CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES
FOR UNDERSTANDING LITERARY TEXTS
In the library, notice all those hundreds
of books on just a few authors? What's in those books? Is it the "how I
feel about/what I think" of a few sensitive and highly trained souls? That does describe much of literary criticism
before modern scholarship (post World War I scholarship). Modern scholarship
purports to be more precise, methodical, “scientific.”
Nearly every one of the books of literary criticism, within the last sixty
years especially, could be categorized under one of the following perspectives.
There are many useful perspectives—"critical approaches," "schools," "philosophies," "orientations"—that will enhance your appreciation of a literary text. Here are just a few of the major critical perspectives: historical, philosophical, biographical, psychological, and New Critical.
1. Historical
Criticism: This is a broad, fluid term that has meant different things to
different people at different times. Generally, this perspective now emphasizes
enjoying a literary text by also understanding that text’s (and its author’s)
relationship to the time period. For example, how did the revolt against
Richard II (which happened during Chaucer’s lifetime) shape The Canterbury Tales? Does The Canterbury Tales help us to
understand ecclesiastical affairs in 14th-century
There are many sub-categories of Historical Criticism. The
question about women in Chaucer's
2.Ideological Criticism: A critical orientation closely related to historical criticism is ideological criticism. This criticism often works from the assumption that literature confirms the ruling ideology (belief-system) of the era that produced it. Literature, then, is often a sophisticated form of propaganda or, sometimes, "anti-propaganda" (an attack on the hegemonous/dominant ideology). Either way, literature is defined within an ideological context. This type of ideological critic would ask how The Canterbury Tales endorses—or subverts—aristocratic norms of religion, love, family, and government.
Other scholars—past and present—claim that a particular ideology is not merely a belief-system but argue that it is "the truth," that history operates according to the laws of a particular philosophy or "ideology." Scholars who espouse this philosophy then analyze a literary text as "evidence" that confirms that ideology.
Religion is one of the most popular philosophical orientations. For example, how does The Canterbury Tales relate to the Christian concept of love? Or how does The Canterbury Tales relate to the idea of original sin and atonement? Or the resurrection?
Another very popular form of this type of ideological criticism is—or was---based on the work of Karl Marx, especially his idea of dialectical materialism. Marxist literary critics read literary texts to see how they confirm the laws of Marxism. For example, how does The Canterbury Tales confirm Marx’s view of history as an inevitable "scientific" movement from feudalism to capitalism to triumphant socialism, a dynamic that Marx argued was based on the dialectic of class struggle? Or, more specifically, how does the class-based relations of the pilgrims support Marx’s theories? Or, again, how does the Wife of Bath’s status as a worker shape her character (a shaping that a Marxist critic would evaluate according to a vast accumulation of Marxist theory)? Or, simply, what is the role of money in the work?
Other popular critical orientations include Positivism (popular in the Victorian era, Positivists viewed history as a scientific "March of Progress") and Nihilism (a reaction to Positivism, as it maintained that history had no goal).
3. Biographical
Criticism: This critical approach emphasizes the life of the author as a
key to understanding his or her work. For example, in order to understand the
representation of women in The Canterbury
Tales, we should know as much as possible about Chaucer’s relations with
women (his wife, women at court, etc.). Or, in understanding Chaucer’s
extensive use of the levels of narration in The
Canterbury Tales, we should be aware that he possibly had been officially
reprimanded for his earlier work. Or, again, a biographical critic might ask,
"Did Chaucer ever visit
4. Psychological Criticism: This criticism is useful in two ways. First, closely relating to biographical criticism, psychological criticism emphasizes understanding the "mind" or "personality" of the author, especially as that mind/personality shapes, and is mirrored by, his literary output. Second, these critics read literary works as evidence that supports a psychological outlook. In other words, fictional characters and events (rather than the author) operate according to the "laws of psychology."
Of course, in order to analyze a personality, you should have a theory or "philosophy" about the personality. The theories of Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) have been by far the most popular for literary analysis. One of Freud’s tenets is that the unconscious—especially as it was shaped by early family life—greatly determines behavior. In analyzing The Canterbury Tales, for example, a Freudian critic would examine how Chaucer’s relationship with women and family members shaped his work, in light of Freud’s theories. S/he would then ask such questions as these, "How does the Wife of Bath reflect Chaucer’s personality? Does ‘The Wife of Bath’s Tale’ reveal the child Chaucer’s repressed sexual desire for his mother? What does Chaucer’s extensive use of scatology indicate about his early ‘potty training’ or a possible ‘anal retentive’ personality?" Or, how does the Wife of Bath's tale reveal her psyche? What does the Wife really want? Why?
Another once popular school of psychology (Analytic Psychology) was created by Carl Jung (1875-1961). His theory of the Collective Unconscious was especially useful for literary critics and scholars. This theory maintained that individual consciousness is linked to a central "mainframe computer," and that this mainframe provides everyone with a few basic programs, called "archetypes," or fundamental patterns (or structures, and so Structuralism). A literary work will succeed, or endure, if it represents one of these patterns/structures (which the individual unit [a person] will recognize and assimilate). Stories that enact these patterns are often myths, but this mythic quality actually appears in most powerful literary works (and Jung is often studied in relation to Mythological Criticism).
For example, The Canterbury Tales contains the basic pattern of people attempting to become reborn/regenerated by going on a journey/quest. "The Pardoner's Tale" includes a variation of this theme, when the ruffians travel to the tree---and die instead of flourish.
Working from the perspective of Post Structuralism, many scholars/critics argue that literary structures do not exist and that, upon close examination, literature does not sustain any consistent meaning. The most popular form of Post Structuralism is Deconstruction (which "deconstructs" a text to reveal the absence of consistent meaning).
5. New Criticism: This school of criticism---closely related to Structuralism---reacted against the biographical, psychological, and historical approaches. New Critics argued that the scholars were so busy with history and biography that they had forgotten about the text! They also claimed that if knowing extensive history and biography were required, only a professor would be licensed to read! New Critics maintained that the only requirements for reading a text were the reader and the text. This approach was new in the late 1930s, but its influence is still with us. For example, in this course, when we study The Canterbury Tales, we use techniques of analysis—such as conflict, climax, and theme—that focus on the work itself without reference to the author or his culture. This is a "new critical" approach."
ASSIGNMENT