PICKING UP THE PIECES - The Introduction to the 1966 Raven Lectures

Sep 28, 2026

Introductory lecture text by C. David Shanks for the 1966 Raven Lectures, focusing on the cultural situation of the time. It argues that today’s prominent eclecticism stems from a deficiency rather than a rich indigenous culture, describing how arts, literature, religion, and moral ideas borrow styles and concepts without conviction. The lecture critiques the “failure of nerve,” links modern artistic experimentation to inward unassuredness, and illustrates breakdown in prose and moral reasoning through examples and discussion.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryLiterature

FormatPDF

Pages40

Reading Time1 h 2 min

AccessFree to download

The Introductory Talk

Defining “culture” and clearing the ground

Eclecticism as deficiency and the failure of nerve

Moral sphere and moral “permissiveness”

Arts and literature: loss of conviction and meaning

Example from modern prose

PICKING UP THE PIECESby # C.DAVID SHANKS THE INTRODUCTION TO THE # 1966 RAVEN LECTURES PICKING UP THE PIECESby C.David Shanks # The Introduction of the 1966 Raven Lectures -EME T9s⁰k ciONCS TOAC !!ECTIONV CN UDLIC L Y PU. TO 9LSEVE P Y/F "ENATONALI. LC tSCH .7LEAE Cr í THE WATERSHED PRESS16 COLD BATH ROAD,HARROGATEYORKSHIRE,ENGLAND6280 | PV U18R
V⁸n | | | | --- | --- | --- | | No.
4l126 | | CI
28.我 | | Dapt. | Date
比 | ao
/ | P10 Printed by Malcolm G.Read39a,Snowsfelds,London,S.E.1. I would like if I may to state at the beginningthat what I am not seeking to offer is a definition ofthe word “culture”,nor even to single out for discus-sion attempts at definition which have been made inthe past.What I shall be trying to do,as the titleof this introductory talk suggests,is—almost literally—to pick up some of the pieces;not in order to pre-pare an exhibition of flawed masterpieces but quitesimply in order to clear the ground.And if one ofmy principal topics turns out to be eclecticism this isa facet already inherent in my subject matter. Eclecticism seems to me to be one of the mostpronounced symptoms of the situation today,andit is an eclecticism which is a reaching out,from anapparently assured and unassailable and superiorposition,to concepts,modes,ideas,abstracted fromwhole stretches of distance in place and time.I amgoing to suggest,however,that this eclecticismsprings not from a surfeit of an organic,indiginousculture but from a deficiency;that what we face atthe present time is not the luxurious dillitantism of anelite trafficking pleasurably with the trappings ofalien civilizations and with powers of almost absoluteassimilation (many instances of eclecticism of thiskind have been discernable in the past,fromchinoiserie in the eighteenth century to comparativereligion in the nineteenth)but with the impoverishedpsyche of western man clutching,a little unseemly,at straws.Take,for example,our sexologists who,in the name of and in the throes of sexual ‘permissive-ness',would borrow certain attributes of orientallicentiousness yet assiduously avoid the concomitant attitudes towards the sanctity of individual life,which might with justice be described as an exampleof having your cake and eating it.Or take thegeneral air of compromise which so bedevils thechurches.They seem so piteously anxious to closetheir ranks and come to terms with the modernworld. I have suggested that we are prepared to borrowsomewhat indiscriminately for our new moral ideas,and of course the same sort of situation obtains inthe arts as well.Many styles are toyed with,but,ashas been said,there is no style.In the emphasis,almost the reverence accorded the materials of artwe may divine the lack of conviction on the part ofthe artist himself (it is an age above all else ofexperiment)and an inward unassuredness which canfind its only security in the haphazard and the fortui-tous.The artist,as the writer,has increasinglyabrogated his responsibility.The order which heappears to seek is disorder.It is as if he were invit-ing the worst to happen,so that he may know withsome certainty that nothing worse shall befall.Itseems almost as if this part of our 'culture'todaycontained elements analogous to knocking the headagainst a brick wall,so eager we seem to seek outsuch brutal proofs that we are here at all.Modernart 'creates new dimensions'or ‘explores space'wehave been told.Or ‘it has its own logic,its ownrhetoric,its own grammar'.Quite so.We may beable to comprehend these lofty aspirations yet havereservations about the intonation and accent even ifwe do not find that the new language originates in a . rather bestial noise. In literature we find the same conditions.Surfacemeanings are played up or even the forms of wordsutterly denuded of meaning are dredged for signifi-cance,as if the practitioner should find there the only'objec

FAQs

What does the speaker say he is not trying to do at the beginning?

He says he is not offering a definition of the word “culture,” nor singling out past attempts to define it for discussion.

How does the speaker explain the cause of today’s eclecticism?

He suggests eclecticism does not spring from a surfeit of an organic, indigenous culture, but from a deficiency—an impoverished psyche reaching for borrowed concepts.

What criticism does the speaker make of modern art and literature?

He argues that modern art and literature show a lack of conviction and inward unassuredness, with meanings played up or denuded, individuality breaking down into physical constituents.

Sep 28, 2026

Uploaded by Chumphorn