Which two of the following are fallacious evaluations of poetry according to Matthew Arnold’s The Study of Poetry?

A. contextual estimate
B. personal estimate
C. comparative estimate
D. historic estimate

Choose the correct answer from the options given below:

Correct option is D

Explanation:
In The Study of Poetry, Matthew Arnold criticizes two types of fallacious approaches to evaluating poetry:
Personal Estimate: Evaluating poetry based on personal bias or subjective opinions, which may distort its actual literary merit.
Historic Estimate: Overvaluing a work of poetry due to its historical importance, rather than its intrinsic quality.

Information Booster:
Arnold’s essay emphasizes that poetry must be judged by universal and eternal standards.
He argued for the separation of personal and historical biases in criticism to objectively assess the "greatness" of poetry. Arnold insists that poetry should be judged by its capacity to provide "high seriousness" and truth, not by personal preferences or historical considerations.

Additional Knowledge:
Contextual Estimate: This is not a concept discussed in Arnold's essay as a fallacious evaluation. It refers to analyzing a work within its cultural or social context, which is a valid approach in modern criticism.
Comparative Estimate: Comparing works of poetry can help in understanding styles, themes, and merits, and is not labeled as fallacious by Arnold.