Literary theory is many different things, but these four key properties are what define it :
1) itâs Interdisciplinary , meaning it borrows from an array of sources and fields. From political theory, to psychology- the limits of lit. theory are far reaching.
2) itâs analytical and speculative- it examines instances and based on those makes well argumented assumptions. Theories of culture and literature arenât like theories in physics- they canât be âprovenâ to be true using concrete âevidenceâ. They can only be more or less useful for providing meaning, and therein lies their value.
3) literary theories critique common sense- itâs their fundamental function to help us, the reader, question well established âuniversal truthsâ and bring to light the fact that they are simply historical conventions. Take nothing for granted. Question everything.Â
4) Lit. theory is reflexive, in that it engages in meta-thinking, or thinking about the thinking. In many ways it is a self critique, it urges the reader to try and understand the assumptions by which she/he has argued for a particular meaning, and that there is ALWAYS an underlying theory. Understanding the way we understand can help us clarify the holes in our reasoning, why we perceive things a certain way. We not only question established ways of thinking when we practice literary theory, we question why and how weâre doing that.Â
source: Literary Theory: a Very Short Introduction by Jonathan Culler
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
I understand what the cockapooâs are complaining about- it simply isnât reasonable that so many things outside of literature, like marxism, feminism, psychoanalysis, should have such a big say in how we understand what we read. But donât be discouraged, obnoxiously-adorable-pups! Society, culture, the self and meaning are connected in unforeseen ways. Thatâs what makes it so interesting!
Perhaps not the most enticing way to kick off, but if youâre anything like me- which presumably you are, being here and all- youâll need to have a firm historical base established before you can get deeper into any complex topic. That itch must be scratched, swiftly and efficiently.
Letâs get to it:
Contemporary lit. crit. thought can be traced back to the first half of the 19th century- predominantly with the arrival of a number of very white, very privileged and very well educated men on the scene of the intellectual elite.Â
Mathew Arnold was the first of the bunch, a professor and poet best known for his lyric âDover Beachâ, as well as his conspicuous mutton chops likely to put wolverine out of business. He believed that culture could help the âself-centred working classâ, as well as the â arrogant upper-classâ transcend all of those weights- such as place, character and circumstance- to become ideal citizens. Something that they could do primarily with the help of poetry, and literature in general.
He was succeeded by T.S. Eliot, who not only believed literature to be of utmost importance in the development and betterment of human kind but who additionally created a list of criteria to extract those texts which would be best suited for the task. His list of best lit. EVER WRITTEN dominated much discussion about literature until the 1970, and still remains highly influential. Curious about what some of T.S. Eliotâs criteria were? They went along the lines of :Â
-Should be highly impersonal
-Should be a perfect integration of both emotion and intellect (other wise it is either too irrational or too boring)
-Should contain much irony and wit!Â
And this is where where him being a white privileged male comes painfully to the fore. All of these criteria then (and even today somewhat) are qualities seen as typically male, where as emotions and an unwillingness to ârationaliseâ were seen as typically female. *More about gender and how it relates to lit. theory later.*
Next we have I.A. Richards, who is best known for doing an experiment on his undergrad students , aka. forever-the-guinea-pigs. He asked them to analyse a text without having given them any contextual information, like who the author was, when it was written. This might not seem like much today, but boy was it innovative back in the late 1800s. During that period and earlier, literature was  analysed, but mainly to debate of what meaning the author of a text meant to convey. In the new practice, dubbed Practical Criticism, which got itâs name from the title of Richardâs book, it was the text itself from which meaning emerged. This was to influence the future development of lit. crit. immensely.Â
And last of all F.R. Levis, whom I slightly favour since he brought books to the fore instead of insisting that poetry was obviously the better of the bunch. He said that because of their scope and attention to detail, they could better represent life in all itâs fullness. He also did a very cool thing by expanding the scope of lit crit., arguing that it presented the best possible base for criticising contemporary culture.  That means that by learning and doing good lit. crit. we are essentially learning to analyse the world outside of the text- the society we are part of and the culture that surrounds our daily lives. How wonderfully useful!
A bit later on, these ideas spread to Arnoldâs, Eliotâs, Richardâs and Lewisâs contemporaries in the US, and there began a movement know as New Criticism, which was more alike than it was different to Practical Criticism described above.Â
I confess, I enjoyed reading about how these 4 guys basically started an avalanche of new thought and theory in lit. crit., one that still hasnât stopped tumb(lr)ling until this very day. Although a lot of their ideas would now seem conservative and a bit snobby, itâs important to understand itâs basic premises. Mainly because, as my English Literature professor used to say, âEvery new movement is a reaction to the former one; whether it is to affirm certain aspects of it, or reject it entirely.â
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
The arts are our storehouse of recorded values. They spring from and perpetuate hours in the lives of exceptional people, when their control and command of experience is at its highest, hours when the varying possibilities of existence are most clearly seen and the different activities which may arise are most exquisitely reconciled, hours when habitual narrowness of interests or confused bewilderment are replaced by an intricately wrought composure.
(Richards [1924] 1972a: 110) from Literary Theory, the Basics by Hans Bertrens
These 2 will be the sources for most of the basic theory. Iâd highly recommended them for anyone who wants a rudimentary and uncomplicated introduction into the field. You can find them on the net if you snoop around enough- or you could just stick around here- more visuals guaranteed.
I could be writing a blog about fantastically underappreciated architectural details in Cologne (where I currently reside). Or, I could document everyday institutional or social phenomena I come across where service design-a new field of design that thinks in ways of systems and experiences, rather than aesthetics - is needed. I could posting my sketches of impressionable strangers who unwittingly stumble into my life. Or! I could be Retweetblogposting well designed diagrams that glaringly describe relations, hierarchies or processes.
These are all valid options when you want to share something with the world. Sharing is fun! You gain an understanding of why youâd be doing these things, how to do them better, as well as have it chronologically documented for future reference. Isnât that the reason why anyone does it?
But, my dear implied reader, brise soleil details in Germanyâs 4th largest city is not why you are here. Youâre here because of an objective that gratifyingly unites  all personal passion hobbies : a better understanding of the human condition. Primarily the humans that are ourselves.Â
There are a number of different mediums, such as  YouTube, medium, an actual written journal, etc, that I could be using. And many more types of text, such as movies, historical scripts, ads, theatre, etc, that could make up the source material the critical analysis is based on.
But literary texts and poetry in particular have a long history of being âmartyrsâ of anatomisation, and theyâve done so with splendid poise.Â
âCritiquing the literary is well documented practice that speaks volumes about how society ( and it the individual within it ) struggles to understand itself at a given moment in time.ââ- me
For example, it wasnât until the late 20th century that critics started taking the reader and how he interpreted the text to be key way of analysing itâs meaning. Until then, a meanings text was though to be either injected into it by the author, or inherent in the text itself. But a new form of consciousness started making headway and the idea that a text has no meaning until we, using our own beliefs, knowledge and experiences, understand there to be one. And voila! Reader response theory was born. A theory which I will unapologetically practice much of the time.Â
So yes, there will be theory involved in the writing of this blog. In fact plural- lots of theories (joy!). But Iâll be worked through tin a comprehensive way, so no need to worry. And much of what Iâll post will be in the form of drawings or sketchnotes about the novels themselves. It wonât all be pure theory.Â
But  didnât you say tabula rasa when it comes to this crit lit business?
Being the obdurate nerd that I am, Iâll admit that I have dabbed in books on the basics of literary theory and criticism. So I have a vague idea of what that means and how to go about doing it. You wouldanât want to listen to someone ramble about geckos for hours without the faintest idea about what reptiles are, right?Â
