•

, .0 r
$1 /
I 11
... . .-- .. - ._ '." - - 1
• „-
 l e r AR
i t ER
LIT a rYy
C R ITI
CR C IISM
I T IC SM
An Introduction
An Introduction
Practice
to Theory
to Theory and
and Practice
FIFTH COITION

If you’re
you're wonderi
wondering why you
ng why you
should
should buy the 5‘45"' edition
edition of
of emerging
e m ergingfield
fieldofofecocriticism
ecocriticismtotoreflect
reflect
Literary Criticism
Literary Criticism,, here are four
four the
the latest
latestscholarship
scholarshipininliterary
literarycriticism
criticise
reasons!
great reasons! 0
© New
N e w Chapters:
Chapters: Entire
Entire chapters
chapters have
have
Charles E.
Charles Bressler
E. Bressler
o
o New
N e w profession
p r o fe s s io nal
a l essays
e s s a y s represent a
a been dedicated
dedicatedto:
to:Postcolonial
Postcolonial Literati
literatm, Wesleyan U
Indiana Wesleyan niversity
Univers ity
Queer Indiana
seminal work
se m in a l w o rk within
w ith in select
select literary
literary schools.
schools. Q ueer Theory, and African
Theory, and AfricanAmerican
American

A separate
A se p ara te aappendix
p p e n d ix contains
c o n ta in s essays
e ssa ys that Criticism
Criticismto
togive
giveeach
eachofofthese
theseimportant
importat
that
provide schools
sc h oo ls adequate
adequate coverage.
coverage.
p ro v id e professiona
p ro fe ssio n a ll examples
e x a m p le s in c lu d in g
including
works
w o r k s by
b y Cleanth
C le a n th Brooks
B ro o k s and
a n d Jacque
Jacque © Consistent Literary
0 Literary Model: All
All schools
school!

Derrida
D e rrid a that provide
p ro v id e insight
in sig h t to the
t he school
sc h oo l of
o f criticism
criticismare
areapplied
appliedto
toaacommon
common

being selection-'Yo
se lec tion - "Young GoodmanBrown'
ung Goodman Brown" to
to
b e in g studied.
studied.
show
sh o w how
h o wone
onework
workcan
canbe
beinterpreted
interpreted C
© New
N e w section
se c tio n on
o n Ecocriticis
Eco criticism
m:: The
The n ew
new
m any different
many different ways.
ways.
edition
e ditio n includes
in c lu d e s a
a chapter
c ha pte r centered
centered oon
n the
the

Longm an
Longman
Boston
Boston Columbus
Columbus Indianapolis N ew York
Indianapolis New York San
Sari F ra n cisco
Francisco
PURIM Upper
Upper Saddle
SaddleRiver Amsterdam
River AmsterdamCape
CapeTown
Town Dubai L o n d o n Madrid
Dubai London M a d rid
Milan Munich
Milan Munich Paris
Paris Montreal
MontrealToronto
TorontoDelhi M exico CCity
Delhi Mexico ity Sao
Sao PPaulo
a u lo
Sydney
Sydney Hong Kong
Hong Kong Seoul
Seoul Singapor
Singapore Taipei Tokyo
e Taipei Tokyo
 Editor: 'Vivian (...11..-1.1
ACtitii.4iti011iS
Seniin'
Strailketing Mailag•pr lovce Niben Page Makeup:
► Makeup: M.)11110(21. » * )c// Apt,,,,..,,
...........* r cmii..11, W < ,ir
t ditoii.if Av.siNtant: I leather Voniero ''
noduction "'tanager: Frail Rusm.110
rtvieo covirtiirotion, le1P8sig, and Electronic
Conte
MallAger. 1.1.y Ile 17 at t, alin
Cover
Cover Design V.rucei'44211013.1r , , , n c c l i „ 8 wWU- .....
Cover Vesiwir.
111usirationirhoto: Fotolia: Reflecting white fo..ather (
SE
Sons, Inc.
ss
rrinter
rinterandand tiirider.
»» RR Donnelley ^
&^ ______________________
-------- ------ - rj^hts reServed. No No part
of a —
part of this Is v
_ _ _ — — ------ T T lIo n Education, Inc- transmitted, in any form or by
Copyright © 201, 2007, 2003 by rearson Education, Inc. Aii rights reserved. without the prior )1' b'
publication
- - ^ ^ may ^ be^ reproduced,
^ . o r estored d in aa ^retrieval
in t o r dsystem,
t n g , or otherwise, w„h„u,
ortransmitted,
o.herwise, in any form.he pn.„,'

eans, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording,

Printed in the United or
State...J.

