Crticism 2

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 92

LITERARY CRITICISM 2

WHAT IS CRITICISM?

A: Definition: Literary Criticism?


Literary Criticism is the name given to works (secondary sources) written by experts who
critique— analyze—an author’s work (primary sources).
Literary criticism is the study, discussion, evaluation, and interpretation of literature. "Literary
criticism is the evaluation of literary works. This includes the
classification by genre, analysis of structure, and judgement of value.“
"Literary criticism asks what literature is, what it does, and what it is worth.“
The entire history of literary criticism could be described as an age old deliberation over two
questions: “what is literature?” And “what is reading?”
A: DEFINITION: LITERARY CRITICISM?

Literary criticism is the method used to interpret any given


work of literature.
The different schools of literary criticism provide us with lenses which ultimately reveal
important aspects of the literary work.
Literary criticism is a disciplined activity that attempts to describe, study, analyze, justify,
interpret and evaluate a work of art.
TYPES OF LITERARY CRITICISM

Theoretical Criticism
Formulates the theories, principles and tenants of the nature and values of art.
It sets the general aesthetic and moral principles that provides the basis for practical
criticism.
Practical Criticism/Applied Criticism
Applies the theories of theoretical criticism to a particular work.
It defines the standard of taste and explains, evaluates or justifies particular works of art.
Literary criticism is thus not to be regarded as just the analysis or evaluation of particular
literary works but also as the formulation of general principles of approach to such works.
A: DEFINITION: LITERARY CRITICISM?

Etymologically, the word criticism is derived from Greek word meaning ‘Judgement’. It is an
exercise in judgement.
Literary criticism is the exercise of judgment on works of literature. To examine aspects of
excellence and defects and finally to evaluate the artistic worth is the function of criticism.
Literary criticism relates to the theory of criticism which, in its turn, relates to the theory
of literature.
LITERARY CRITICISM, LITERARY THEORY AND LITERARY
HISTORY

Literary theory, literary criticism, and literary history are interrelated and interdependent.
They co-exist in the field of literary studies as bound by their major and common object of
study, which is the literary work.
Literary theory is the capacity to generalize about phenomena and to develop concepts
that form the basis for interpretation and analysis of a “literary” text.
Literary criticism co-exists with literary history and literary theory in the field of literary
studies.
Criticism as science follows and applies the general principles and methods of research
from literary theory, but it also reveals an artistic aspect when the critic personalizes the
discourse by his/her own opinions.
THE FOUR ELEMENTS OF THE THEORY OF LITERATURE &
THE THEORY OF CRITICISM
1- MIMETIC THEORY

One of the oldest understandings of literature which focuses on the relationship between
the work and the universe.
The work is a reflection of the world, and literary criticism focuses on the techniques
which are used to realistically depict that world. This is called mimetic theory.
2- DIDACTIC THEORY

In the terms of Abrams’ triangle, didacticism focuses on the relationship between the work
and the audience.
In this understanding of literature, it was important that the work imparts some knowledge
to the reader, change their behaviour, or impart social norms or wisdom.
3- EXPRESSIVE THEORY

The artist’s relationship with their work.


Literature is defined as an outpouring of personal feelings or experiences of
the artist. This is the expressive theory.
This theory became very influential during the Romantic period, around the 18th century.
During this time the individual figure of the artist and their responses to nature, in particular,
rose to prominence. (Individualism & Subjectivism)
Expressive theory could be seen to be the opposite of mimetic theory – expressive works can
be completely subjective, having abandoned any attempt to represent an objective reality in
order to focus on the feelings of the author.
4- FORMALIST THEORY

Formalist theory disregards each point of the triangle and focuses on the work itself.
Literature is stylistic, by definition. A work of literature must deploy specific techniques and
have a specific shape, or structure.
This definition leads to an increased appreciation of literary aesthetics and distinguishes
literature from other written forms such as newspaper articles or political writings.
Some influential formalist critics in the early 20th century also attempted to identify the
plot and structures which define different literary genres.
B: IS LITERARY CRITICISM USEFUL?

Literary criticism searches for meaning which increases our understanding of the text.
It helps us to understand what is important about the text: its structure, its context: social,
economic, historical, what is written and how the text manipulates the reader.
It helps us to understand the relationship between authors, readers, and texts.
The act of literary criticism ultimately enhances the enjoyment of our reading of the
literary work.
B: THE FUNCTIONS OF LITERARY CRITICISM?

Literary criticism has two main functions:


1. To analyze, study, interpret and evaluate works of literature.
2. To form general principles for the examination of works of literature.
Literary criticism is asking questions about the work of art and answering them. The
purpose is better understanding and appreciation of the pleasure.
Critical inquiry builds up a theory of literature.
B: THE FUNCTIONS OF LITERARY CRITICISM?

