Table-Talk · Chapter
On Criticism explained
Hazlitt explores the nature and evolution of criticism, contrasting insipid praise with dogmatic condemnation.
What happens
Hazlitt explores the nature and evolution of criticism, contrasting insipid praise with dogmatic condemnation. He critiques modern critics who prioritize self-display over justice to authors, and laments the political and partisan corruption of literary judgment. He also contrasts the superficial formalism of earlier criticism with a more genuine criticism that reflects the soul and body of a work.
Themes in this chapter
Criticism and Critical Practice
Hazlitt examines the evolution of criticism from simple opinion-giving to self-aggrandizing analysis, and contrasts genuine criticism with formalist or partisan approaches.
Institutional Corruption and Esprit de Corps
The chapter highlights how political and party loyalties corrupt literary criticism, turning it into a tool for proscription and personal attack.
Fame, Reputation, and Public Opinion
Hazlitt discusses how critics can destroy an author's reputation through malicious reviews, and how public opinion is swayed by dogmatic assertions.
Characters to notice
- William Hazlitt
The author and narrator, reflecting on the state of criticism.
- John Milton
Mentioned as an author whose 'Paradise Lost' baffled formalist critics.
- Sir Joshua Reynolds
Referenced indirectly through the discussion of connoisseurs and mechanical criticism of art.
- William Shakespeare
Quoted ('such sweet thunder') and alluded to in the discussion of genuine criticism.
- Samuel Johnson
Referenced as 'Justice Woodcock' in a simile about critics' morbid pretensions.
- Sir William
Mentioned in the context of 'Sir Walter Scott' as an example of a writer with a reputation to lose.
Key passages
“A genuine criticism should, as I take it, reflect the colours, the light and shade, the soul and body of a work”
True criticism should capture the essence and emotional impact of a work, not just its formal structure.
Hazlitt defines his ideal of criticism as holistic and empathetic, in contrast to mechanical analysis.
“The first are frequently actuated by personal friendship, the last by all the virulence of party spirit.”
Some critics are motivated by personal bias, others by political partisanship.
Hazlitt distinguishes between two corrupting influences on criticism: personal favoritism and political malice.