T.S. Eliot and F.R. Leavis : On the Use of Criticism

Both T. S. Eliot and F. R. Leavis represent some important features of the English critical tradition. Leavis is, to some extent, a follower of T. S. Eliot, and he derives from him the ideas of tradition, of criticism as an intellectual discipline, of disinterestedness in criticism, and of poetic autonomy. But Leavis is essentially a teacher=critic, whereas Eliot is a poet=critic; hence some remarkable differences between the attitudes of each critic towards criticism. Eliot regards the criticism written by poets as the most genuine form of literary criticism, because it is 'literary' in the sense that it helps one elucidate the secrets of poetic composition, leading, in the long run, to the idea of 'good writing'. Leavis, on the other hand, regards criticism as an act which begins and ends in discrimination and judgment, and which neccesiates the critic to be involved in the problem of value. Eliot and Leavis share the common interests in the reappraisal of the English critical tradition, and each of them deals with such major critics as Samuel Johnson, S. T. Coleridge, and Matthew Arnold. In the following pages the present writer examines the writings of Eliot and Leavis on these critics, and tries to define the differences between the critical positions of the two critics