Criticism is the science of forming and expressing correct judgement upon the value and •
merit of works of literature. It is only through criticism that intellectual appreciation and
clear understanding become possible.
“The business of literary criticism is: •
to distinguish between a good book and a bad one to help us to recognize for
ourselves
to get full value out of literary quality
A qualified critic opens up for us a whole world of pleasure and imaginative experience •
and intellectual stimulus waiting to be explored.
C: THE DEVELOPMENT OF LITERARY CRITICISM

Literary criticism reveals a threefold perspective of development: •


First, for the periods before twentieth century, literary criticism is dependent on some dominant in •
those periods trends and movements of creative literature (for instance, classical or Neoclassical
criticism, Romantic criticism, and others);
Second, especially in nineteenth and twentieth centuries, emerge trends in criticism which are also •
related to new developments in science, philosophy, and society (for instance, historical criticism, realistic
criticism, Marxist criticism, psychoanalytical criticism, feminist criticism, and others);
Third, in twentieth century, some trends in literary criticism were developed from within the critical •
practice itself (for instance, narratology in the structuralist approach, or deconstruction in the
poststructuralist approach to literature).
SCHOOLS OF MODERN CRITICISM

Russian Formalism
New Criticism
Structuralism
Post-structuralism: Definitions
Major poststructuralist theories: intertextuality, reader response, psychoanalysis
Colonial and Post Colonial Studies.
Russian Formalism
RUSSIAN FORMALISM - DEFINITION

Formalism: refers to kinds of criticism that emphasize the importance of the formal
dimensions of literary texts, such as prose style, rhyme, narrative structure, verse-form and
so on. Formalism stresses the importance of form as (supposedly) distinct from content,
meaning, social and historical context.
Russian Formalism is a 20th century movement that started in Russia.It started in the
1915 and flourished in the 1920’s
It was simultaneous with New Criticism which started in Britain and America.
It was based on Ferdinand De Saussure's Linguistic Theory & Symbolism.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Russian Formalism was associated with OPOJAZ


OPOJAZ: a group of linguists and literary critics who were both responsible for the
development of Russian Formalism and Literary Semiotics
Moscow Linguistic Circle (Semiotics, Literary Theory and Linguistics) & Prague Linguistic
Circle (structuralist literary analysis)
The two groups derived their basic techniques from Ferdinand de Saussure’s theory.
They believed that the language of literature is different from other kinds of language. This
justifies the formalist proposition about the autonomy of the literary work (hence their text-
orientation).
INTRODUCTION TO RUSSIAN FORMALISM

Formalism developed as a reaction to the obscurity of symbolist and impressionistic •


methods of assessing literature.
Hence, the Russian formalists endeavoured to offer the model of an objective, scientific •
examination of literary style.
It forced critics to evaluate a literary work on its own terms rather than rely on •
“accepted” notions.
PRINCIPLES OF RUSSIAN FORMALISM

Emphasis on formal structure


Autonomous nature of text
Literary language versus Ordinary language
RUSSIAN FORMALISM – KEY FORMALIST IDEAS (1)

It aims to explore what is specifically literary in texts


It favors a detailed and empirical approach to reading.
Russian Formalists were much more interested in establishing a ‘scientific’ basis for the
theory of literature.
They aimed to outline models and hypotheses (in a scientific spirit) to explain how
aesthetic effects are produced by literary devices.
RUSSIAN FORMALISM – KEY FORMALIST IDEAS (2)

Russian Formalism is concerned with describing the procedures and techniques of a


literary work. It highlights how texts disrupt the reader’s expectations by using language in
novel ways (defamiliarization), so that meaning appears as a function of the work’s formal
procedures.
Literature aims to archive a “Freshness of Perception”.
LITERARY LANGUAGE VERSUS ORDINARY LANGUAGE (3)

• To convey this specific literary experience, the writer must employ certain
techniques :
Literariness
Foregrounding
Defamiliarization
FORM & CONTENT (1)

Form (formal): the shape and structure as well as the manner in which a literary work is made (How?),
as opposed to its meaning i.e.substance or paraphrasable content (‘what is said’).
For the Russian formalists, there was a sharp division between form and content.
Shklovsky, Tomashevsky and Jakobson were the first to argue that the formal dimension of literature
should be the primary concern of literary study. i.e. (rhythm patterns in poetry to narrative strategies in
fiction)
Early Russian formalists could go as far as to assert that content was merely an effect of form.
Emphasis of formal structure: Formal analysis (Metaphor – Syntax – Images – Rhyme – Symbols – Metre)
is key to understanding a work of literature.
FORM AND CONTENT (2)

Meaning appears as a function of the work’s formal procedures.


Russian Formalists considered that human ‘content’ (emotions, ideas and ‘reality’ in general)
possessed no literary significance in itself, but merely provided a context for the functioning of
literary ‘devices’.
The Formalists’ aim was making strange the familiar, what became known as defamiliarisation.
Texts with this formal property make a shift away from conventions and slow down the
reader’s response.
Anything can be literary if it is made strange by language devices such as defamiliarisation.
KEY TERMS IN RUSSIAN FORMALISM

Defamiliarization
Literariness
Foregrounding
The Dominant
DEFAMILIARIZATION (1)

A key term for Russian Formalists.


