St Andrews Seminary - Mapav Yearbook (Rochester, NY)

Page 32 text:

S A T O R the work means something to you, when you see in it a reflection or extension of yourself, when it becomes an outlet for you, you will be anxious to know the details of the author's life. We cannot lay down any definite rules for reading. The principal rule is to find the writer or writers, the book or books, that enrich our thinking by interpreting it. Sometimes the right book startles or warns us, sometimes it takes issue with us, sometimes it reveals new hidden powers, but in all cases it reveals something in common with us. Literature gives the most service to those who feel the need of a spokesman-who have something to say but lack the ability to say it. Wheiiever we read, we ought remember that we are developing our own personalities and that the book or story is only an extension of ourselves, an outlet for our thoughts and feelings. .Q , Ja. .HEL-Q Q J,iD?- ,- fQ.11s-.K fa d ' M 1 . To His Lasting Fame Adapted from an ode of Horace More enduring than bronze is the monument I have conceived, And more lofty than tombs that the kings of great Egypt once reared. For not beating of rain, nor the power of wind from the North, Nor the cycle of years in their endless swift course, not the flight Of the ages, may lessen it, carry away, or destroy. My demise incomplete e'er will be, for the part of my works That shall scape the fell clutches of Death's hungry goddess is great. On and on shall I grow, ever fresh with the husbandry, praise Of the time that shall after. As long as some priest shall ascend, Midst the hush of the virgins, the height of the Capitoline Shall my name still be heard,-- where the Aufidus wild and untamed In its course flows protestingly by, and where Daunus, a king Of a parched estate and a monarch, the lowly of birth, Over peasants for subjects once ruled,f as the first to adapt The Aeolian meters to measures Italian in form. O, accept this proud honor, my Muse, which by merits of thine I have won, and Phoebus' bright laurels of bay, may thou deign In thy pleasure to bind and encircle the brow of thy bard. twentyffowr CHARLEs LANGWORTHY, '40

Page 31 text:

1 9 3 9 What Is Literature? We can better understand a subject by first knowing its definition. We cannot define literaf ture with the accuracy with which we define biology, since definition is a scientific processg literature is an art and art is concerned with exf pression and creation. It is hardly possible to arrive at any clear understanding of what is meant by literature as an art, without some conf ception of what constitutes art in general. Broadly speaking, art exists in consequence of the universal human desire for sympathy. The essence of art is the expression of emotion, any book to be a work of art must embody sincere emotion. The writer must be sufficiently master of technique to be able to make words impart what he would express. The emotion expressed must be general and in some degree typical. Art must deal with what is typical in the sense that it touches the possibilities of all human nature. Therefore literature may be broadly defined as the adequate expression of genuine and typical emotion. Since literature is not a science but an art, we cannot put the meaning of a poem into words as easily as we can write up an experiment in chemistry. Definitions of literature are really descriptions from different points of view. Thomas Carlyle calls literature the 'Lthought of thinking souls, while Cardinal Newman refers to it as Nthe expression of thought in language, where by thought I mean the ideas, feelings, views, reasonings, and other operations of the human mind. The New Standard Dictionary defines literature as any written or printed prof ductions of the human mind collectivelyg especif ally such productions as are marked by elevation, vigor and catholicity of thought, by fitness, purity and grace of style and by artistic construction. From a cursory reading of this definition many people get the false impression that any' thing printed or written is literature. A little thought will show us that not all written or printed work is literature. The advertisements in this book are printed and are more than a list of words such as the dictionary is. The daily newspapers are printed and furnish a wide va' riety of information and a variety of reading material but the newspaper is not usually conf sidered literature although such men as Felix Morley, George Parker f'36j, John Owens f'37l, W. W. Waymack C381 have won the Pulitzer prize for journalism. Perhaps by this time some may have become confronted with the question: Well, what is literature? When we analyze a piece of literaf ture, such as, David Copperheld, The Ring and DONALD LEAHY, '39 the Book, Aes Triplex, we come to the concluf sion that these have certain characteristc none of which the advertisements, the dictionary or the newspaper contain. The principal character' istics of literature are: Literature is a picture of life, from which we can get a deeper knowledge of life and of man's achievementsg it gives us an intellectual and spiritual pleasure. Real literature does not dieg it is immortal. A recent bestfseller, for instance, Margaret Mitchell's Gone Witli the Wind and Marquand's Late George Apley, Pulitzer prize winners in 1937 and 1938 respecf tively, just after publication, were talked about in all circles, but soon this interest begins to wane and the book is left on the library shelves, un' noticed, but the classics are read and refread by all people and in every age. In our own experi' cnce we have probably found that the old book: are the most interesting. Literature is independent of place since the reader need not limit himself to the literature of one country but finds pleasure in books which have been translated from other languages. Ros' tand's Cyranno de Bergerac is as popular with American readers as Barrie's Peter Pan. Today, the ancient Roman empire would be entirely for' gotten were it 11015 for the interest students find in the literature of that country through their study of Caesar, Cicero, Vergil, Horace, and Livy. The poet has well said, NA thing of beauty is a joy forever. Cannot the fact that literature is a thing of beauty be alleged for the lasting enjoyment found in literature? Literature appeals to the universal desire for selffexpression since it includes all writings that express what we consciously or unconsciously feel the need of saying but are not able to sayg it expresses, as Hamlet says, thoughts beyond the reaches of our souls. Thomas Gray refers to this in his Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard when he says, Some mute inglorious Milton here may rest. Literature takes our half' formed thoughts, our suppressed moods, our stifled desires and leads them out in harmony and completeness. The person who would make literature the basis of a wellfrounded, humanistic selffeducation and have it as a guide through life should first approach literature itself, and seek what it has in common with him. It is unfortunate for stu' dents that literature is still taught from the fact side. The life of the author, the date of his work, and in the case of poetry, the meter employed have something to do with a book, but are all secondary. The first thing to do is to see in the book a reflection of yourself. When you do this twentyfthree