any '?°bl
written permissiontlf the publisher. ^ ^ .h e U h r a r r u r C o u ^
Publication data available from the Library of Congress
j. f i av au ^ ie i
- «• -- t i A l l

1. r t i l
Catalogue in

56 7
7 8 9 10--DOH-15
1()—DOH—15 14
14 13
13
Longman
an imprint
is an imprint of
205-2^21^
TNl -13: 978-0-205-21214-9
IS 3N-13: 01214-^
0-205-21214-X
- „ e

ISI3N-10:
ww.pearsonhlghered.com
www.pearsonhighered.com
w
 Co n t e n t s
CONTENTS

Foreword xi
To the
To theReader
Reader xiii
1
\ Defining
DefiningCriticism,
Criticism,Theory,
Theory,and
andLiterature
Literature 1
Listening to a Conversation 1
Eavesdropping on
Eavesdropping on aa Literature
Literature Classroom
Classroom 2
Can a Text
Text Have More Than One Interpretation? 4
How toto Become
Become a Literary Critic 5
What Is Literary Criticism? 6
What Is Literary Theory? 7
Making Meaning
Meaning from
from Text
Text 9
The Reading Process and Literary Theory 10
10
What Is Literature? 12
12
Literary Theory and the
the Definition
Definition of
of Literature 14
14
The Function of Literature and Literary
Literary Theory 15
15
Beginning the Formal Study of of Literary Theory 17
17
2 A Historical Survey
2 Survey of
ofLiterary
Literary Criticism 19
Introduction 19
19
Plato (c.
(c. 427-347 BCE)
BCE) 20
Aristotle
Aristotle (384-322
(384-322 BCE)
BCE) 22
Horace (65-8
(65-8 BCE)
BCE) 24
Longinus (First Century CE) CE) 25
Plotinus (204-270
(204-270 CE) 26
Dante Alighieri
Alighieri (1265-1321)
(1265-1321) 27
Giovanni
Giovanni Boccaccio
Boccaccio (1313-1375)
(1313-1375) 28
Sir Philip Sidney
Sidney (1554-1586)
(1554-1586) 29
John Dryden
Dryden (1631-1700)
(1631-1700) 3030
Joseph Addison
Addison (1672-1719)
(1672-1719) 32
Alexander Pope
Pope (1688-1744)
(1688-1744) 33
William Wordsworth
William (1770-1850)
Wordsworth (1770-1850) 34
34
Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822)
(1792-1822) 37
37
lippolyte Adolphe
Hippolyte AdolpheTaine
Taine (1828-1893)
(1828—1893) 38
Arnold (1822-1888)
Matthew Arnold (1822-1888) 40
IHenry Jam es (1843-1916)
fenry PIT'S 42
42
Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975)
(1895-1975) 44
44
Modern
Modern Literary Criticism 46
40

V
 vi
VI Contents

, Russian Formalism
Russian Formalism and
and New
New Criticism <
48
Introduction 48
Russinn Formalism
Russian 48
48
Russian Formalism and
the Gap between Russian Formalism and New Cri
B duintf the
Bridging
Applying Russian Formalism
Russian Form alism to a Literary Text
Text 51
51 5]
New Criticism 52
52
Historical Development 54
54
Assumptions
Assumptions 56 56
Methodology
Methodology 60
60
Questions for Analysis 63
63
Critiques and Responses 63
63

4
4 Reader-oriented Criticism
Reader-oriented 65
Introduction 65
Historical Development 69
7. A.
1. A. Richards 70
Louise
Louise M.
M. Rosenblatt 72
Assumptions
Assumptions 73
73
Methodology
Methodology 75
75
Structuralism 76
G erald PRINCE
GERALD P rince 76
Phenomenology 77
Phenomenology 77
H ans ROBERT
HANS R obert JMUSS
auss 78
78
W olfgang ISER
WOLFGANG Iser 78
78
Subjective Criticism 80
80
N orman H HOLLAND
NORMAN olland 80
80
D avid BLEICH
DAVID B leich 80
80
A Two-step
Two-step Methodology 81
81
Questions for Analysis 82
82
Critiques
Critiques and Responses 83
83
5 Modernity/Postmodernism:
Modemity/Postmodernism: Structuralism/
Poststructuralism:
Poststructuralism: Deconstruction
Deconstruction 85
Modernity
M odernity 85
85
Poststructuralism
Poststructuralism oror PPostmodernism
ostm od ernism 88
88
Modernity
Modernity toto M
Modernism
odernism 90
90
Structuralism: ItsHHistorical
Structuralism: Its Development
istorical D ev elo p m en t 91
91
Pre-Saussurean Linguistics
Pre-Saussurean Linguistics 91
91
Saussure's Linguistic Revolution
Saussure's Linguistic Revolution 92
92
The Structure ofof Language 93
93
Langue and Parole 96
96
Saussure'ss Redefinition
Redefinition of
of a Word 96
Assumptions of
Assumptions of Structu
Structuralism 98
Methodologies
M r/h0? 0lw8ies ofof S ^Structuralism
uct 98
Claude Levi-Strauss
C/awrfe Levi-Strauss101100
p 100
100
Roland Barthes
Roland Barthes 101
 Critie>sm Chapter 22 •
• A Historical Survey
Survey of
of Literary
Literary Criticism
Criticism 45
45
, • A Historical sur^yofUte^
.,1 fwurvey of Literary Criticism
. i . AH's'°r a aia', His vjorld, that was
i_ijs World, was successfully
successfully defended
defended inin 1946
1946but
but not
not published
published