Estrangement effect to transform ordinary language to literary
language by making the familiar unfamiliar.
Defamiliarization (Shklovsky, ostranenie, ‘making strange’):
making new, different, strange, fresh what is known and familiar; in a narrow sense, modifying the reader’s
habitual perceptions by drawing attention to the artifice of the text through literary technique.
(e.g. Lawrence Sterne’s Tristram Shandy).
Art becomes a way of restoring conscious experience, of breaking through mechanical habits of conduct
(automatization).
DEFAMILIARIZATION (2)
“The technique of art is to make objects ‘unfamiliar’, to make forms difficult, to
increase the difficulty and length of perception because the process of perception is an
aesthetic end in itself and must be prolonged.
Art is a way of experiencing the artfulness of an object; the object is not important”,
as Shklovsky put it.

The purpose of art is to impart the sensation of things as they are


perceived, and not as they are known. The technique of art is to make
objects ‘unfamiliar ....tluciffid smrof ekam ot ,’Art is a way of
experiencing
the artfulness of an object; the object is not important.
(Shklovsky, Art as Technique )1917 ,
LITERARINESS

It is a feature that distinguishes literature from other arts.


It is a deviation from normal language. A literary text transfers
you to another world.
Example: Alice in Wonderland
Literariness (Jakobson, literaturnost): ‘The subject of literary science is not literature, but
literariness, i.e. that which makes a given work a literary work’ (Roman Jakobson, 1919).
Like ‘defamiliarization’, it is a concept which emphasizes that the defining features of a
literary work reside in its form.
FOREGROUNDING

A technique used to highlight certain expressions. In a literary text. Some words situations •
and expressions stand out from others.
In literature, foregrounding is identified with linguistic deviation (e.g. Inversion – Repetition •
– Paradox).
Poetic metaphor, a type of semantic deviation, is the most important instance of this type of •
deviation.
Story (fabula) vs. Plot (syuzhet): the logical-chronological order of events (the raw story •
material) vs. their narrative structuring in the text (i.e. the devices which defamiliarize the
story).
THE DOMINANT

The Dominant (the Prague School): ‘the focusing component of a work of art: it rules, •
determines, and transforms the remaining components’ (Jakobson, 1935).
The dominant gives the work its organic unity (Gestalt). •
Literary works are seen as dynamic systems in which elements are
structured in relations of foreground and background. •
This concept emerged as a development and response to Shklovsky’s definition of •
Defamiliarization.
It emphasized the distinction between those formal elements which function to •
defamiliarize (the dominant) and those which function passively.
Victor Shklovsky argues that art forms like music and architecture do not have images. He says that art is rather a technique that helps
recover the sensation of life .
Perception becomes habitual in life, which leads to an automatic or mechanical life .
Theory of Defamiliarization
Shklovsky coined this term in his essay ‘Art as a Technique’. He explains that it is an artistic technique to
“distinguish poetic from practical language on the basis of former’s perceptibility.” The technique of art is to
make objects unfamiliar, make the forms difficult, to increase the difficulty and length of perception. “Art is a
way of experiencing the artfulness of an object: the object is not important.” (Shklovsky)
He argues that familiar objects are not significant and art removes objects from the automatism of
perception so that one has to spend more time to understand them.

Poetic Language
In the second part of the essay, Shklovsky talks about how poetic language is a defamiliarised language. The
language of poetry and the practical language have very different functions. Practical language is used for
communication purposes, whereas the language of poetry has no such practical purpose. It’s objective is to
defamiliarised and lengthen the time and effort in perception.
VLADIMIR PROPP’S MORPHOLOGY OF THE FOLKTALE
(1928)
Propp was a Soviet folklorist and scholar who analysed the basic structural elements of Russian folk tales to
identify their simplest basic structural units. He examined Folktale “Narratology” from a formalistic perspective.
He wrote Morphology of the Folktale was published in Russian in 1928. In this book, Propp attempted to find a
similar deep structure underlying any number of folk stories.
In his study, Propp completely ignored the historical and social context of the tales he examined. He worked with
a body of Russian folktales, which he believed all possessed the same structure of ‘narrative functions’ (possible
actions).These functions are like buliding blocks and follow the chronological order of a linear sequence. Propp
compiled a list of thirty- one possible functions. Despite the differences in shape and identity of the
characters/landscapes/obstacles, the stories still have the same building blocks.
According to Propp, similar events of two completely different stories can be grouped together into one function.
FOR EXAMPLE:

- A wizard gives the hero a magical potion that will disguise him and allow him to slip past
the guards.
- The acrobat gives the hero a talking eagle that can carry him anywhere he wants to go.
Can you give more examples?
New Criticism

Introduction & Definition


New Criticism was a formalist movement in literary theory that dominated American literary criticism in the middle decades
of the 20th century.
The name given to a style of criticism advocated by a group of academics writing in the first half of the 20th century. It
emphasized close reading, particularly of poetry, to discover how a work of literature functioned as a self-contained, self-referential
aesthetic object.
They attempted to systematize the study of literature, to develop an approach which was centered on the rigorous study of
the text itself. The New Critics aimed for a newer, systematic and objective method.
New Criticism developed as a reaction to the older literary history schools that focused on the biographical circumstances of
the authors.
It also reacted against the subjective and emotional criticism of the Romantics and judged it as too emotional and subjective.
The New Critics wanted to avoid impressionistic criticism, and social/historical approaches.
The movement derived its name from John Crowe Ransom’s1941 book The New Criticism.
KEY IDEAS OF THE NEW CRITICS

