Wikipedia

Literary criticism

(Redirected from Literary analysis)
For the event, see Literary Criticism (UIL).

A genre of arts criticism, literary criticism or literary studies is the study, evaluation, and interpretation of literature. Modern literary criticism is often influenced by literary theory, which is the philosophical analysis of literature's goals and methods. Although the two activities are closely related, literary critics are not always, and have not always been, theorists.

Whether or not literary criticism should be considered a separate field of inquiry from literary theory is a matter of some controversy. For example, The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism[1] draws no distinction between literary theory and literary criticism, and almost always uses the terms together to describe the same concept. Some critics consider literary criticism a practical application of literary theory, because criticism always deals directly with particular literary works, while theory may be more general or abstract.[2]

Literary criticism is often published in essay or book form. Academic literary critics teach in literature departments and publish in academic journals, and more popular critics publish their reviews in broadly circulating periodicals such as The Times Literary Supplement, The New York Times Book Review, The New York Review of Books, the London Review of Books, the Dublin Review of Books, The Nation, Bookforum, and The New Yorker.

History

edit

Classical and medieval criticism

edit

Literary criticism is thought to have existed as far back as the classical period.[3] In the 4th century BC Aristotle wrote the Poetics, a typology and description of literary forms with many specific criticisms of contemporary works of art. Poetics developed for the first time the concepts of mimesis and catharsis, which are still crucial in literary studies.[4] Plato's attacks on poetry as imitative, secondary, and false were formative as well. The Sanskrit Natya Shastra includes literary criticism on ancient Indian literature and Sanskrit drama.[5]

Later classical and medieval criticism often focused on religious texts, and the several long religious traditions of hermeneutics and textual exegesis have had a profound influence on the study of secular texts.[6] This was particularly the case for the literary traditions of the three Abrahamic religions: Jewish literature, Christian literature and Islamic literature.

Literary criticism was also employed in other forms of medieval Arabic literature and Arabic poetry from the 9th century, notably by Al-Jahiz in his al-Bayan wa-'l-tabyin and al-Hayawan, and by Abdullah ibn al-Mu'tazz in his Kitab al-Badi.[7]

Renaissance criticism

edit

The literary criticism of the Renaissance developed classical ideas of unity of form and content into literary neoclassicism, proclaiming literature as central to culture, entrusting the poet and the author with preservation of a long literary tradition. The birth of Renaissance criticism was in 1498, with the recovery of classic texts, most notably, Giorgio Valla's Latin translation of Aristotle's Poetics. The work of Aristotle, especially Poetics, was the most important influence upon literary criticism until the late eighteenth century. Lodovico Castelvetro was one of the most influential Renaissance critics who wrote commentaries on Aristotle's Poetics in 1570.

Baroque criticism

edit

The seventeenth-century witnessed the first full-fledged crisis in modernity of the core critical-aesthetic principles inherited from classical antiquity, such as proportion, harmony, unity, decorum, that had long governed, guaranteed, and stabilized Western thinking about artworks.[8] Although Classicism was very far from spent as a cultural force, it was to be gradually challenged by a rival movement, namely Baroque, that favoured the transgressive and the extreme, without laying claim to the unity, harmony, or decorum that supposedly distinguished both nature and its greatest imitator, namely ancient art. The key concepts of the Baroque aesthetic, such as "conceit' (concetto), "wit" (acutezza, ingegno), and "wonder" (meraviglia), were not fully developed in literary theory until the publication of Emanuele Tesauro's Il Cannocchiale aristotelico (The Aristotelian Telescope) in 1654. This seminal treatise – inspired by Giambattista Marino's epic Adone and the work of the Spanish Jesuit philosopher Baltasar Gracián – developed a theory of metaphor as a universal language of images and as a supreme intellectual act, at once an artifice and an epistemologically privileged mode of access to truth.

Enlightenment criticism

edit
 
Samuel Johnson, one of the most influential writers and critics of the 18th century. See: Samuel Johnson's literary criticism.