m Coe."
a" .. w 6 8 ‘ and The Dialogic Imagination:
The Dialogic Imagination: Four
Four Essays byM.
Essays by M. M.
M. Bakhtin
Bakhtin (edited,
(edited,
goKTIN 05-1979 until 1968; and
daV uteraly_______
y literary Mikhail
theorist, Mikhail __ ““luitui
Bakhtin
B isti a
aarItch translated, and
Unt's|ated, and published
published inin 1981). SinceBakhtin's
1981). Since Bakhtin's death
death inin 1975, many other
1975, many other
)dern_da
slikliAll -.ther Ills ,dern-day
modem-aay
theory, because_ „ lliP Bakhtin
because
himself repres
himself represent
represent.
Bakhtin............... ^pieseiv rt:in tran* bes and
speaches andessays
essayshave
havebeen
been translated
translatedandandpublished,
published,but but the
the core
core of
of his
his
ir,th
. o
than n ^
any y obit
°' rary theory
'he°
d r^ L
intecests.t tc. Bakhtin
s Bakhtin
Bakhtin has been
has
has been dubbe
been dubbed!
dubbed ed-s sPe*
ifn
istic
rastic and
and literary
literary theories
theories can
can be
be discovered
discovered in in the
the earlier
earlier works.
works.
m .-- aa
ferhar5"-
rhaps"1. p ^,,,,uday n t-J ^ ' rary l
peS and m‘e * iteI. a semiotician, an artist
di9cigles anher, a Writer, a semiotician, a
'^ CCentral to Bakhtin's
e n tra l to Bakhtin's critical
critical theory
theory isis the concept of
the concept of the
the dialogic.
dialogic.
According
rding toto Bakhtin,
Bakhtin, all language
language is aa dialogue
dialogue in whichwhich aa speaker
speaker andand aa
^ pWaCa £adf,nic dlSa ph'los0ptlfterarv
,i‘enTillicsSeinic
literary
... rary historian, an
an ethicist,
ethicist,- and
nisw* *«***/--------------
historian, and aa cul.
*“*'* ct. -
cul- listener form aa relationship.
ACC° e r form relationship. Language
Language is is always
always the the product
product of of at
at least
least
e._ i ver.e stonan, F
''er>e 1• historian' foe, a3isllte
stilciir°itsicC,Pa one
ne of of ,u„
\ the mnst
most original
the most thinkers
original thinkers
original thinkers of nf ithe
of the
guisb a * ; a'Maraxir
iirselli t' - h :C• A '
Marxist cn two peoplein
llsteneople in aadialogue,
dialogue,not not aamonologue.
monologue.And And itit is
is language
language thatthat defines
defines
• on tle ie is ont:
Forrolig Crh `
ritthout quo° weixtcheonutt tW°as
us P individuals.
individuals. Our personal
personal consciousness
consciousness consists
consistsof of the
the inner
inner con-
akhtin received , ,.Hte
littleattention
attentionduringduring his his lifetime,
lifetime, except us as . we have
have only
only in our heads,heads, conversations
conversationswith with aa variety
variety of
mtiethcen,u7. htin received htt Russia,
Russia, 10 to a a middle-class
m,ddle-class familyfamiW `, versations we
' ironica
ironically voicesthat
VefSa thatare
aresignificant
significant for
for us.
us. Each
Each ofof these
these voices
voices cancan respond
respond in in new
new
tu:1,2111' . . Bax
.c-c'elInvtuBrY
Blaite ^ aBnodrno
,1’ nrvyirnairuss.
,r years. Rnrn
Bo' " m Dsa before
' Pssa _______
before ,,lr^,ytoin
moving
moving Peirnarad
toPetrograd
Petrogradtotostudy study
his p yilnius and uoe idnes°re and excitingways,
V°dexciting ways,developing
developingwho who wewe are
areandandcontinually
continually helping
helping shape
shape
Perhapshaps m urae nis ‘ inof St Petersburg in 1913.Leaving Leavingthe theuniversity
university without
ditin grew «P f st Petersburg m ^ Nevel then to Vitebsk, where an we become.
become. In In one
one very
very real
real sense,
sense,no no individual
individual can can ever
ever be be
univ-. dies, he then moved first to Nevel then to Vitebsk, where who we know n. That
5akbun g- w up by a
" mpletely understood
completely understood or fully known.
or fully That anyany person
person always
always has has the
the
:he UrUVt e studies, tij It he ‘hen,
,acher At ^Vitebsk,
L bsk, he he was