New Critics believed that the structure and meaning of the text were intimately connected
and should not be analyzed separately. In order to bring the focus of literary studies back to
analysis of the texts, they aimed to exclude the reader’s response, the author’s intention,
historical and cultural contexts, and moralistic bias from their analysis.
New Criticism emphasizes explication, or "close reading," of "the work itself." It rejects old
historicism's attention to biographical and sociological matters.
New Criticism attempts to be a science of literature, with a technical vocabulary.
New Criticism, incorporating Formalism, examines the relationships between a text's ideas
and its form, between what a text saysandthe way it says it. New Critics "may find tension, irony,
or paradox in this relation, but they usually resolve it into unity and coherence of meaning"
New Criticism, like Formalism, tended to consider texts as autonomous and “closed,” meaning
that everything that is needed to understand a work is present within it. The reader does not
need outside sources, such as the author’s biography, to fully understand a text. New Critics insist
that those types of knowledge had very little bearing on the work’s merit as literature.
Like Formalist critics, New Critics focused their attention on the variety and degree of certain
literary devices, specifically metaphor, irony, tension, and paradox.
.

The New Critics paid close attention to the interactions between form and meaning.
Studying a passage of prose or poetry in New Critical style required careful, exacting
scrutiny of the passage itself.
Formal elements such as rhyme, meter, setting, characterization, and plot were used to
identify the theme of the text. i.e. (Form reveals meaning)
In addition to the theme, the New Critics also looked for paradox, ambiguity, irony, and
tension to help establish most unified interpretation of the text
Key terminology

The intentional and affective fallacies

In The Verbal Icon (1954), William Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley describe two other
fallacies which are encountered in the study of literature.
The "Intentional Fallacy" is the mistake of attempting to understand the author's intentions
when interpreting a literary work. Such an approach is fallacious because the meaning of a
work should be contained solely within the work itself, and attempts to understand the
author's intention violate the autonomy of the work.
Wimsatt and Beardsley attack the fallacy of intention; they say that knowledge about the
authorial intention is irrelevant to judgment of a
literary text. Wimsatt and Beardsley attack the idea of intentionality on two grounds.
Intention is never clear; there can always be dispute on the issue (whereas the poem is a
publicly available object of study.)
Intention would threaten the autonomy of the text, and locate the text in derivative terms.
The "Affective Fallacy" is the mistake of equating a work with its emotional effects upon an
audience. The new critics believed that a text should not have to be understood relative to
the responses of its readers; its merit (and meaning) must be inherent.
Key New Critics
Important New Critics included Allen Tate, Robert Penn Warren, John
Crowe Ransom, Cleanth Brooks, William Empson, and F.R. Leavis.
William K. Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley .
In The Well-Wrought Urn (1947), Cleanth Brooks integrates these considerations into the
New Critical approach. In interpreting canonical works of poetry, Brooks constantly
analyzes the devices with which they set up opposing these and then resolve them. The
poet is able to create internal paradoxes which are always resolved. New Critical analysis,
the poem is shown to be a hierarchical structure of meaning, of which one correct reading
can be given.
The New Critics reject approaches which view the poem as an attempt at representing the
"real world." They justify the avoidance of discussion of a poem's content through the
doctrine of the "Heresy of Paraphrase. Brooks asserts that the meaning of a poem is
complex and precise, and that any attempt to paraphrase it inevitably distorts or reduces it.
Thus, any attempt to say what a poem means is heretical, because it is an insult to the
integrity of the complex structure of meaning within the work.
Also very influential were the critical essays of T. S. Eliot, such as “Tradition and the
Individual Talent” and “Hamlet and His Problems,”in which Eliot developed his notion of the
“objective correlative.”
Eliot’s evaluative judgments, such as his condemnation of Milton and Shelley, his liking for
the so-called metaphysical poets and his insistence that poetry must be impersonal, greatly
influenced the formation of the New Critical canon.
CONCLUSION

Although the New Criticism is no longer a dominant theoretical model in American •


universities, some of its methods (like close reading) are still fundamental tools of literary
criticism, underpinning a number of subsequent theoretic approaches to literature
including post-structuralism, deconstruction theory, and reader-response theory.
TRADITION AND THE INDIVIDUAL TALENT’ (1919)

