Despite all its shortcomings, literary criticism still supplies both the writer and the reader with the tools for self-evaluation and self-improvement. It comes in various forms and for different aims. The evolution of literary criticism passes through different schools and approaches as one school opposes the other. Some of the major approaches that stood against each other based on different assumptions, had been started with the historical theory that was hugely criticised specially by the mid-twentieth century tendencies which knew the emergence of the New criticism developed by Anglo-American writers, and later the growth of reader-response criticism followed indirectly by the structuralist theories.
Table of Contents
Introduction
I- The Historical criticism
II-The new criticism
III- Reader Response theory
IV-structuralism
CONCLUSION
Objectives and Topics
This work aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of literary criticism, exploring how different theoretical schools have shaped the interpretation of texts over time. It investigates the shift from historical and biographical approaches to text-centered theories, reader-oriented perspectives, and structuralist linguistic analyses, ultimately arguing for the value of diversity in critical evaluation.
- Evolution of historical criticism and its reliance on cultural context.
- The rise of New Criticism and its formalist emphasis on "close reading".
- The role of the reader as an active participant in meaning-making.
- Application of linguistic structures in structuralist literary analysis.
- Critical comparison of diverse approaches to interpreting literature.
Excerpt from the Book
II-The new criticism:
Unlike the Historical criticism, New Critics treat a work of literature as if it were a self-contained, self-referential object. Rather than basing their interpretations of a text on the context of the work or the author’s life, as it is the case in the historical approach, New critics perform a close reading, concentrating on the relationships within the text that give it its own form.
As a type of formalist literary criticism, new criticism reached its height during the 1940s and 1950s.Precisely, the Anglo-American traditions of criticism in the mid-twentieth century was noticeably influenced by one of the foremost poets and critics of the 19th century Matthew Arnold, who was often regarded as the father of modern literary criticism. In his essay “the study of poetry”, Arnold gives poetry the highest value when he believes that “mankind will discover that we have to turn to poetry to interpret life for us, to console us, to sustain us” 1, and he proposed that philosophy and religion should be replaced by poetry. Arnold believed also that modern poets should look to the ancients writers and their great characters and themes for inspiration and guidance. For him only some literary writing should be viewed as ‘Literature’ then be part of the ‘canon’; the idea that will later be rejected by some authors who viewed the canon as being artificial and hierarchical.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides an overview of the development of literary criticism, highlighting the tension between historical theories and later movements like New Criticism, reader-response, and structuralism.
I- The Historical criticism: Explains the method of analyzing literature through the cultural, intellectual, and social context of the time it was produced, including the author's biography.
II-The new criticism: Details the formalist approach that focuses on the text as a self-referential object, emphasizing "close reading" and objective standards as seen in the work of I.A. Richards and Cleanth Brooks.
III- Reader Response theory: Examines how this school shifted the focus to the reader as an active agent, exploring subjective responses and the role of linguistic competence in text interpretation.
IV-structuralism: Discusses the application of linguistic concepts and abstract structures to literary analysis, drawing heavily on the work of Ferdinand de Saussure.
CONCLUSION: Synthesizes the discussed theories, advocating for an inclusive view where multiple critical perspectives can coexist to enrich the understanding of a literary work.
Keywords
Literary criticism, Historical criticism, New Criticism, Reader Response theory, Structuralism, Close reading, Textual analysis, Semiotics, Linguistic competence, Phenomenology, Canon, Meaning construction, Poetics, Literary theory, Subjective response.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this work?
The work provides a historical and analytical overview of the major schools of thought in literary criticism, tracing their evolution from the historical method to structuralism.
What are the central thematic areas discussed?
The main themes include historical context, text-centered formalist analysis, the subjective experience of the reader, and the linguistic structures that form a narrative.
What is the main objective of the author?
The goal is to illustrate how different critical theories attempt to make sense of literary works and to argue against the superiority of one single approach.
Which scientific methods are examined?
The book explores the historical method, formalist "close reading", phenomenological approaches to consciousness, and the linguistic-semiotic methods used by structuralists.
What does the main body cover?
The main body covers four key movements: Historical criticism, New Criticism, Reader Response theory, and Structuralism, providing key theorists and their core concepts for each.
Which keywords best describe the content?
Key terms include Literary criticism, New Criticism, Reader Response, Structuralism, Close reading, and linguistic structures.
How does the author distinguish between "open" and "closed" texts?
Drawing on Umberto Eco, the author differentiates between closed texts that dictate an interpretation and open texts that invite the reader to decode meaning within a cultural context.
What is the significance of the "horizon of expectations" in this study?
The term, associated with Hans Robert Jauss, describes how the social and historical situation of the reader influences their interpretation of a work's meaning.
How does the author define the role of the structuralist critic?
The structuralist critic seeks to understand a text by analyzing its underlying abstract structures, aiming to construct a poetics that functions like the study of language itself.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Rachid Merzouki (Autor:in), 2013, Literary criticism, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/266180