was surrounded
surrounded by" -
a ero
group peat of C°pabiiity to
capability to change
changeor ornever fully be
never fully be known
known in in this
this world
world Bakhtin
Bakhtin labels
labels
ii lie np^hng*' h00iteachet At V ■ !tural influencesences ofofthe
theRussian
Russian
his S.a-h
he WOW,.
he worked,fwho
Lritellectua6 as a
who ,--00 €
addressed
addressed thethes osocial
c i a land^ Today
Recolunon ansi its rule under Joseph Stalin. Today this group of scholars, la
ellectua kfitin, P. rule
culturaltWs influgroup of scholars, in. unfinalizability.
u nfinalizability.
Because Bakhtin
Because Bakhtinpositspositsthat thatall
alllanguage
.
languageisisaadialogue,
,
dialogue,not not monologic,
monologic, he he
N.under
Medvedev, Josep and vVNN. Voloshinov,Voloshinov,isisknown known asasthe the
, the term
the term heteroglossia
heteroglossia (a (a translation
translation of the Russian Russian wordword raznorecie,
Takhhn, F N- Medvedev and U n in g rad . Here Bakhtin employs
Ba had moved to Leningrad. Here Bakhtin Waning "other
meaning "otherorordifferent
differenttongues"tongues"or or"multiianguagedness")
"multilanguagedness") to demon- demon­
ludin g
egaikhtin
LMin Circle.
struggled Circle. By 1924,t
financially 1924,
as his
h eillness
the f ° “P(p‘
group teomyelitis in his leg) and his lackol
(osteomyelitis in his leg) and his lack ofe strate the
strate themultiplicity
multiplicity of of languages
languagesthat that operate
operatein in any
any given culture.
given culture.
J J e dpolitical
proper financially as ^g'prevented
credentials prevented him from findingwork.work.In In 1929hhe Bakhtin thus
Bakhtin thusexpands
expands thethe traditional
traditionaldefinition
definition of of thethe word language
language from
oper political credentials pre _ithim
.ns from
-n the finding
underground 1929 Russian
was arrested for supposedly participating in the underground Russian being defined
being definedonly onlyasasthe the spoken
spoken tongue
tongue ofofa agiven,
given,cultural
cultural people.
people. For tor
as arrested for supposedly P Psiberia for ten years, he appealed his
Orthodox Church. Sentenced to exile isi Siberia for ten years, he appealed his Bakhtin,
Bakhtin, all allforms
formsofofsocialsocialspeech speech thatpeople
that peopleuse useinintheir
theirdaily
daily activities
activities
rth„doxbecauseChurch.S.-ntenceakeninR physical condition and was then sen-
of his weakening physical condition and was then sen- constitute heteroglossia.
constitute heteroglossia. Professors
Professors speak
speak one onewayway while
whilelecturing
lecturing to to their
sentence
S s U
tenced ^ years
to six o f tof^internal
a i e exile
x Uin Kazakhstan.
e m ^ - ^ bookkceper then astoaa classes, another
classes, another to to
their
theirspouses,
spouses, another
another to to
their
theirfriends,
friends,another
another to to the clerk
clerk
n as
as a bookkeeper th oeften at the
thestore,
store, another
another totothetheserver
server atat
a restaurant,
a restaurant, andandanother
anotherto tothe
the police
police of­
of-
Throughout
Throughout the the 1930s,
19305,Bak Bakhtin worked c in Saransk,
Saransk, moving often to
who gives the
ficer who the professor
professor aa speedingspeeding ticket.
ticket. Each
Eachindividual speech act is
individual speech
teacher at Mordovia State Teachers College in
■acher atfurther
escape Mordovia State e during varioUs
imprisonment political
various political purges.
purges. In In 1938his»
1938 his os a dialogic
dialogicutterance
utterance that
that isisoriented
orientedtowardtowarda aparticular
particular listener
listener or audience,
icape further imprisonment R , to be amputated. Although he
tromyelitis advanced, causing his, right leg to he amputated. Although he demonstrating the
demonstrating therelationship
relationshipthat thatexists
existsbetween
between the the speaker
speaker and and listener.
listener.
■omyelitis advanced, causing ■ R f 8 his scholarly work dramatically
was plaguedwith
;as plagued withpain
painfor
for the
thems
restof
of hhis life, his
alite, tas scholarly work dramatically
defended In his
his essay
essay"Discourse
"Discourse ininthe
theNovel"
Novel" (1935),
(1935),Bakhtin
Bakhtin applies
applies his ideas ideas
he successfully defended Iiih dor-
s doe
nproved after 16:46 directly totothe
directly thenovel.
novel.He believes that
le believes that thethe novel
novel is is characterized
characterized by by
improved afterthe
theamputation.
amputation. In In And from the late 1940s w®
trral dissertation on Rabelais and his world. And from the late 1940s until
aral dissertation on Rabelais and hi ' ordov Pedagogical lnsti^ dialogued heteroglossia.
dialogized heteroglossia. Within
Within thethe novel,
novel, multiple
multipleworld world views
views and a a va-
va­
his retirementin
lis retirement in 1961,
1961,Bakhtin
Bakhtintaught
taught at at me
me Mordov l'edagogical Institute,
Russian acade riety of
riety ofexperiences
experiences arearecontinually
continually dialoguing
dialoguingwith witheach eachother,
other,resulting
resulting in in
how
lo w the! University
University ofofSaransk.
Saransk.InInthe
thelatter
latterpart of the
part of 195Cla,
the W5 Russian
^ ^acade-
were more rnulnple imeractions,
multiple interactions, some
some ofof which
whichare arereal
realand andothers
othersof ofwhich
which are are imag-
imag-
ined.
mics andscholars
nics and scholars were
were once
once again
again interested in
mtere his work a
producin!, and
new edition commentAlthough
° Uf’ 1the characters'utterances
6 cBaracters u tterancesa arere indeedim
indeed important,
portant, itit is is tthe
he
than surprisedtotodiscover
discoverthat
that he
he was
was still commenting narrator's dialogic utterances,
han surprised stlUalive.
aU . Producing a new edition
, jtlonal works or
on R a*!. important FoTthm^ h utterances, B.3 khtin asserts,
Bakhtin asserts, thatthat are the most
are the most
%is 1929
nis 1929 studyofofDostoevsky
study Dostoevskyalong
along with
with additional
^ works on Rabelais
the "poster sch important. For through these utterances, diverse voices and interactions and
relationships
ati o fs
relationship s form m t . eSe utterances- A verse voices and interactions and
and the Renaissance
and the Renaissanceculture,
culture,Bakhtin
Bakhtin quickly
qui<*jybecame the "poster scholar
0f his mam* P guage a complex unity, Whatever meaning the lan-
for Russianscholarship.
scholarship.After
Afterhis
hisdeath
death min l1075,, a variety of his Bv
manuslirs 5 svageof the te fo
text
xrtmposses^e^savs^khP
po, sZa tin'g Unity, W hatever m eanmg the lan-
for Russian h*^self. the speake
speakerr nor
nor in the text
in the textsb K Vt says
, kels,
Bakhtin,res‘des
Y BaPhtm' residesnot notininthetheintention
intention of of the
the
became available,
became available, fewbeing
few beingedited
editedbyby the
the author
au himself.
foundBy the l9K
scholars sornewhere between the speaker or writer, or
ehveen
between the
the listener
listene^or or re
r e
reader a l T f " , betWeen the SPeaker or writer, or
and '90s,
and '90s,Bakhtin
Bakhtinwaswasregarded
regardedas asone
oneofofthe
the most p
most profound scholarsoi 0 oaccurrin
occurring, for even
pvrrAd g, for even withjnt
within . Such
uch dialogized
dialogizedheteroglossia
heteroglossia is is
continually
conti
nually
twentieth century. , bis first work,,— 1Uais • process Bakhtin a single utterance, two diff
Process Bakhtin calls calls hybridization ‘W° different erent languages
languages clash, clash,
His most
most renowned
His renownedacademic
academicwritings
writingsinc u e his first
include work on, ez''''
j-ssertation' 1 hybridization.

