Skip to main content

Chapter 2: Accommodations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
A Defence of the Humanities in a Utilitarian Age

Abstract

If some advocates for the forms of knowledge that were soon to become known as the humanities in their modern institutional form pushed back against their marginalization within the reform movement by inverting the hierarchical relation between so-called useful knowledge (or information) and the more “creative” world of the arts (to use deliberately loaded terms, whose severe limitations were a major part of their argument) in terms that favoured the ultimate power of a vision of the imagination that refused to subordinate itself to the world of “applied” tasks, another intellectual tradition was gaining momentum during these same years that responded to this challenge by emphasizing their mutually enhancing nature. By stressing the proximity of these supposedly very different forms of knowledge, critics such as Leigh Hunt and John Stuart Mill foregrounded questions about their relative strengths, limits, and sometimes, surprising areas of convergence. If Hunt’s writing in the 1830s was energized by his attempt to forge an “anti-sectarian philosophy” whose respect for the worth of “every species of liberal knowledge” including the doctrine of Utilitarianism, which many literary enthusiasts regarded as their antithesis, it is no small irony that one of utilitarianism’s greatest champions, Mill, spent these same years forging an explicitly anti-sectarian philosophy from the opposite direction, rethinking the very nature of utilitarianism in ways that aligned it with those creative and critical preoccupations that constituted the domain of liberal knowledge. In doing so, Mill was also converging with Thomas Arnold’s insights about the ways that the social cleavages produced by industrial capitalism required new forms of public discourse that embraced the importance of affective and intellectual modes of understanding. If Arnold figured the controversy surrounding the 1832 Reform Bill as a political crisis that would need to be settled, at least in part, on a personal (or interpersonal) level by rebuilding the forms of sympathy and community that would enable economic and democratic changes to overcome entrenched forms of class alienation, Mill was arriving at a similar position from the opposite direction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Arnold’s comment about his father was included in earlier drafts of Culture and Anarchy . Arnold, perhaps wisely, omitted it from the published version. Interestingly, neither phrase appears in any of Thomas Arnold’s published writing.

  2. 2.

    For an account of these events, see Raymond Williams, “A Hundred Years of Culture and Anarchy,” Problems in Materialism and Culture. London: Verso, 1980.

  3. 3.

    For an account of these events, see George Rudé, “English Rural and Urban Disturbances on the Eve of the First Reform Bill, 1830–1831,” Past and Present 37 (1967): 87–102.

  4. 4.

    As Slavoj Žižek put is: “the realization of desire does not consist in its being ‘fulfilled,’ ‘fully satisfied,’ it consists rather with the reproduction of desire as such, with its circular movement” (7).

  5. 5.

    For a more recent argument for the value of this disruptive potential, see Gayatri Spivak’s thoughts on the role of the humanities in her assessment of the impact of the 9–11 attacks: “What seems important today, in the face of this unprecedented attack on the temple of Empire, is not only an unmediated intervention by way of the calculations of the public sphere—war or law—but training (the exercise of the educative power) into a preparation for the eruption of the ethical. I understand the ethical, and this is a derivative position, to be an interruption of the epistemological, which is the attempt to construct the other as object of knowledge.” “Terror: A Speech After 9–11,” boundary 2 (31.2): 2004, p. 93.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Keen .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Keen, P. (2020). Chapter 2: Accommodations. In: A Defence of the Humanities in a Utilitarian Age. Palgrave Studies in the Enlightenment, Romanticism and Cultures of Print. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32660-9_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics