CRITICISM AND THE MAN 91 



ity, his style, his continuity of thought, his turns of 

 expression, his particular interpretation of literature 

 and life ? His opinions may be sound, but this is 

 not the secret of his power ; it resides in something 

 more intimate and personal to himself. The late 

 Principal Shairp was probably as sound a critic as 

 was Arnold, but his work is of much less interest, 

 because it does not contain the same vital expression 

 of a new and distinct type of mind. Arnold was a 

 better critic of literature than of life and history. 

 There were other values than literary ones that were 

 not so clearly within his range. In 1870 he thought 

 the Germans would stand a poor chance in the war 

 with Trance. How could the German Gemeinheit, 

 or commonness, stand up before the French esprit ? 

 In our civil war, he expected the South to win. 

 Did not the South have distinction ? But distinc- 

 tion counts for more in style than in war. Arnold's 

 criticism has the great merit of being a clear and for- 

 cible expression of a fine-bred, high-toned, particu- 

 lar type of man, and that type a pure and noble 

 one. There was no bungling, no crudeness, no strain- 

 ing, no confusion, no snap judgment, and apparently 

 no bias. He was as steady as a clock. His ideas 

 were continuous and homogeneous ; they run like 

 living currents all through his works, and give them 

 unity and definitiveness. He is not to be effaced or 

 overthrown ; he is only to be matched and appraised. 

 His word is not final, but it is fit and challenges 

 your common sense. His contribution flows into 

 the current of English criticism like a clear stream 