Dostoevsky's Poetics (1929,

Dostoevsky's 2nded.,
(1929, 2nd ed.,1963);
1963);his
hisdoctora
doctoral clsertati
 . » rarv CntK'sm Chapter 22 •
•AA Historical
I listorical Survey
Survey of
of Literary
Literary Criticism
Criticism 47
47
chow 2 • A I listorical SurveyofofUterafy
al Survey literary Criticism
Chapter i
,.AHi*** novels, especially those
•Is, especially those written b by diversified,
diversified, with no no one one voice
voice speaking
speaking ex ex cathedra
cathedra or or no
no one
one theory
theory tena-
tena­
• ciously held by
ciously held by all.
all. AtAt the
the end
end of
of the
the nineteenth
nineteenth century,
century, most
most critics
critics em
empha-
pha­
inpolyphonic novels, the author know):
Bakhtin maintains that some nove,.,
Dostoevsky,
&Otto nnaintrshttoh In n(e
lt. I'4ntffil
am polyphonic. nonpolyphonic
ng the novel's novels,
beginning. eel,writer
the authTh sized eitheraabiographical
sized either biographicalor or aa historical
historical approach
approach to to texts. Using Taine's
texts. Using Tam e's
‘
Dostoevsky, oarehpo-YVvet
f the novel while wr ai
whtte writing the novel's beginning r ^W s historical interestsin
historical interests inaatext
textand
andH Henry James's
enry Jam es's newly articulated theory of
newly articulated of
s' actions and choices, and the author also k tiK
‘ ' ‘■■‘ns and choices' a" d the au th or a[ shoe ^ riter thenovel,
the novel,many
manycritics
criticsinvestigated
investigatedaatexttextasasififititwwere theembodiment
ere the embodiment of of its
its
of )Vel, au th or's understan
understand-
the end'"* 01 haracters' . actions ai novel, the author's
he
knows ending
all
tknows all the cthe(4 t-e n('
characutetru re. in this kind . ln a p olyphonic novel,, there
In this d
'. author or ahistorical
historicalartifact.
artifact.In
Inthe
theyears
yearsthat
thatfollow
follow Arnold
Arnold andand James,
Jam es, nono
(ure. >rk. InIna a\ polyphonic novel the is author or a .
the work's entireh.:ituis'eshibited
hlblted in the ork. single,universally
universallyrecognized
recognizedvoice voiceddominates literary theory.
theory. Instead,
work's entire N orm the w outcome,
resorbed ’ norisisthe
nor the text
text aa w
work-
roerk..
Is sinele, om inates literary Instead,
the
............. 14 W anding of f truth 1.,_e many distinctiveliterary
literaryvoices
voicesgive
giverise
risetotoaahosthostofofdiffering
differing and
and exciting
exciting
no of troth O o truth. The truthtruth ol of
b distinctive
many literarv
understanding -,ic, n
no overall out
no overall oudined struct
, worldview or, ur _, h-----«,’
anon. cr'trviKinPSSPS
.o__nesses of nf the
thp an. ways
ways to to examine
examine aa text text.
author's an active - - mi- What follows
followsin in the
the twentieth
twentieth and and twenty-first
twenty-first centuries is aa variety
variety of of
What centuries is
ing out i° * the
out1of is an activeerters,
,he f novelI IS cre iu iv n in 1
crtatiiin
creation in o
wing
allowing forgenuine
genuinesurprises
surprisesforforall
all
“the
v* polyphonic nuv*.
nove ... llo schools of criticism,
schools of criticism, with witheach
eachschool
school askinglegitimate
asking legitimateand andrelevant
relevantbut but dif­
dif-
p
then,
ho the
thor, thereaders, and the
readers, and characters,
the characters, der, and
a reader, d characters—interact
ch aracters—interactas as ferentquestions
ferent questions about
about aa text.Most
text. Mostofofthese
theseschools
schoolsabandon abandonthe thehholistic
olistic
—author,
concerned. All participants—author, reader, for truandth ch aracters—
requires a plurality of
tconcerned. All
equalsinincreating participants
creating approach
approach totoliteraryliterarystudy,
study,which whichinvestigates,
investigates,analyzes,
analyzes,and andinterprets
interprets all all
equals thethe novel's
novel's "truth,"
"tru th," for truth requires •. . . a plurality
,nteractas of
elements
elements ofof the
the artistic
artistic situationininfavor
situation favorof of con
concentrating
centrating on on oneone or or more
m ore
c nature of the novel implies that there are
are specific aspects.
specific aspects. ForForexamexample,
p le, m od modernism
ern ism (an (and,
d , ininpparticular,
articu lar, th the
e NNew ew
tor
consciour.. - — . the polyphonic nature of the novel implies
Bakhtin,
nsciousnesses.
C0115C 1
For
i1Usnetitieti
Bakhtin, the polyphonic no.— - - ■■
- * *•---»____
that there
truths, not
not just
justone.
one.Each
Eachcharacter
characterspeaks
speaksandand thinks
thinks his Criticism,the
Criticism, thefirst
firstcritical
criticalmmovement
ovem ent ofofthe thetw twentieth
entieth cen century)
tu ry ) w wishes
ishes to to
nv truths hisor
orher
herown
own
truth. Although
truth Although one onetruth
truth may
may bebe preferred
preterred toto others
othersby
bya acharacter,
character,a areader,
reader, break
break from fromthe the past,
past, deemphasizing
deem phasizing the the culturaland
cultural andhistorical
historical influences
influences
!flatly
the author,
the author,no notruth
truthisisparticularly
particularly certain.
certain. Readers
Readerswatch
w atchasasone
onecharacter
character thatmay
that mayaffect
affect a work
a work ofof literature.The
literature. Thetext,
text,these
thesecritics
criticsdeclare,
declare,will will inter­
inter-
pret thetext.
text. On the other hand, CulturalPoetics,
Poetics,a aschool schoolofofcriticism
criticism that
that
oinfluences
Ofr
influences •’ r, and
another, andtraders
featiers
anoint th ese...... ..
listen totothe
listen themmultitude
ultitude ofofvoices
voicesheard
heard by
. What develops,
