such thing; but let us notice how it is just our worship of machinery, and of external doing, which leads to this charge being brought; and how the inwardness of culture makes us seize, for watching and cure, the faults to which our want of an Academy inclines us, and yet prevents us from trusting to an arm of flesh, as the Puritans say,—from blindly flying to this outward machinery of an Academy, in order to help ourselves. For the very same culture and free inward play of thought which shows how the Corinthian style, or the whimsies about the One Primeval Language, are generated and strengthened in the absence of an Academy, shows us, too, how little any Academy, such as we should be likely to get, would cure them. Every one who knows the characteristics of our national life, and the tendencies so fully discussed in the following pages, knows exactly what an English Academy would be like. One can see the happy family in one's mind's eye as distinctly as if it were already constituted. Lord Stanhope, the Dean of St. Paul's,[1] the Bishop of Oxford,[2] Mr. Gladstone, the Dean of Westminster, Mr. Froude, Mr. Henry Reeve,—everything which is influential, accomplished, and distinguished; and then, some fine morning, a dissatisfaction of the public
Page:Culture and Anarchy, Third edition, 1882, Matthew Arnold.djvu/15
PREFACE.
xi
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Culture_and_Anarchy%2C_Third_edition%2C_1882%2C_Matthew_Arnold.djvu/page15-1024px-Culture_and_Anarchy%2C_Third_edition%2C_1882%2C_Matthew_Arnold.djvu.jpg)