In the Enlightenment period (1700s–1800s), literary criticism became more popular. During this time literacy rates started to rise in the public;[9] no longer was reading exclusive for the wealthy or scholarly. With the rise of the literate public, the swiftness of printing and commercialization of literature, criticism arose too.[10] Reading was no longer viewed solely as educational or as a sacred source of religion; it was a form of entertainment.[11] Literary criticism was influenced by the values and stylistic writing, including clear, bold, precise writing and the more controversial criteria of the author's religious beliefs.[12] These critical reviews were published in many magazines, newspapers, and journals. The commercialization of literature and its mass production had its downside. The emergent literary market, which was expected to educate the public and keep them away from superstition and prejudice, increasingly diverged from the idealistic control of the Enlightenment theoreticians so that the business of Enlightenment became a business with the Enlightenment.[13] This development – particularly of emergence of entertainment literature – was addressed through an intensification of criticism.[13] Many works of Jonathan Swift, for instance, were criticized including his book Gulliver's Travels, which one critic described as "the detestable story of the Yahoos".[12]

19th-century Romantic criticism

edit

The British Romantic movement of the early nineteenth century introduced new aesthetic ideas to literary studies, including the idea that the object of literature need not always be beautiful, noble, or perfect, but that literature itself could elevate a common subject to the level of the sublime. German Romanticism, which followed closely after the late development of German classicism, emphasized an aesthetic of fragmentation that can appear startlingly modern to the reader of English literature, and valued Witz – that is, "wit" or "humor" of a certain sort – more highly than the serious Anglophone Romanticism. The late nineteenth century brought renown to authors known more for their literary criticism than for their own literary work, such as Matthew Arnold.

The New Criticism

edit

However important all of these aesthetic movements were as antecedents, current ideas about literary criticism derive almost entirely from the new direction taken in the early twentieth century. Early in the century the school of criticism known as Russian Formalism, and slightly later the New Criticism in Britain and in the United States, came to dominate the study and discussion of literature in the English-speaking world. Both schools emphasized the close reading of texts, elevating it far above generalizing discussion and speculation about either authorial intention[14] (to say nothing of the author's psychology or biography, which became almost taboo subjects) or reader response:[15] together known as Wimsatt and Beardsley's intentional fallacy and affective fallacy.[16][17] This emphasis on form and precise attention to "the words themselves" has persisted, after the decline of these critical doctrines themselves.[18]

Theory

edit

In 1957 Northrop Frye published the influential Anatomy of Criticism. In his works Frye noted that some critics tend to embrace an ideology, and to judge literary pieces on the basis of their adherence to such ideology. This has been a highly influential viewpoint among modern conservative thinkers. E. Michael Jones, for example, argues in his Degenerate Moderns that Stanley Fish was influenced by his own adulterous affairs to reject classic literature that condemned adultery.[19] Jürgen Habermas, in Erkenntnis und Interesse [1968] (Knowledge and Human Interests), described literary critical theory in literary studies as a form of hermeneutics: knowledge via interpretation to understand the meaning of human texts and symbolic expressions – including the interpretation of texts which themselves interpret other texts.

 
Ferdinand de Saussure's theories of linguistics and semiotics were influential in developing structuralist approach to literary criticism.

In the British and American literary establishment, the New Criticism was more or less dominant until the late 1960s. Around that time Anglo-American university literature departments began to witness a rise of a more explicitly philosophical literary theory, influenced by structuralism, then post-structuralism, and other kinds of Continental philosophy. It continued until the mid-1980s, when interest in "theory" peaked. Many later critics, though undoubtedly still influenced by theoretical work, have been comfortable simply interpreting literature rather than writing explicitly about methodology and philosophical presumptions.

Current state

edit

Today, approaches based in literary theory and continental philosophy largely coexist in university literature departments, while conventional methods, some informed by the New Critics, also remain active. Disagreements over the goals and methods of literary criticism, which characterized both sides taken by critics during the "rise" of theory, have declined.

Some critics work largely with theoretical texts, while others read traditional literature; interest in the literary canon is still great, but many critics are also interested in nontraditional texts and women's literature, as elaborated on by certain academic journals such as Contemporary Women's Writing,[20] while some critics influenced by cultural studies read popular texts like comic books or pulp/genre fiction. Ecocritics have drawn connections between literature and the natural sciences. Darwinian literary studies studies literature in the context of evolutionary influences on human nature. And postcritique has sought to develop new ways of reading and responding to literary texts that go beyond the interpretive methods of critique. Many literary critics also work in film criticism or media studies.

History of the book

edit

Related to other forms of literary criticism, the history of the book is a field of interdisciplinary inquiry drawing on the methods of bibliography, cultural history, history of literature, and media theory. Principally concerned with the production, circulation, and reception of texts and their material forms, book history seeks to connect forms of textuality with their material aspects.

Among the issues within the history of literature with which book history can be seen to intersect are: the development of authorship as a profession, the formation of reading audiences, the constraints of censorship and copyright, and the economics of literary form.