‘ ’ - - them What develops,
Ix pret the
first appeared
first appeared
On
inin
the
thethe
other
1980s
1980s
hand,
andand
Cultural
continues
continues to to develop
develop itsitsu nd
underlying assump-
erlyin g assu m p­
each character as these vo4o.”. Ishare those who hear,.
each
says character
says Bakhtin, isaa,h„
Bakhtin,isas .
carnival isticatmosphere,
carnivalistic atmosphere, aa sense
sense oi * * ® !»
of joyful relativity.
-------- ,Teas
tionsand
tions andmethodologies,
methodologies, argues
argues that
that mmost critics'hhistorical
ost critics' istorical consciousness
consciousness
■ i.uii„'Kmost significant contributions to literary' must
must be bereawakened
reawakened because,
because, in reality,
in reality, thethe fictional
fictional textand
text andits itshistorical
historical
? of Bakhtin's
sense c it carnival is one ot liakhtin'smost
mostsignificant
significant u .... _____■ •» to literary
contributions «avo|c
?l's polyphonic style, especially the novels and culturalmilieu
and cultural milieuare aream amazingly
azingly sim similar.
ilar. FFor o r ththese critics,
ese critic s, aa rereader
a d e r can
can
theory and helps describe the novel's polyphonic style, especially the novels
theory ana neipsPolyphonic
UWv.--- Bakhtin, have a carnival sense of never fully
never fullydiscern
discern thethetruth
truth about
about a historical
a historical o rora aliterary
literaryte x t since
text sincetru th
truth
of Dostoevsky. novels, asserts Bakhtin, havevoicesa carnival sense of-
are simultane-
of Dostoevsky. Polyphonic novels, asserts itself isisperceived
itself perceived differently
differently from
fromone
oneeraeratotoanother.
another.FFor o r those
thosew h o esp
who ouse
espouse
the world,
the world, aasense
senseofofjoyful
joyfulabandonment
abandonment where
where many
manyvoices
voicesare
aivsimultane
^
ouslv
ously heard
heardand
anddirectly
directly influence
influence their hearers.Each
their hearers. Eachparticipant
participant testsboth
tests both theprinciples
the principles of of Cultural
Cultural Poetics,
Poetics, thethe text-only
text-o criticism
n ly critic ism of ofth thee eearly
a rly an and
d
-----.■ k- — ■
the
the ideas
ideasand
andthe iii;o«;
livesc0 of
thelives f other
‘
otherparticipants, creatingaasomewhat
participants, creating somewhat ‘seriocomic
seriocomic mid-twentieth century
mid-twentieth centuryappears
appearsbiased
biasedand andincom plete.
incomplete.
In the
In theremaining
remaining chapters
chapters of of
this book,
this book, w ewe will
willexam
examinein e the themmost
o st ppromi-
ro m i-
environment.
env ironment•
Bakhtin's interestin
Bakhtin's interest inlanguage,
language,culture,
culture,literature,
literature, religion,
religion,and
anupolitirsen nent
of1 schools of twentieth-
,° 1S ° f twf nheth~ andand twenty-first-century
tw en ty -first-cen tu ry ininterpretation.
terp retatio n . FFor
o r each
each
compasses much
compasses much ofofcontem porary literary
contemporary theory'and
literary theory andcriticism.
criticism.
HisHis ideas
ideas of
ineThese diverse
thSe , 1,VerSe schools,
schools' we will
we wiU note note
thethe tenets
tenets of of
thethe
p hphilosophy
ilo so p h y uunderly-
n d erlv -
have become
becomestarting
startingpoints
pointsfor
for conversations
conversations and anddialogues
dialogues
various contem porary cu 1
among
Itural
among compel
theories-
compet- -1 ing their literary theory. Most, if not all, have borrowed ideas, principles, and
^
concernst efromSthe literary
1* M ° critics
St' if n 0t a" ' h av e b° rrOWed ’d e a s' P ™ ciP 'e s. and
have and theories already discussed. We will ex-
ing and
and often
oftenconflicting
conflictingvoices
voicesinin various contemporary cultural theories. amine closely wwhat
h a f hthey
W borrow th co ries already d iscu sse d . W e will e x-
ing amine closely from these past schools of criticism, what
they
theY
m amend,
aem
dean
bd and
o,utan what
lterry
idw m*3™ ? theSe paSt sch o o ls of criticism , w h a t
a hatco ncepts they add. We will also note each school's
historical development ™ Cept;\they a d d - W e w ill a lso n o te e a c h sch o o l's
historical
and its m ___
development,
J L - _ »f
icw, «ulW llg c
w orkin g assu m p tio n s, itsitsp aparticular
ts working assumptions, rticu la r vvocabulary,
o ca b u la ry ,
and its methodology for interpreting
and its methodology for interpreting texts.
g texts. ByBysoso
d odoing,
in g , wwe
e wwill
ill bbecome M-
e co m e in­
MODERN
m o d e r n lLITERARY
i t e r a r y cCRITICISM
r it ic is m ,,, deiiii formed about literary theorists and
Jam - me ei1 a text. theorists andcritics
criticswwho articulate
h o articu clearly our
late clearly o u r analyses
an aly ses
in listi8 ^
(and ;
•n 1916) marks
Matthew a tran*
Arnold's death m and to
to aa lesser
lesser ddegree
egree H Henry
enry Jamesen'A to
s dea
and
in Wordsworth
1916) marks abefnr pcnod
transitional pt nod'ninliterary
literarycriticism Dryden, P°P*'
criticism.. Like DrY
and Wordsworth
ing Itterary beforea him,
critic of 'm' ^Arnold
rno*d was
w as the
th e recognized
recognizedauthority authorityart'..adiki
and and
.enliw-
tJ
tbe major ideas of hi< *
ing literary critic of hit; day, ^ and it
'sis histheories arid criticism that ettl j
theories and criticisrn that
the major ideas01ofh'S hisPra'
era.Wl*
Withthe
thepassing
passing
— oof
af A rrn
o aold
bArnold, , the
d tim the c .0
p ^ o mor
e preaornic
period W j J.
1 04.
veto
any one person or set of ideas representing
mcvone person or set of ideas representing a
any a broad • ■-wforpro^
v 0 ice vie ° r , oalV
time period ,0$
oure

