Page 46 - Decoding Culture
P. 46

THE WAY WE WERE  39
           that they might agree that yes, indeed, the critic has revealed that
           all-important coherence.
             This last stage is the interrogative method, the famous 'this is
           so, is it not?' The critic works with concrete judgements, detailed
           analyses  of the text,  and  appeals to  the  readers'  shared  experi­
           ence  to  'get them  to  agree':  This - doesn't it?  - bears  such  a
           relation to that;  this kind of thing - don't you find it so? - wears
                                         )
           better than that'  (l-eavis,  1952: 215 .   But, as Anderson  (1968: 52)
           points out,  [ tlhe central idea of this epistemology - the interroga­
                    '
           tive  statement - demands  one  crucial  precondition:  a  shared,
           stable system of beliefs and values'. Where critic and readers do
           not hold to the same beliefs, presuppositions, theoretical commit­
           ments,  then  - as  with  all  forms  of  inductive  empiricism  -
           meaningful  discourse  is no  longer  possible except  (perhaps)  at
           the level of meta-analysis. Hence the need for explicit theoretical
           and methodological discussion. If there is a community of culture
           shared by critic and reader the detailed textual argument can be
           experienced  as  persuasive.  But if there is no  such  community,
           then the critic's claims will seem to the unsympathetic reader to be
           no more than arbitrary assertions of one viewpoint over another.
           In this way Leavis' faith in the significance of the 'organic commu­
           nity' finds an odd reflection in his epistemology, and his method, in
           turn,  forms the basis for Leavisism's educational mission.  If we
           could  only be educated into embracing Leavis' values and critical
           perceptions,  the argument runs, then we would indeed  come  to
           constitute a cultured community.
             In the end, then, and for the moment leaving to one side his pos­
           itive  commitment  to  the  significance  of  human  agency,  the
           underlying ideas of Leavisism have similar limitations to those of
           the mass society/media effects tradition. Both traditions are firmly
           empiricist, in Leavis' case in an openly inductive and anti-theoreti­
           cal form, and in the case of effects research somewhat disguised





                              Copyrighted Material
   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51