Critical_Theory
pdf
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of Toronto, Mississauga *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
ENGLISH CO
Subject
English
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
Pages
5
Uploaded by BrigadierSeahorse7729
Formalism (1930s-present):
Form Follows Function: Russian Formalism, New Criticism, Neo-Aristotelianism
Formalists disagreed about what specific elements make a literary work "good" or
"bad"; but generally, Formalism maintains that a literary work contains certain intrinsic
features, and the theory "...defined and addressed the specifically literary qualities in
the text" (Richter 699). Therefore, it's easy to see Formalism's relation to Aristotle's
theories of dramatic construction.
Formalism attempts to treat each work as its own distinct piece, free from its
environment, era, and even author. This point of view developed in reaction to "...forms
of 'extrinsic' criticism that viewed the text as either the product of social and historical
forces or a document making an ethical statement" (699). Formalists assume that the
keys to understanding a text exist within "the text itself" (a common saying among New
Critics), and thus focus a great deal on, you guessed it, form (Tyson 118).
Typical questions:
1.
How does the work use imagery to develop its own symbols? (i.e. making a
certain road stand for death by constant association)
2.
What is the quality of the work's organic unity "...the working together of all
the parts to make an inseparable whole..." (Tyson 121)? In other words, does
how the work is put together reflect what it is?
3.
How are the various parts of the work interconnected?
4.
How do paradox, irony, ambiguity, and tension work in the text?
5.
How do these parts and their collective whole contribute to or not contribute
to the aesthetic quality of the work?
6.
How does the author resolve apparent contradictions within the work?
7.
What does the form of the work say about its content?
8.
Is there a central or focal passage that can be said to sum up the entirety of
the work?
9.
How do the rhythms and/or rhyme schemes of a poem contribute to the
meaning or e
ff
ect of the piece?
Feminist Criticism (1960s-present):
Feminist criticism is concerned with "the ways in which literature (and other cultural
productions) reinforce or undermine the economic, political, social, and psychological
oppression of women" (Tyson 83). This school of theory looks at how aspects of our
culture are inherently patriarchal (male dominated) and aims to expose misogyny in
writing about women, which can take explicit and implicit forms. This misogyny, Tyson
reminds us, can extend into diverse areas of our culture: "Perhaps the most chilling
example...is found in the world of modern medicine, where drugs prescribed for both
sexes often have been tested on male subjects only" (85).
Feminist criticism is also concerned with less obvious forms of marginalization such as
the exclusion of women writers from the traditional literary canon: "...unless the critical
or historical point of view is feminist, there is a tendency to underrepresent the
contribution of women writers" (Tyson 84).
Common Space in Feminist Theories
Though a number of di
ff
erent approaches exist in feminist criticism, there exist some
areas of commonality. This list is excerpted from Tyson (92):
1.
Women are oppressed by patriarchy economically, politically, socially, and
psychologically; patriarchal ideology is the primary means by which women
are oppressed.
2.
In every domain where patriarchy reigns, woman is other: she is marginalized,
defined only by her di
ff
erence from male norms and values.
3.
All of Western (Anglo-European) civilization is deeply rooted in patriarchal
ideology, for example, in the Biblical portrayal of Eve as the origin of sin and
death in the world.
4.
While biology determines our sex (male or female), culture determines our
gender (scales of masculine and feminine).
5.
All feminist activity, including feminist theory and literary criticism, has as its
ultimate goal to change the world by prompting gender equality.
6.
Gender issues play a part in every aspect of human production and
experience, including the production and experience of literature, whether we
are consciously aware of these issues or not.
Feminist criticism has, in many ways, followed what some theorists call the three
waves of feminism:
1.
First Wave Feminism - late 1700s-early 1900's: writers like Mary
Wollstonecraft (A Vindication of the Rights of Women, 1792) highlight the
inequalities between the sexes. Activists like Susan B. Anthony and Victoria
Woodhull contribute to the women's su
ff
rage movement, which leads to
National Universal Su
ff
rage in 1920 with the passing of the Nineteenth
Amendment.
2.
Second Wave Feminism - early 1960s-late 1970s: building on more equal
working conditions necessary in America during World War II, movements
such as the National Organization for Women (NOW), formed in 1966, cohere
feminist political activism. Writers like Simone de Beauvoir (Le Deuxième
Sexe, 1949) and Elaine Showalter established the groundwork for the
dissemination of feminist theories dove-tailed with the American Civil Rights
movement.
3.
Third Wave Feminism - early 1990s-present: resisting the perceived
essentialist (over generalized, over simplified) ideologies and a white,
heterosexual, middle class focus of second wave feminism, third wave
feminism borrows from post-structural and contemporary gender and race
theories (see below) to expand on marginalized populations' experiences.
Writers like Alice Walker work to "...reconcile it [feminism] with the concerns of
the black community...[and] the survival and wholeness of her people, men
and women both, and for the promotion of dialog and community as well as
for the valorization of women and of all the varieties of work women
perform" (Tyson 107).
Typical questions:
1.
How is the relationship between men and women portrayed?
2.
What are the power relationships between men and women (or characters
assuming male/female roles)?
