CRITICISM.

EDITORS DAILY CRIMSON. - In this university of specialists and specialized research, it seems as if one branch of study was becoming restricted beyond the point of advisability. Reference is made to the theme work of the present sophomore class. Perhaps there has been enough written pro and con on the English courses and the methods in use, but objection can still be made in one direction at least. Criticism figures first and foremost in almost every part of required work in sophomore English. The second and third themes are in themselves supposed to be criticisms, and after these each student must take the previous theme of a fellow classmate and make a criticism of this, a supplement of the succeeding essay.

As our education in this particular case is supposed to be taken from the value of specialism from the very fact of the course being prescribed, and to be transferred to the ground of thorough and symmetrical culture, it seems worth while to glance at the facts and see if the desired result is likely to follow.

No one will deny that the abundance of work required in the course and the great stress put upon English writing, carry within themselves the true theory of thorough culture in this most important branch, but at the same time, there are many things which require just as much practice relatively as criticism. This class of work binds one more or less to a set method of thought, and a narrow way of looking at things. You cannot gather figs from thistles, nor acquire a ready style and ample vocabulary from constant application of the familiar, "What does the author attempt? Is the attempt worth while? Is the attempt successful?" These three phrases stand like ghouls at the mental feast of every wretched sophomore, and, with cruel knives carve his repast into morsels to suit themselves.

There is another point in regard to this especial system which is open to objection, namely, that the basis upon which are founded twelve separate criticisms by each student, must be the work of different members of his own class. In very truth, if the admission of foreign commodities on an equal footing with home products is the only way to reserve a healthy state of our commercial markets, how will this restrictive high protection act upon the intellectual wealth of those under its action? Shall we find each individual offering to his fellow classmen, products equal to those found in the unlimited markets of the outside world of literature? It is barely possible.

Finally, one can hardly engage for a certain length of time, in a particular kind of work without becoming identified with it, and the logical result of the system will show itself at some future day. Instead of builders in literature, we shall have a class of men whose only ability lies in tearing down, instead of our being able to appreciate an artistic piece of work as a whole, our knowledge must come from a view of it lying dismembered before us like the wreck of some noble ship cast upon a barren shore.

'88.