The Role and Nature of Literary Criticism: A Study in Details
Tabular Analysis of Literary Criticism
In-depth Analysis: Exploring the Depths of Literary Criticism
Introduction:
To the general public, the term "criticism" often implies judgment, and this perception influences how it is understood, even in its broader academic sense. The critic is seen as an expert whose role is to assess the merits and flaws of a work and offer a final verdict. Since criticism focuses on evaluating creative works, its detractors often label it as "parasitic," claiming it is nothing more than "books about books." In this view, criticism is secondary and derivative, lacking any independent value. Moreover, there is criticismthat comments on the theory of criticism itself, making it "books about books about books." If the first is parasitic, critics might argue, isn't the second saprophytic? However, this extreme view, which sees criticism as a useless or misleading siren, is not only overly simplistic but also fundamentally flawed.
Criticism, as T.S. Eliot describes it, is a "common pursuit of true judgment." Matthew Arnold, in his influential essay The Function of Criticism at the Present Time, also emphasizes its essential value. He argues that criticism serves the useful purpose of promoting knowledge and disseminating the best ideas, with its function being "to know the best that is known and thought in the world, and, in his turn, make this known." By doing so, criticism aims to shape and refine public understanding and appreciation of literary works.
In essence, criticism guides the average reader, enhances their judgment, and deepens their appreciation of literature. It is not just about passing judgment but about creating a thoughtful dialogue with the text, enriching both the reader’s experience and the literary conversation. As Francis Bacon famously said, "some books are to be read by deputy," meaning that critics can distill and communicate the essence of works for the broader public, thus fulfilling an invaluable role in literary culture. Even if some dismiss it as mere commentary, the function that criticism serves can never be invalidated—it is essential for developing understanding, insight, and a more informed reading of literature.
Remote Antiquity:
Criticism has its roots in ancient times, with the earliest examples of literary criticism emerging in the works of Western philosophers and poets. The Greek philosopher Plato, in his dialogue The Republic (about 380 BC), offers one of the earliest extended discussions of literature. Following him, Aristotle’s Poetics (about 330 BC) provides a more systematic approach to literary criticism, focusing on the classification of poetry and drama. Aristotle outlines key concepts such as the structure of a play, emphasizing the importance of an exposition, a middle with a climax, and a satisfying conclusion. He also introduces terms like hamartia (tragic flaw), peripeteia (reversal of fortune), anagnorisis (recognition), and hubris (excessive pride), which have become essential tools in the analysis of literature. While these terms offer valuable insights, they can sometimes be restrictive, as lesser critics have often imitated them without originality. Nevertheless, scholars like Humphrey House argue that Aristotle's Poetics serves an important role, even if only as a framework for questioning and analysis.
Medieval Europe And Renaissance:
Another significant ancient critic is Longinus, a Roman whose treatise On the Sublime (1st century AD) presents a view of literature quite different from Aristotle's. Longinus emphasizes the importance of spontaneity and inspiration in artistic creation, suggesting that the true value of art lies in its ability to leave a lasting impression on the mind of the reader.
Pre-Romantic, Romantic & Post Romantic:
After Sir Philip Sidney, English literary criticism evolved significantly through the contributions of notable critics such as Ben Jonson, John Dryden, William Hazlitt, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Dr. Samuel Johnson, and Matthew Arnold. These figures, spanning the Pre-Romantic, Romantic, and Post-Romantic periods, introduced new insights into the evaluation of literature and shaped the trajectory of critical thought for generations.
Pre-Romantic Criticism:
In the Pre-Romantic era, critics like Ben Jonson and John Dryden focused on the classical ideals of literature, drawing from ancient Greek and Roman works to establish guidelines for evaluating English literary forms. Ben Jonson, for example, emphasized the importance of following classical rules in drama, paying attention to the unities of time, place, and action. John Dryden, considered one of the foremost critics of the 17th century, emphasized the blending of classical ideals with the emerging English forms. His essay "An Essay of Dramatic Poesy" (1668) is a hallmark of Pre-Romantic criticism, where he discusses the merits of classical drama versus modern drama and defends English literature against the French tradition. This period was marked by an attempt to establish English literature as equal to the classical traditions of Greece and Rome while defining standards for English poetics and drama.
