Matthew Arnold: “Sweetness and Light” Summary by Sarah K. Wilson Some people look down on “culture” because they see it as a knowledge of what’s “in” that serves to distinguish one from the lower classes. Arnold believes that culture should be sought out of curiosity, meaning a “liberal and intelligent eagerness about things,” or “a desire after the things of the mind simply for their own sakes and for the pleasure of seeing them as they are” (466). Beyond this, culture is also a “study of perfection” which “moves by the force . . . of the moral and social passion for doing good” (467). In other words, culture can teach intellectual and moral good. One who embraces this culture, works to bring about intellectual and moral good in his life and work to make those things “prevail” in society. Compared to utilitarianism, this pursuit seems “selfish, petty, and unprofitable”; however, a society of intellectually and morally developed people, people who seek culture as a “study of perfection,” is the only truly great society (467). In this sense, culture is actually quite beneficial. Pursuing culture means realizing what’s important in life. Wealth, health, physicality are all meaningless. Only intellectual and moral development are important. (470). Culture is worthwhile because it reminds us of what’s important and renews our passion for “sweetness and light” (471). When true culture is achieved, true greatness occurs and social classes are destroyed.

 

#######################

Matthew Arnold: “Sweetness and Light”

 

Summary by Sarah K. Wilson

 

              Some people look down on “culture” because they see it as a knowledge of what’s “in” that serves to distinguish one from the lower classes.   Arnold believes that culture should be sought out of curiosity, meaning a “liberal and intelligent eagerness about things,” or “a desire after the things of the mind simply for their own sakes and for the pleasure of seeing them as they are” (466).  Beyond this, culture is also a “study of perfection” which “moves by the force . . . of the moral and social passion for doing good” (467).  In other words, culture can teach intellectual and moral good.  One who embraces this culture, works to bring about intellectual and moral good in his life and work to make those things “prevail” in society. 

              Compared to utilitarianism, this pursuit seems “selfish, petty, and unprofitable”; however, a society of intellectually and morally developed people, people who seek culture as a “study of perfection,” is the only truly great society (467).  In this sense, culture is actually quite beneficial.   Pursuing culture means realizing what’s important in life.  Wealth, health, physicality are all meaningless.  Only intellectual and moral development are important. (470).

              Culture is worthwhile because it reminds us of what’s important and renews our passion for “sweetness and light” (471).  When true culture is achieved, true greatness occurs and social classes are destroyed.

Jonathan Swift first used the phrase in his mock-heroic prose satire, "The Battle of the Books" (1704), a defense of Classical learning, which he published as a prolegomenon to his A Tale of a Tub. It gained widespread currency in the Victorian era, when English poet and essayist Matthew Arnold picked it up as the title of the first section of his 1869 book Culture and Anarchy: An Essay in Political and Social Criticism, where "sweetness and light" stands for beauty and intelligence, the two key components of an excellent culture.

The Victorian poet and essayist Matthew Arnold, who was also an inspector of schools, popularized Swift's phrase as the theme and title of the first chapter of his celebrated book of cultural criticism, Culture and Anarchy. Arnold contends that the most valuable aspect of civilization is its ability to confer "sweetness and light," and he contrasts this to the moralism, hatred, and fanaticism of some of the would-be educators and materialistic improvers of mankind. For Arnold, sweetness is beauty, and light is intelligence – and together they make up "the essential character of human perfection," which had its fullest development, he believed, among the ancient Greeks.^[6]

Arnold criticizes the religious and utilitarian reformers of his own day for wanting only to improve humanity's moral and material condition, or for focusing "solely on the scientific passion for knowing," while neglecting the human need for beauty and intelligence, which comes about through lifelong self-cultivation. Arnold concedes that the Greeks may have neglected the moral and material, but:

Greece did not err in having the idea of beauty and harmony and complete human perfection so present and paramount; it is impossible to have this idea too present and paramount; but the moral fiber must be braced too. And we, because we have braced the moral fibre, are not on that account in the right way, if at the same time the idea of beauty, harmony, and complete human perfection is wanting or misapprehended amongst us; and evidently it is wanting or misapprehended at present. And when we rely as we do on our religious organisations, which in themselves do not and cannot give us this idea, and think we have done enough if we make them spread and prevail, then, I say, we fall into our common fault of overvaluing machinery.^[7]

The phrase came into regular use as an English language idiom after the publication of Arnold's essay.