Page 33 text:

1 9 3 9 The Church and Science Catholics have so frequently heard the denial of the existence of a conflict between the Church and science that, in some cases, they regard that denial as based upon the authority of the Church. They forget that this is a reasoned conclusion based upon the validity of human reason, and not upon faith. Science is a knowledge of things in their proximate causes. It is founded on experience and generalizations and deductions drawn from those experiences. Scientific experiment demands accuf rate instruments and most careful observation and under such conditions the possihility of error is minimized. Therefore we must admit that facts proved by sciencific experiment are not to be def nied nor the logical conclusions drawn from them. When these conditions are fulfilled we say that the science is true v- it represents things as they are. Now, on the other hand, we have the Catholic Church, founded by Cod and guided by Him, Who is the source of all truth. To deny that such a Church teaches truth would deny the truth and goodness of God and the validity of human reason by means of which these attributes can be discovered. It is very evident that there can be no conf flict between true science and the true Church because they both represent reality-things as they are. In this way if the Church makes a state' ment, science cannot contradict Her and still ref main true. True science is reasonable for it is built upon logical reasoning from observed facts. The Church is reasonable, for none of her doctrines is contrary to reason and many of them can be proved by reasoning upon the knowledge of ex' perience. So, if we were to admit that there can exist a conflict between Church and science, we must deny the validity of human reason with vtihich each is in perfect harmony. If we deny the validity of reason, we wipe out science and there' fore, the conflict. That is all very well, it may be objected, JosEPH LYNCH, '39 but it is not to be denied' that the Church has come in conflict with the teachings of scientists. Does not that give the lie to your conclusion? You must remember that we defined science as a certain knowledge, and it is with this definite knowledge that the Church can have no conflict. However, in the scientihc method there is one step which, while it is a perfectly logical step to take, does not proceed in a logical manner. This is the step in which scientific theories are formed and it is with these theories that the Church occasionally has difficulty. We said that this step does not proceed logic' ally. It lies more in the field of fancy and imag ination than in the field of strict logic. The scien tist tries to picture in his mind what is taking place in reality. He does not proceed slowly and surely, step by step, but draws a mental picture of what he thinks may possibly be occurring in nature. He is like an artist who here and there gets a brief and somewhat hazy glimpse of his model. He fills in the blank spaces with what he thinks is probably truly there, but as these points cannot be demonstrated, they remain merely a guess and, possibly a very pretty picture. We also stated that a man is logical in taking that step, and he remains so as long as he rememf bers that the result of his labor is a theory and not certain scientiic knowledge. Man is naturally interested in mechanism g he always wants to know how and why a thing works. So it is rea' sonable that he should seek to explain natural phenomena. The purpose of science is utilitarian and so, if this step yields practical application, and it does, a scientist is perfectly logical in using it. However, the theorist ceases to be logical when he forgets that he is theorizing and treats his picture as a scientific fact and demands for it the respect that demonstrable facts command. When he comes upon a fact with which his theory does not agree, if he is logical, he revises his theory, if he is illogical, he tries to get around the fact. In the same way, when he comes in conf twentyfjive