares Sidneys stance that poetry teaches and delights.
During the debate between Lisideius and Neander over whether the French or the English
are superior writers, Neander raises the point that the French follow rules too closely, while
Lisideius asserts that the English should make more of an effort to follow the rules. Lisideius
notes that the French always stick to the three unities, and they keep the story focused by sticking
with one plot and one main character. English drama incorporates subplots and mixes the genres
of comedy and tragedy. Additionally, Lisideius notes that the French refrain from dramatizing
death and battles while the English do the opposite (162-5).
Through the debate between Lisideius and Neander, I have partially formed my view on
literary criticism. I am in favor with Neander on most of these points. While rules can be useful
in guiding the writing of literature, I do not think that it is necessary to stick to them at all times.

Whiteheart 6
There are times when genius trumps rules. When poets break the rules of their meter to
emphasize a word or an idea, the poetry is more powerful than if the poet had stuck to the rules.
Additionally, Neander argues that the English achieve unity through subplots and minor
characters, which takes more skill than achieving unity through a single plot line (165). It is
difficult to incorporate subplots effectively, but it does add to literature when it is done well.
In a series of books I have started reading called A Song of Fire and Ice, the author,
George R.R. Martin has several distinct subplots taking place at once. In each subplot there is a
main character who is dealing with a particular trial in the midst of the overall plot. Even though
there are so many stories going on at once, they are all unified through the main plot the throne
of Westeros. Because Martin has added several dimensions to his story and still managed to unify
them, his novels are far more interesting and powerful than if he had just written a story about a
kings struggle to stay on his throne.
Samuel Johnsons view of criticism is similar to the view of Drydens Neander in his
Preface to Shakespeare. In this essay Johnson both praises Shakespeare and critiques his
faults. Among his criticism of Shakespeare, Johnson does not include Shakespeares failure to
adhere to the three unities. Johnson notes that this is because spectators are always in their
senses, and know, from the first act to the last, that the stage is only a stage, and that the players
are only players (210). In other words, Shakespeares failure to keep the unities of time and
place do not hinder the believability of the play because the audience knows that what they are
watching is not real, so it does not matter if the play begins in Venice and ends in England.
Johnson asserts that Shakespeare stick to the one unity that matters the unity of action.
Aristotle agrees with Johnson on this matter. The unity of action is the unity of the plot the
unity that ties one action to the next, so that the events of the play mimic those events of real life.

Whiteheart 7
Shakespeare achieves this. Johnson refers to Shakespeare as the poet of nature. He writes,
Shakespeare is above all writers [] the poet of nature; the poet that holds up to his readers a
faithful mirror of manners and life (202). Johnson does a good job criticizing Shakespeare
because he acknowledges his flaws and his strengths as well. Additionally, he does not criticize
based on strictly rules, he criticizes the conventions of writing that matter the most. He realizes
that Shakespeare adheres to the unity of action, so the unities of time and place do not matter. He
also does not refrain from criticizing Shakespeare despite the fact that he is a great writer.
Johnson delivers his criticism objectively and discerningly. He serves as an adequate model for
literary critics.
As literary criticism moves into the 19th century and beyond, it begins to lack
acknowledgement of truth in literature. Romantic poet John Keats equates beauty with truth in
his Four Letters. Keats writes, What the imagination seizes as Beauty must be truth whether
it existed before or not-(280). Keats asserts here that whatever is beautiful is true - even it if it is
not true. Keats describes poets as having Negative Capability, or the ability to detach from
reason, truth, and morality in order to imagine himself into another role to write (283).
Essentially, a poet has no identity, he embodies the role necessary to create beauty regardless of
truth. Romantics, such as Keats who begin to steer away from the idea of absolute truth in
literature, pave the way for others to take this idea to new extremes.
For instance, modern critic Walter Pater claims that there is no truth in art. Pater states
that our physical life is a perpetual motion [] everything around us is constantly changing
(355). In addition to the changes of the physical world, the human mind is always changing. We
change our thoughts, emotions, and perceptions; they are unstable, flickering, inconsistent
(356). Because everything is always changing, there can be no truth. Pater asserts then, that we

Whiteheart 8
should try to make our inner experience as intense as possible. We should burn always with this
hard, gemlike flame, to maintain this ecstasy (356). How do we do this? We love art for arts
sake. We view art because of its beauty and because of the passion it stirs within us. There is no
universal truth in art, or in life period. The most we can do is make the best of our inner
experience.
These critics, Keats and Pater, acknowledge the beauty in literature. Pater even discusses
sublimity in his essay and mentions being brought to ecstasy and Longinus does. Here, I agree
with Keats and Pater. Literature is beautiful, and I think that we can find truth in beauty as Keats
claims. We can find truth about human nature and our Creator through beauty. However, the two
fall short in recognizing that there is an absolute truth and that that truth can be communicated in
literature. Earlier critics, such as Sidney as well as earlier writers such as Shakespeare have
shown us that both beauty and universal truth coincide in literature.
Post-modern critics veer even further from the idea of absolute truth. Feminist critic
Adrienne Rich asserts in her essay When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-vision that women
have been oppressed by a system of male patriarchy that has prevented women from writing
freely (512-13). In order to combat male writing, Rich claims that writing is re-naming. In
other words, written language does not have an absolute meaning, words can mean things that
they do not mean. She writes, you have to be free to play around with the notion that day might
be night, love might be hate; nothing can be too scared for the imagination to turn into its
opposite (519). Rich undermines the absolutes of language and imposes a deconstruction on
patriarchal language.
While it is true that women have been under the oppression of men in the past, Rich does
not address her frustrations in an appropriate manner. Language is sacred. It is absolute. It does

Whiteheart 9
have meaning. As a Christian, I have to hold firm to belief in God as the absolute standard for
truth. God values language. He preserved his most important message to mankind in the written
word. That is not something that can be undermined. When we acknowledge that language is
absolute, and that it can communicate truth, we cannot except post-modern theories such Richs.
We cannot turn truth into non-truth. Truth is non-changing. Because language is capable of truth,
literature is as well. We find beauty in it, and we learn from it.

Whiteheart 10
Works Cited
Aristotle. The Poetics. Kaplan and Anderson 18-46.
Dryden, John. An Essay of Dramatic Posey. Kaplan and Anderson 136-181.
Johnson, Samuel. Preface to Shakespeare. Kaplan and Anderson 200-231.
Kaplan, Charles and William Davis Anderson, eds. Criticism: Major Statements. 4th ed. Boston:
Bedford-St. Martins, 2000. Print.
Keats, John. Four Letters. Kaplan and Anderson 279-286.
Longinus. On the Sublime. Kaplan and Anderson 47-83.
Pater, Walter. From Studies in the History of the Renaissance. Kaplan and Anderson 354-357.
Plato. The Republic: Book X. Kaplan and Anderson 1-14.
Rich, Adrienne. When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-Vision. Kaplan and Anderson 511524.
Sidney, Sir Philip. An Apology for Poetry. Kaplan and Anderson 101-135.
The Holy Bible, King James Version. New York: American Bible Society, 1999. Print.