Major twentieth-century schools of critical analysis

edit
Historicist approaches
Formalist approaches
Political approaches
Psychological approaches
Race and sexuality approaches

Key texts

edit
Further information: Critical theory, Feminist literary criticism, and List of American literary critics

Classical and medieval periods

edit

Renaissance period

edit

Enlightenment period

edit

19th century

edit

20th century

edit

See also

edit

References

edit
  1. ^ The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism (2nd ed.). Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press. 2005. ISBN 978-0-8018-8010-0. OCLC 54374476.
  2. ^ Bhagat, Mahesh Kumar (1 January 2024). "Understanding theory, literary theory and literary criticism". International Journal of Research in English. 6 (1): 62–64. doi:10.33545/26648717.2024.v6.i1b.161.
  3. ^ "Literary Theory | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy". Archived from the original on 27 November 2020. Retrieved 1 December 2020.
  4. ^ Baxter, John (1997). Aristotle's Poetics: Translated and with a Commentary by George Whalley. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press. pp. xxii–xxxiii.
  5. ^ Pollock, Sheldon Ivan (2016). A rasa reader: classical Indian aesthetics. Historical sourcebooks in classical indian thought. New York: Columbia university press. p. 47. ISBN 978-0-231-17390-2.
  6. ^ Gadamer, Hans-Georg; Gadamer, Hans-Georg (2003). Truth and Method (2 ed.). New York: Continuum. p. 292. ISBN 978-0-8264-0585-2.
  7. ^ van. Gelder, G. J. H. (1982). Beyond the Line: Classical Arabic Literary Critics on the Coherence and Unity of the Poem. Leiden: Brill Publishers. pp. 1–2. ISBN 978-90-04-06854-4. OCLC 10350183.
  8. ^ Jon R. Snyder, L’estetica del Barocco (Bologna: Il Mulino, 2005), 21–22.
  9. ^ Van Horn Melton, James (2001). The Rise of the Public in Enlightenment Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 82. ISBN 978-0-521-46573-1.
  10. ^ Voskuhl, Adelheid (2013). Androids in the Enlightenment: Mechanics, Artisans, and Cultures of the Self. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 71–72. ISBN 978-0-226-03402-7.
  11. ^ Murray, Stuart (2009). The Library: An Illustrated History. New York: Skyhorse. pp. 132–133. ISBN 978-1-61608-453-0. OCLC 277203534.
  12. ^ a b Regan, Shaun; Dawson, Books (2013). Reading 1759: Literary Culture in Mid-Eighteenth-Century Britain and France. Lewisburg [Pa.]: Bucknell University Press. pp. 125–130. ISBN 978-1-61148-478-6.
  13. ^ a b Hohendahl, Peter Uwe; Berghahn, Klaus L. (1988). A History of German Literary Criticism: 173–1980. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. p. 25. ISBN 978-0-8032-7232-3.
  14. ^ Lamarque, Peter (26 January 2006), "The intentional fallacy", Literary Theory and Criticism, Oxford University PressOxford, pp. 177–188, doi:10.1093/oso/9780199291335.003.0014, ISBN 978-0-19-929133-5, retrieved 25 October 2024
  15. ^ Ryan, Michael, ed. (24 December 2010). The Encyclopedia of Literary and Cultural Theory (1 ed.). Wiley. doi:10.1002/9781444337839.wbelctv1a006. ISBN 978-1-4051-8312-3.
  16. ^ Wimsatt, W. K.; Beardsley, M. C. (1946). "The Intentional Fallacy". The Sewanee Review. 54 (3): 468–488. ISSN 0037-3052.
  17. ^ Wimsatt, W. K.; Beardsley, M. C. (1949). "The Affective Fallacy". The Sewanee Review. 57 (1): 31–55. ISSN 0037-3052.
  18. ^ Cohen, Stephan (2022). "Form and Formalism". In Frow, John (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of Literary Theory (1 ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acref/9780190699604.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-19-069960-4.
  19. ^ Jones, E. Michael (1991). Degenerate Moderns: Modernity as Rationalized Sexual Misbehaviour. San Francisco: Ignatius Press. pp. 79–84. ISBN 978-0-89870-447-1. OCLC 28241358.
  20. ^ "Contemporary Women's Writing | Oxford Academic". OUP Academic. Archived from the original on 7 August 2019. Retrieved 1 August 2019.
  21. ^ Ussher, J. (1767). Clio Or, a Discourse on Taste: Addressed to a Young Lady. Davies. p. 3. Retrieved 10 October 2014.
  22. ^ Davis, Theo (2007). Formalism, Experience, and the Making of American Literature in the Nineteenth Century. New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. p. 69. ISBN 9781139466561.
edit
Listen to this article (8 minutes)
 
This audio file was created from a revision of this article dated 18 October 2006 (2006-10-18), and does not reflect subsequent edits.
(Audio help · More spoken articles)
Library resources about
Literary Criticism
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Literary_criticism&oldid=1255974825"