Eliot defends the role of tradition in helping new writers to be modern. He thinks that in order to move forward, we have to look
backward to the past.
Eliot’s anti-Romanticism rejects the view of original creation and inspiration. His concept of tradition foregrounds how important
older writers are to contemporary writers.
Examples:
- The Waste Land
- James Joyce looked back to ancient Greek myth (the story of Odysseus) for his novel set in modern Dublin, Ulysses (1922)
- Pygmalion
- Eliot states that the term traditional is talked about in a derogatory sense. At least, the word is seldom used to praise writers,
either living or dead ones. Readers often look for the way a writer stands out from their predecessors before appreciating their
work. Eliot seeks to remove this prejudice, claiming that the best parts of a poem are actually the ones that are alive with the past.
- However, by “following tradition,” Eliot does not mean imitating one’s most recent ancestors.
Instead, he means that a traditional poet has a “historical sense” which makes them conscious of the
whole past as if it were the present. Together, all poetry makes up a simultaneous whole that is
changed by new poetry and guided by old poetry.
- Eliot opens Part II of his essay by stating that true criticism criticizes the poem, not the poet. A poet
is accomplished not because of how much personality they have, but because of how perfect a
medium they are for combining feelings in new ways. This is like when a piece of platinum causes
sulphur dioxide and oxygen to transform into sulphurous acid without itself being involved in or
affected by the result.
- Eliot claims that the poet is not remarkable because of their own personal experiences. In fact, the
poet may even have a boring life while still being a good poet. What’s more, seeking new experiences
does not help the poet enrich their poetry because artistic emotion is of an entirely different form
than personal emotion. Poetry is not an expression of emotion and personality, but rather an escape
from both.
• In summary, Eliot dedicates his conclusions to anyone genuinely interested in poetry. The
poet’s work must be impersonal, and they only achieve this depersonalization if they develop a
consciousness of the past as if it were alive in the present.
“No poet, no artist of any art, has his complete meaning alone. His significance, his appreciation
is the appreciation of his relation to the dead poets and artists. You cannot value him alone; you
must see him, for contrast and comparison, among the dead. I mean this as a principle of
aesthetic, not merely historical criticism...What happens when a new work of art is created is
something that happens simultaneously to all the works of art which preceded it...The poet who
is aware of this will be aware of great difficulties and responsibilities.”
Tradition is a matter of much wider significance. It cannot be inherited, and if you want it you
must obtain it by great labour...the historical sense involves a perception, not only of the
pastness of the past, but of its presence; the historical sense compels a man to write not merely
with his own generation in his bones, but with a feeling that the whole of the literature of
Europe from Homer and within it the whole of the literature of his own country has a
simultaneous existence and composes a simultaneous order. This historical sense, which is a
sense of the timeless as well as of the temporal and of the timeless and of the temporal
together, is what makes a writer traditional. And it is at the same time what makes a writer most
acutely conscious of his place in time, of his contemporaneity.”
― T.S. Eliot, Tradition and the Individual Talent: An Essay
STRUCTURALISM

Structuralism is an intellectual literary movement which wascommenced in France in the 1950s.


The concepts of structuralism achieved widespread influence throughout the1960s, 1970s and
1980s.
The anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss was the first intellectual whoapplied this intellectual -
movement in his works and the literary critic Roland Barthes put forward this movement by
applying it in his works.However, its origin is in the works of Ferdinand de Saussure in his
development of the structural linguistics.
“The essence of structuralism is the belief that nothing can be understood in isolation and -
everything must be seen in the context of the larger structure(s) it is a part of. This looking
fora bigger structure of everything we see is called structuralism.”
- Structuralism is a conceptual system to interpret and analyze the inherent structure of any system such as
society, culture, language, belief, myth, etc.Every unit of any system is linked with another and thus, a
broader meaning system comes into being.
- Structuralists believe that the underlying structures which organize rulesand units into meaningful systems
are generated by the human mind itselfand not by sense perception.
- Structuralism tries to reduce the complexity of human experiences to certain underlying structures which
are universal
- Structuralism attempts to offer a universal mechanism of explaining any system such as language.
- It is closely related to Semiotics, the study of signs, symbols and communication, and how meaning is
constructed and understood.
DEFINITION

• Structuralism is a 20th Century intellectual movement and approach to the human


sciences (it has had a profound effect onlinguistics, sociology, anthropology and other
fields in additionto philosophy) that attempts to analyze a specific field as a complex
system of interrelated parts.
Structuralism suggests the interrelationship between “units ecafrus( ”
phenomena( and In language, units are words and rules eb nac stinu hcihw ni syaw eht( ”
)rehtegot tup
rules are the forms of grammar which orderwords .
• In literary theory, structuralism challenged the belief that a work of literature reflected a given
reality; instead, a text was constituted of linguistic conventions and situated among other
texts. Structuralist critics analyzed material by examining underlying structures, such as
characterization or plot, and attempted to show how these patterns were universal and could
thus be used to develop general conclusions about both individual works andthe systems
from which they emerged.

