Alexander Pope set down a set of rules and guidelines he believed that every critic of literature should follow.

In his Essay On Criticism, he explains how he feels the critic of literature should proceed. According to Pope, the critic should use universal truths based on Nature as a means of critiquing works of art. Alexander Pope believed that Nature was the one universal truth and should be the basis for all critics as they review literature. In the introduction to An Essay On Criticism the Norton editors define Popes view of Nature as an equally ambiguous word, meaning not things out there or outdoors but most important that which is representative, universal, permanent in human experience as opposed to the idiosyncratic, the individual the temporary(2509). Pope believed that Nature was a series of universal truths that extended beyond the individual, regardless of his background and beliefs. According to Pope, it is these universal truths should be the basis for judging literature. He warns against using individual experience and personal knowledge as a criteria for critiquing saying that these will not be fair and accurate. Pope believed that the rules of Nature came from Nature itself. They were not devised by man; they were simply rediscovered. Pope describes these rules when he says, Those rules of old discovered, not devised, are nature still, but Nature methodized. (88-89). Pope is saying the rules of Nature have always existed, man just discovered them and put them to use. The rules of nature according to Pope were fairly simple: they must bring life, force, and beauty. He notes One clear, unchanged, and universal light, Life, force, and beauty must to all impart, at once the source, and end, and test of art (70-73). Here Pope is saying that a work of art should be critiqued on its ability to communicate these three features. Pope was a strong proponent of the ancients because he felt that they had discovered and used the rules of Nature appropriately. The ancients understood these rules and produced their art according to them. In Popes view this is why the works of art by the ancients have lasted through the ages. In order for a work of art to last it must bring life, force, and beauty to others. They did not devise the rules but rather they were in tune with them and the results were works that have lasted centuries. He refers to Homer as an example of one of the ancients who has tapped into the spirit of Nature. According to Pope, Homer understood the rules of Nature and in fact in An Essay On criticism Pope compares Nature with Homer by saying Nature and Homer were, he found, the same (135). Pope believed that the ancients were extremely in tune with this concept of Nature. According to Pope To copy Nature is to copy them(140). The ancients were so aware of the concept of Nature that the two became

almost one. So if you were to create works of art or critique works of art based on the literature of Homer and Virgil it would be no different than basing it Nature. Pope also warns the critic of literature against judging the work without a full knowledge of the concept of Nature and the subject itself. He says A little learning is a dangerous thing/ Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring/ There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain/ And drinking largely sobers us again (215-218). Here he is saying that the critic should not judge the work until he has a firm grasp on the concept of the basic rules of Nature. He is also saying that the critic should have a good knowledge of the subject he is critiquing; otherwise the critique will be flawed and unjust. If the critic does not understand and use the basic rules, then the result is a critique that is not characteristic with the great works of the ancients and therefore is not acceptable. The rules of Nature according to Pope are the backbone of creating and critiquing works of art. But he also realized that even if an artist or critic adhered to these rules there would still be room for individual creativeness and due to individual inspiration. This individualism cannot be helped because the artist and the critic inherently bring some of their creativeness and inspiration to the work. So even though they use the rules of Nature as the basis for the work, inspiration of the individual also has a part in the process. He states this when he says Some beauties yet no precepts can declare/for theres a happiness as well as care/music resembles poetry, in each/are nameless graces which no methods teach/and which a master hand alone can reach (141-145). Pope recognizes the fact that even if the artist or critic were to follow the rules of Nature the artist or the critic would still have their own inspiration to bring to the project. As long as the rules of Nature were followed Pope did not take issue with the artist adding his own inspiration to the work. Neo-classiscm is defined as a revival of the ancients or a revisiting of the classic works. Alexander Pope felt that the ancient writers such as Homer and Virgil were revered through the age for a reason; that reason is their discovery and application of the rules of Nature. Because their work incorporates the tenets of Nature, beauty, force and life it has been viewed through the centuries as classic works of art. Pope believed that the reason the works of Homer and Virgil had lasted throughout the centuries is because they had tapped into Nature. He advocated the artists and the critic do the same in order to make their work effective and long lasting.