THE ANATOMY OF LIBERALISM
thought from philosophy to sociology, to the economic realities of life.
Explicit defense of the system is taL:ing the place of implicit bonds with
the theoretical pillars of the system.
Criticism has long been concerned with the relation of the new to the
old. But these categories have usually been thought of as revolt and tradi–
tion in
aesthetics.
Undoubtedly, literary currents will emerge under
capitalism. But they will be nourished by the dominant bourgeois per–
spectives. A genuine revolt, like that of proletarian literature, has roots
in a completely new outlook.
Hazlitt's emphasis on the function of criticism as an objective whole is
an application of, the modern scientific temper. The advance of science
has provoked attempts to establish objectivity even in art criticism. Com–
plete objectivity would require a consideration of the functions of critic–
ism as a whole, leading, as Marxist criticism does, to a rejection of the
social theories sustaining traditional literature. Failing to do this, Haz–
litt's objectivity becomes, at best, a statistical one, with no basis for radical
change. Hazlitt's method has produced a survey and composite of critical
opinions, but it gives no insight into the philosophical presuppositions of
those' opinions.
Though Hazlitt occasionally admits some "class bias" in art, he as–
signs little value to it, and the admission is inconsistent with his leading
ideas. Hence Hazlitt's critique actually involves the
assump~ions
that art
is beyond the tentacles of class problems, and that the mechanism for
solving aesthetic questions is to be taken from prevailing (bourgeois}
values and doctrines.
51