• - In structuralist literary criticism, here is a constant movement away from the interpretation
of the individual literary work towards understanding the larger structures that contains
them.
• Structuralism focuses on literature as a system of signs in which meaning is constructed
within a context. Words inscribed with meaning may be compared to other words and
structures to determine their meaning. Unlike Formalist critics or New Critics,
structuralist critics are primarily interested in the codes, signs, and rules that govern
social and cultural practices, including communication.
CHARACTERISTICS OF STRUCTURALISM

There are four main common ideas underlying Structuralism as a general movement: firstly,
every system has a structure; secondly, the structure is what determines the position of
each element of a whole; thirdly,
"structural laws" deal with coexistence rather than changes; and fourthly, structures are the
"real things" that lie beneath the surface or the appearanceof meaning.
Unlike the Romantic or Humanist models, which hold that the author is the starting point
of any text, hence the idea that
"language speaks us", rather than that we speak language.
It is a process of explaining literature by concentrating more on the linguistic aspects.
It highlights the inherent meaning of human language.
A literary work is considered a construct in which language plays avery important
role.
Meaning is not taken as a private experience. It is the product of a certain shared system of
signification
Language speaks. People do not speak the language. Language predates the individual.
Meaning is not natural. We interpret the world by imposing meaning on objects which
can be called functions of the language.
Criticism that uses a structuralist approach analyzes patterns, narrative operations,
and/or codes of operation to interpret the text and the culture from which it emerges,
exploring underlying structures that make the creation of meaning possible.
1.Key Structural Terminology

Key Terms Definitions

Sign the basic unit of Saussurean linguistics, a physical entity


consisting of a signifier (an acoustic image) and a signified (a
concept); a sign is said to be arbitrary because a logical
relationship between the signifier and signified does not
necessarily exist
Referent the extra-linguistic object to which a sign refers; the
relationship between the sign and referent are also arbitrary
and conventional
a pair of related terms or concepts that appear to be opposite in
Binary Opposition
meaning (e.g., light/dark)
langue refers to language as a structural system based on
Langue & Parole certain rules, while parole refers to an individual expression of
language
SIMILARITIES BETWEEN RUSSIAN FORMALISM AND
NEW CRITICISM

Russian Formalism and New Criticism are two formalist literary


movements that took place in the first half of the twentieth century.
In both these literary movements, the text itself is more important; it is studied
independently of the author’s intention and historical and cultural context.
Moreover, both these schools of thought mainly focus on poetry. They both attempted a
scientific study of poetic language.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RUSSIAN FORMALISM AND NEW
CRITICISM

There is a difference between Russian Formalism and New Criticism, especially in their
focus on the form and content of a literary work. Russian Formalism mainly focused on the
form or structure of a literary work, instead of its content. In contrast, New Criticism
believed that both form and content are equally important but they are so organically
related that they cannot be set apart.
WHAT ARE THE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN FORMALISM, STRUCTURALISM, AND NEW
CRITICISM?
• Formalists studied the nature of literary language, which they saw as different from
everyday language. New Critics believed that literary analysis should be confined to the
text itself and that context was irrelevant. Structuralists saw literature as existing within a
complex arrangement of "structures" or fundamental ways of understanding the world,
and therefore literary texts had to be studied as a product of those structures.
ANOTHER ANSWER:
A DISCUSSION OF THE RELATIONSHIP OF FORM TO
CONTENT:

- The Russian Formalists: the prime concern of Russian Formalists is ‘literariness’. To achieve
this end, they talk much of metre, rhyme scheme, rhythm, figures of speech, and other
devices that are related to poetry (syntax, structure, imagery, motifs, styles, and conventions
etc.). They often make distinction between literary and ordinary use of language. Russian
formalists have elevated and focused much on the ‘form’ rather than the ‘content’.
- The New Critics observe an organic relationship between ‘form’ and ‘content’. To Brooks, ‘form’ is meaning
and everything. J. C. Ransom thinks that a critic should not concern the paraphrased content because
reliable rendering into prose is not possible. Therefore, he should be concerned with both determinate and
indeterminate meanings in relation to ‘structure’ and ‘texture’. When they are put together, reveal the
complete meaning.
- The Structuralists are solely interested in the process which facilitates the generation of meaning rather
than the meaning itself. As such, ‘structuralists’ are not concerned with the author or reality.
- Structuralist approach to literature examines structures for instance, poem, essay, novel, drama, etc. along
with their constitutive components which being put together give meaning as post-effect to the text. For
instance, a poem is a structure and its components are sounds, images, phrases, punctuation and words.
These elements are held together by some internal governing rules. They generate meaning when they all
are collectively integrated in a structure.
• - When all the units of a text are examined then it may be understood. All literary
structures generate meaning differently. Structuralists believe in the fact that ‘content’ is
simply an effect of the structure. For them, ‘content’ is realized when all constitutive
components of a particular structure are examined and understood. There is no ‘content’
when ‘form’ is absent. ‘Content’ is a result of ‘form’. Structuralists examine the ‘form’ of a
text especially by viewing at elements.
Post-structuralism is a term for philosophical and literary theories
that both build upon and reject Structuralist ideas that preceded it .

