When M. H. Abrams published a defense, in 1972, of "theorizing about the arts" ["What's the Use of Theorizing about the Arts?"], some of his critics accused him of falling into subjectivism. He had made his case so forcefully against "the confrontation model of aesthetic criticism" and had so effectively argued against "simplified" and "invariable" models of the art work and of "the function of criticism" that some readers thought he had thrown overboard the very possibility of a rational criticism tested by objective criteria.
In his reply to these critics ["A Note on Wittgenstein and Literary Criticism," published in the journal English Literary History], Abrams concentrates almost entirely on whether his critical pluralism is finally a skeptical relativism. He does not even mention his great historical works, The Mirror and the Lamp and Natural Supernaturalism, and he has nothing to say about how his pluralistic theories could be applied to the writing of history. But then, surprising as it seems once we think about it, neither of the two histories says much about his method either. (p. 139)
This is a free excerpt of 178 words. There are 6,126 words (approx.
20 pages at 300 words per page) in the full critical essay.
Read the rest of this Criticism with our Abrams, M(eyer) H(oward) 1912–: Critical Essay by Wayne C. Booth Access Pass.