3.
How are male and female roles defined?
4.
What constitutes masculinity and femininity?
5.
How do characters embody these traits?
6.
Do characters take on traits from opposite genders? How so? How does this
change others’ reactions to them?
7.
What does the work reveal about the operations (economically, politically, socially,
or psychologically) of patriarchy?
8.
What does the work imply about the possibilities of sisterhood as a mode of
resisting patriarchy?
9.
What does the work say about women's creativity?
10. What does the history of the work's reception by the public and by the critics tell us
about the operation of patriarchy?
11. What role does the work play in terms of women's literary history and literary
tradition? (Tyson)
Marxist Criticism (1930s-present):
Whom Does It Benefit?
Based on the theories of Karl Marx (and so influenced by philosopher Georg Wilhelm
Friedrich Hegel), this school concerns itself with class di
ff
erences, economic and
otherwise, as well as the implications and complications of the capitalist system:
"Marxism attempts to reveal the ways in which our socioeconomic system is the
ultimate source of our experience" (Tyson 277).
Theorists working in the Marxist tradition, therefore, are interested in answering the
overarching question, whom does it [the work, the e
ff
ort, the policy, the road, etc.]
benefit? The elite? The middle class? Marxist critics are also interested in how the
lower or working classes are oppressed - in everyday life and in literature.
The Material Dialectic
The Marxist school follows a process of thinking called the material dialectic. This
belief system maintains that "...what drives historical change are the material realities
of the economic base of society, rather than the ideological superstructure of politics,
law, philosophy, religion, and art that is built upon that economic base" (Richter 1088).
Marx asserts that "...stable societies develop sites of resistance: contradictions build
into the social system that ultimately lead to social revolution and the development of a
new society upon the old" (1088). This cycle of contradiction, tension, and revolution
must continue: there will always be conflict between the upper, middle, and lower
(working) classes and this conflict will be reflected in literature and other forms of
expression - art, music, movies, etc.
The Revolution
The continuing conflict between the classes will lead to upheaval and revolution by
oppressed peoples and form the groundwork for a new order of society and economics
where capitalism is abolished. According to Marx, the revolution will be led by the
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
working class (others think peasants will lead the uprising) under the guidance of
intellectuals. Once the elite and middle class are overthrown, the intellectuals will
compose an equal society where everyone owns everything (socialism - not to be
confused with Soviet or Maoist Communism).
Though a staggering number of di
ff
erent nuances exist within this school of literary
theory, Marxist critics generally work in areas covered by the following questions.
Typical questions:
1.
Whom does it benefit if the work or e
ff
ort is accepted/successful/believed,
etc.?
2.
What is the social class of the author?
3.
Which class does the work claim to represent?
4.
What values does it reinforce?
5.
What values does it subvert?
6.
What conflict can be seen between the values the work champions and those
it portrays?
7.
What social classes do the characters represent?
8.
How do characters from di
ff
erent classes interact or conflict?
New Historicism, Cultural Studies (1980s-present):
It's All Relative...
This school, influenced by structuralist and post-structuralist theories, seeks to
reconnect a work with the time period in which it was produced and identify it with the
cultural and political movements of the time (Michel Foucault's concept of épistème).
New Historicism assumes that every work is a product of the historic moment that
created it. Specifically, New Historicism is "...a practice that has developed out of
contemporary theory, particularly the structuralist realization that all human systems are
symbolic and subject to the rules of language, and the deconstructive realization that
there is no way of positioning oneself as an observer outside the closed circle of
textuality" (Richter 1205).
A helpful way of considering New Historical theory, Tyson explains, is to think about the
retelling of history itself: "...questions asked by traditional historians and by new
historicists are quite di
ff
erent...traditional historians ask, 'What happened?' and 'What
does the event tell us about history?' In contrast, new historicists ask, 'How has the
event been interpreted?' and 'What do the interpretations tell us about the
interpreters?'" (278). So New Historicism resists the notion that "...history is a series of
events that have a linear, causal relationship: event A caused event B; event B caused
event C; and so on" (Tyson 278).
New Historicists do not believe that we can look at history objectively, but rather that
we interpret events as products of our time and culture and that "...we don't have clear
access to any but the most basic facts of history...our understanding of what such
facts mean...is...strictly a matter of interpretation, not fact" (279). Moreover, New
Historicism holds that we are hopelessly subjective interpreters of what we observe.
Typical questions:
1.
What language/characters/events present in the work reflect the current
events of the author’s day?
2.
Are there words in the text that have changed their meaning from the time of
the writing?
3.
How are such events interpreted and presented?
4.
How are events' interpretation and presentation a product of the culture of the
author?
5.
Does the work's presentation support or condemn the event?
6.
Can it be seen to do both?
7.
How does this portrayal criticize the leading political figures or movements of
the day?
8.
How does the literary text function as part of a continuum with other
historical/cultural texts from the same period?
9.
How can we use a literary work to "map" the interplay of both traditional and
subversive discourses circulating in the culture in which that work emerged
and/or the cultures in which the work has been interpreted?
10. How does the work consider traditionally marginalized populations?