Post-structuralism: Definitions
Post-structuralism: Main Ideas and trends.
Post-structuralism and the Rejection of Structure.
Post-structuralism and Structuralism: Main differences.
- Common ideas among post-structuralists include:
the rejection of the self-sufficiency of structuralism.
the rejection of the binary oppositions that constitute its structures.
Post-structuralism does not interpret language or the world within
pre-established, social structures.
- A relativist philosophy based on the ideas and works of a number of French scholars working
in the 1960s, notably Jacques Derrida, Jacques Lacan, Foucault, Roland Barthes, and Julia Kristeva,
to develop earlier thinking by Hegel, Nietzsche, Husserl, Heidegger, Freud, and Marx.
- Post-Structuralism is a body of different responses to structuralism.
- A philosophical movement of the 20th century.
- It focused mainly on language as a system in constant change.
- The “self” is not a singular or coherent entity but a mass of conflicting tensions, in addition
to knowledge derived from gender, class, profession, etc.
- Poststructuralism displaces the writer/author and make the reader the primary subject of
inquiry. Other sources are examined for meaning (readers, culture, other literature, etc.)
- Poststructuralism applies Structuralism into new areas of inquiry. It is simply a fuller
working-out of the implications of structuralism.
- A general trend of post‐structuralist method, often termed deconstruction, is to unsettle
any firm conclusions. It opens up alternative readings and meanings.
- To properly study a text, the reader must understand how it relates to himself/herself.
Post-structuralists reject that there is a consistent structure to
texts, especially the binary opposition theory .

Key
-Po Terms Definitions
a pair of related terms or concepts that appear to be opposite in
Binary Opposition
meaning (e.g. light/dark, good/evil, masculine/feminine)
the preferred term of a binary opposition; the term’s connotation
Privileged Term
usually creates its privileged status
the unfavorable term of a binary opposition; the term’s
Suppressed Term
connotation usually creates its unfavorable status
Hierarchies a system in which ideas, objects, people, groups, and institutions
are ranked one above the other according to
privileged status or authority
- The meaning of texts and concepts constantly shift in relation to many variables. The same
text means different things from one era to another and from one person to another. “The
Shifting Meanings of Texts”
- At some point in the late 1960s, structuralism gave birth to ‘poststructuralism’. The only
way to properly understand the meanings of texts is to deconstruct its assumptions and
knowledge systems.
- Deconstruction asserts that since systems are always changing, it is impossible to describe
a complete system, such as one that insists on the association of darkness with evil and vice
versa.
• - Jacques Derrida is the originator of deconstruction. Derrida did not intend for
deconstruction to serve as a method for writing literary criticism. Rather, Derrida viewed
deconstruction as a technique for exposing and subverting many assumptions of Western
thought in a variety of texts. Additionally, Paul de Man, Barbara Johnson, and J.H. Miller
have all been instrumental in the development of deconstructive readings of literary
texts.
“DEATH OF THE AUTHOR”
Differences between Structuralism and Post-Structuralism
Structuralism was a literary movement primarily concerned with understanding how language works as a system of meaning
production. That is to say, structuralism asked the following question: How does language function as a kind of meaning machine?
To answer this question, structuralism turned its attention to form. Focusing on the form or structure of the literary work, and the
particular use of language in the work, would allow structuralists to think of language as a kind of science.
The primary theorist framing the ideas associated with structuralism

was Ferdinand de Saussure, who developed the idea that language was composed of arbitrary units that were void of concept or
meaning until they acquired meaning through a language system that relied on differences between terms within their larger
linguistic and social contexts.
Poststructuralism, on the other hand, is less singularly defined as a movement than structuralism. A number of literary theories fall
under the larger umbrella of poststructuralism, including gender theory and reader- response theories. These theories recognize the
overarching notion that meaning does not exist outside of the text and that meaning is not fixed but rather contingent and unstable.
• Poststructuralism evolved alongside Jacques Derrida's theory of deconstruction, which
emphasized this concept of unstable, unfixed meaning as it functioned in language.
According to Derrida, language is made up of units that do not contain inherent meaning
and relate to other units (or signifiers) through their difference. Meaning, in
deconstructionist theory, is therefore constantly deferred, never landing in one place or
becoming stable. Poststructuralism emerges in this context, recognizing this lack of fixed
or inherent meaning and yet also acknowledging the need for language to acquire
meaning.
POST STRUCTURALIST THEORIES

Intertextuality is the shaping of a text's meaning by another text. It is the interconnection


between similar or related works of literature that reflect and influence an audience's
interpretation of the text.
- The concept of intertextuality is a literary theory stating all works of literature are a derivation
or have been influenced by a previous work of literature.
- Intertextual figures include allusion, quotation, plagiarism, etc.
- It is a literary device that creates an 'interrelationship between texts' and generates related
understanding in separate works.
- These references are made to influence the reader and add layers of depth to a text, based on
the readers' prior knowledge and understanding.
THERE ARE THREE TYPES OF INTERTEXTUALITY:

