Whittier’s Critical Creed
41
“mechanical exactness” based on classically correct rules.
Rather, true beauty comes from the mind as a radiation of
“holiness, of purity, of that inward grace that passeth show.”
The artist must understand this and discern in the “outward
environment . . . a deeper and more real loveliness.” Con-
versely, Whittier claims that ugliness or deformity occurs
only when there is an absence of virtue or the presence of
sin. This inner spiritual beauty transcends rules and tech-
niques, as Whittier once remarked of John Woolman’s writ-
ings: “Beauty they certainly have, but it is not that which
the rules of art recognize” (Works, VII, 345).
Obviously this idea of beauty is intimately connected with
his belief in the Quaker doctrine of the “inner light,” which
maintained that the indwelling of the holy spirit in each man
was a personal, introspective experience, and, at times, a
mystical relationship. In striving for individual perfection, no
set dogma or creed is followed, only the subjective voice of
the “inner light.” So, when Whittier commented that “beauty,
in and of itself, is good” (“To Avis Keene”), he meant some-
thing far different from Keats’ similar statement. Following
Emerson’s organic view of art, Whittier believed that good-
ness, truth, and beauty were one and that the material was
only a reflection of the Divine archetype. As a corollary,
Whittier held that the appreciation of beauty was a personal
thing which could be found anywhere and by anyone. The
attraction of an external object was dependent on “an in-
stantaneous reflection as to its history, purpose, or associa-
tions.” Such a view followed the prevailing romantic belief
in Alison’s comments on the subjectivity of the beautiful—
that the mind not only received but also created in its appre-
ciation of the beautiful. Thus, beauty was no longer intrinsic
or absolute in the Neoclassic sense, but dependent upon