Romantic Criticism:
The Romantic period, which began in the late 18th century, saw a radical shift in literary criticism. Romantic critics, such as William Hazlitt and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, moved away from rigid classical norms and emphasized imagination, emotion, and individuality in literature. Coleridge, in particular, became a towering figure of Romantic criticism. In his "Biographia Literaria" (1817), Coleridge discussed the creative process, differentiating between the "primary imagination" (a faculty all humans possess) and the "secondary imagination" (the divine creative power of the artist). He also developed critical concepts such as "organic form," where he argued that a work of art should grow naturally from its content, as opposed to following predetermined structural rules.
William Hazlitt, another major Romantic critic, was known for his essays that delved deeply into the psychology of authors and their works. He was a champion of Shakespeare and brought attention to the complexity of human emotions and inner life that literature could express. His works, such as "Characters of Shakespeare's Plays" (1817), reflect his appreciation for the emotional depth of literature and his rejection of rigid classical models.
In the Romantic era, critics like Coleridge and Hazlitt also placed a greater emphasis on the personal response to literature, encouraging readers to engage emotionally and imaginatively with texts. This marked a shift from the more formalist criticism of earlier periods and paved the way for more subjective, individual interpretations of literature.
Post-Romantic Criticism:
As the Romantic period transitioned into the Victorian era, critics like Matthew Arnold became influential in the Post-Romantic phase of literary criticism. Arnold, in works such as "The Study of Poetry" (1880), argued for the moral and cultural significance of literature. For Arnold, literature was not merely a means of individual expression or emotional release but a tool for elevating society and cultivating moral virtues. He famously introduced the concept of "touchstones"—great works from the past that could be used as standards for evaluating contemporary literature. Arnold believed that literature should offer timeless truths and insights into the human condition, and he sought to balance the Romantic emphasis on emotion with a return to a more ethical and instructive role for literature.
Dr. Samuel Johnson, a critic from the late Pre-Romantic era who also influenced Post-Romantic thought, emphasized the importance of moral instruction in literature. His "Lives of the Poets" and other critical works stressed the didactic function of literature, and he held that great literature should reflect universal truths about human nature. Johnson's focus on common sense, clarity, and moral instruction would resonate with later Victorian critics like Arnold.
20th-Century and Beyond:
The legacy of Pre-Romantic, Romantic, and Post-Romantic criticism laid the groundwork for the developments in literary theory throughout the 20th century. The rise of movements such as New Criticism, structuralism, post-structuralism, and deconstruction further complicated the landscape of literary criticism. These approaches brought a renewed focus on the text itself, the role of language, and the relationship between literature, culture, and power. Critics like T.S. Eliot, F.R. Leavis, and later theorists such as Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida expanded the scope of literary criticism, making it a multifaceted and interdisciplinary field.
Evolution of Criticism:
The traditional criticism practiced by many early critics is both individual and comparative in nature. The goal of this method is to evaluate a literary work by understanding the unique genius of its author and the circumstances that shaped that genius. For example, in studying Paradise Lost, the critic’s first task is to eliminate personal bias and conduct an exhaustive analysis of the poet's genius, as well as the environment in which John Milton lived and worked. This approach counters the older judicial criticism, which often relied on predetermined rules and standards set by classical authors like the Greeks and Romans, whose works were viewed as the permanent measure of literary excellence. Over time, critics began to recognize that literary standards evolve and that criticism must adapt to new works produced after these ancient models.
Matthew Arnold introduced a significant shift in this tradition by arguing that poetry should be measured against the greatest works of literature produced up to that point. He emphasized that critics should always keep in mind the lines and expressions of the great masters and use them as a "touchstone" to assess other works of poetry. In his essay The Study of Poetry, Arnold illustrates this concept by referencing what he calls a simple but perfect single line of poetry, highlighting his belief in timeless literary standards.