1 - Explicit intertextuality, alluding specifically to another text through quotation or •


reference
2 - Implied intertextuality, where the allusion is more indirect may occur through such
commonalities as genre or style
3 - Inferred intertextuality referring to the texts drawn on by the actual responder and •
will likely include texts that had not even existed when the text was composed.
WHY IS INTERTEXTUALITY IMPORTANT? WHAT ARE ITS
FUNCTIONS?
1- Recognising and understanding intertextuality leads to a much richer reading experience which invites
new interpretations as it brings another context, idea, story into the text at hand.
2- As new layers of meaning are introduced, there is pleasure in the sense of connection and the continuity
of texts and of cultures. These connections mean that a responder is engaging with a broader literary
heritage than just a discrete text.
3- Intertextuality also invites us to revisit the earlier text, often with new insights into its meaning for our
time.
4- Intertextuality also raises questions about nature of authorship and originality as texts may be seen as
‘composed’ from pre-existing elements rather than ‘created’.
5- It also provides one way for students to compose their own texts drawn from their knowledge of
others.
PSYCHOANALYTIC CRITICISM:

is literary criticism or literary theory which, in method, concept, or form, is influenced by the tradition of psychoanalysis begun by Sigmund
Freud.
- It adopts the methods of "reading" employed by Freud and later theorists to interpret texts.
- It argues that literary texts, like dreams, express the secret unconscious desires and anxieties of the author, that a literary work is a
manifestation of the author's own neuroses. One may psychoanalyze a particular character within a literary work, but it is usually assumed that
all such characters are projections of the author's psyche.
- This critical endeavor seeks evidence of unresolved emotions, psychological conflicts, guilts, ambivalences, and so forth within what may well be
a disunified literary work.
- Psychoanalytic criticism is similar to New Criticism in not concerning itself with "what the author intended," but what the author never
intended (that is, repressed).
- Psychoanalytic critics will ask such questions as, "What is Hamlet's problem?" or "Why can't Brontë seem to portray any positive mother
figures?"
Reader-response criticism is a school of literary theory that focuses on the reader (or "audience") and their
experience of a literary work, in contrast to other schools and theories that focus attention primarily on the author
or the content and form of the work.
- It considers readers' reactions to literature as vital to interpreting the meaning of the text. “Only in the reading
experience does the literary work come alive.”
- Reader-response theory recognizes the reader as an active agent who imparts “real existence” to the work and
completes its meaning through interpretation.
- Reader-response criticism argues that literature should be viewed as a performing art in which each reader creates
their own, possibly unique, text-related performance.
- It stands in total opposition to the theories of formalism and the New Criticism.
- The thoughts, ideas, and experiences a reader brings to the text, combined with the text and experience of reading
it, work together to create meaning. From this perspective, the text becomes a reflection of the reader.
Typical questions:
- How does the interaction of text and reader create meaning?
- What does a phrase-by-phrase analysis of a text, tell us about the reading experience built into that text?
POST-STRUCTURALISM VS STRUCTURALISM

The difference between Post-Structuralism and Structuralism is simple to understand. Structuralism and Post-Structuralism are two
different literary movements. Structuralism proposes that the world should be understood through structures.
- Structuralists emphasized the idea that truth and reality were to be identified within the structure.
- Post-Structuralism, on the other hand, criticized this foundation of structuralism. According to Post-Structuralism, there were no
realities or truths; all such elements have to be understood as constructions

.
WHAT IS STRUCTURALISM?

Structuralism, as a theoretical perspective of understanding the society and the world at large,
began in the 1960s in France. It was Claude Levi-Strauss who pioneered Structuralism. This can be
understood as an approach that highlights the existence of a structure in every phenomenon.
- Structuralists such as Saussure used language in order to highlight the existence of a structure in
different phenomena.
- According to him, a language is made up of arbitrary elements. These elements do not have any
individual meaning. It is through the system that these elements derive meaning. - The reality was
to be identified within the structure.
- Binary opposition was one of the theories of Structuralism. This highlighted that certain concepts
are in opposition such as male and female.
WHAT IS POST-STRUCTURALISM?

Post-Structuralism can be understood as a criticism of Structuralism.


- Unlike Structuralism, which brought the idea of the existence of a structure, Post- Structuralists rejected this.
- They believed that in order to understand something, it was necessary to study not only the subject itself, but also the system of
knowledge, since it can be misinterpreted.
- The foundation for this was laid by the ideas of Ferdinand de Saussure, Claude Levi-

Strauss, and Jacques Derrida.


- Post-Structuralism is believed as historical whereas Structuralism is believed to be descriptive. This is because Post-Structuralism
engages in an analysis of history to understand concepts. For example, the interpretation of concepts in the past can greatly differ
from the present. Post-Structuralists pay attention to these changes.
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN POST-
STRUCTURALISM AND STRUCTURALISM?

- Structuralism emphasizes the existence of a structure in understanding varied phenomena.


- Post Structuralism can be understood as a criticism of Structuralism.
- Post-Structuralism is believed as historical whereas Structuralism is believed to be descriptive.
- Structuralists focused on the function of language as a kind of meaning machine. Thus, they turned their attention to form. Focusing on the form
or structure of the literary work, and the particular use of language in the work, would allow structuralists to think of language as a kind of
science.
- Post- Structuralists theories recognize the idea that meaning does not exist outside of the text and that meaning is not fixed but rather changing
and unstable. They

emphasized this concept of unstable, unfixed meaning


- Meaning, in deconstructionist theory, is therefore constantly deferred, never landing in one place or becoming stable.
- Compared to Structuralism as a solid theory, Post-structuralist theories do not represent a well-defined movement.

You might also like