The key to New Criticism was the notion that a literary work should be viewed independently of external contexts such as the author's biography or historical background. Critics were encouraged to engage in "close reading"—a careful and detailed analysis of the text itself. This method involved paying meticulous attention to the language, structure, and meaning of the text without letting preconceived ideas or personal biases interfere. Influential works in this movement included Practical Criticism by I.A. Richards, Understanding Poetry by Cleanth Brooks and Robert Penn Warren, and The Verbal Icon by W.K. Wimsatt, all of which emphasized textual analysis and interpretation.
Following the Second World War, an even deeper cultural crisis in the West sparked further reevaluations of literary criticism. This led to the development of four key critical approaches: existential, phenomenological, mythological, and structuralist criticism, with the later emergence of post-structuralism.
Existential criticism drew its influence from existentialism, a philosophical movement focused on themes of absurdity, despair, and alienation, as seen in Jean-Paul Sartre’s Being and Nothingness. Phenomenological criticism, based on Edmund Husserl's methods, sought to strip away appearances and focus on the essence of literary experience, revealing how works present themselves to consciousness.
Myth criticism, popularized by Northrop Frye, viewed literature as myth-making and categorized works into modes corresponding to the seasons and ancient myths of sacrifice and renewal. Frye's Anatomy of Criticism is a key text that divides literature into these modes, demonstrating how myth underpins literary forms.
However, the most significant challenge to traditional criticism came from structuralist criticism, which emerged from structural linguistics. Structuralists believed that language and literature function as systems of signs with underlying patterns or "deep structures" that differ from the surface level of the text. Post-structuralism went even further, arguing that critics must actively deconstruct and reconstruct literary works in their minds, suggesting that meaning is not fixed but fluid and open to reinterpretation.
Both structuralism and post-structuralism, with their emphasis on abstract, complex systems of meaning, present paradoxes and intellectual challenges that demand deep and careful engagement from critics. These schools of thought have significantly reshaped how literature is interpreted, requiring more sophisticated and abstract approaches to understanding literary texts.
The Conclusion:
A crucial element of literary criticism lies in how a critic approaches and reveals a piece of literature. It is important to recognize that if a critic, out of a mistaken sense of authority, exercises their role without sufficient knowledge or a sense of responsibility, they can be seen as engaging in cultural and artistic sabotage. There are critics who behave like universal fault-finders, akin to sadists who take pleasure in dissecting an author or their work. This type of criticism is destructive, especially when dealing with young writers, who, as Charles Morgan suggests, may feel like they are exposing their "fresh burning wounds" to the world. A critic judging new poetry or emerging literature must approach it with empathy, understanding, and a sense of encouragement.
On the other hand, there is the equally flawed approach of the universal enthusiast, a critic who praises everything without discernment. Such uncritical praise does no service to literature and fails in its purpose of offering meaningful evaluation.
The ideal literary critic, then, is neither a mere fault-finder nor a blind eulogizer. Instead, they are someone as well-read as a Saintsbury, yet they carry their knowledge with humility. They are not only learned but also wise, and they possess integrity. Additionally, the ideal critic is somewhat of a philosopher with their own perspective, though they avoid rigid theorizing. It is only with this balance of knowledge, fairness, and insight that a critic can be considered truly ideal.
Practical Criticism A Study Of Literary Judgement I. A. Richards : I.A. Richards : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. (n.d.). Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/wxpO_practical-criticism-a-study-of-literary-judgement-i.-a.-richards
Essays in criticism. The study of poetry. John Keats; Wordsworth. Edited by Susan S. Sheridan : Arnold, Matthew, 1822-1888 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. (n.d.). Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/essaysincritic00arnouoft
Samuel Johnson’s literary criticism : Hagstrum, Jean H : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. (n.d.). Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/samueljohnsonsli00hags
Principles Of Literary Criticism : I A Richards : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. (n.d.). Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.218337
Posts
Comments
Post a Comment
Drop any query, suggestion or comment here.