mrw/ompnl
emnt ends,
movement although
ends,although Bakhtin
Bakhtin ss concerns
although Bakhtin's concerns
w . —- - - anda e c0voice
tne cpUnte^
s1vie for pr
ter Arnold,
After
Af literary theory
Arnold, literary theory and
and criticism
criticism become splinten4
 Chapter 33 •• Russian
Chapter RussianFormalism
Formalismand
andNew
NewCriticism
Criticism 49

practitioners such members

practitioners members as ns Roman
Roman Jakobson,
Jnkobson, JanJan Mukarovsky,
Mukarovsky, Peter Peter
Bogatyrev, and
Hogatyrev, and G.
G.O. Vinokur. The
0. Vinokur. The following
following year in Petrograd, the the Society
Society
for the
for the Study of Poetic Language (OPOYAZ) (OPOYAZ) was was formed,
formed, including
including in its
membership Victor Victor Shklovsky,
Shklovsky, Boris Boris Eichenbaum,
Hichenbaum, and Victor Victor Vinogradov.
Vinogradov.
Although the adherents
Although adherents of both groups often disagreed concerning the prin­ prin-
cciples
iples of
of literary
literary interpretation, they were united in their rejection
in their rejection of many
nineteenth-century assumptions
nineteenth-century assumptionsof of textual
textual analysis,
analysis, especially
especially thethe belief that
a work of of literature
literature was
was the expression
expression of of the
the author's
author's worldview
worldview and their
dismissal of
dismissal of psychological
psychological and biographical criticism criticism as being irrelevant
to interpretation. These Russian scholars boldly declared the autonomy of of
literature and poetic language, advocating aa scientific scientific approach to literary
interpretation. Literature, they they believed, should be investigated as its own
discipline, not merely as aa platformplatform for for discussing
discussing religious,
religious, political,
political, socio-
socio­
logical,
logical, oror philosophical
philosophical ideas. By By radically
radically divorcing
divorcing themselves
themselves from previ­ previ-
ous literary
literary approaches and advocating advocating new new principles
principles of of hermeneutics,
these
these members of the Moscow Moscow Linguistic
Linguistic Circle
Circle and Society for
and of the Society for the
Study of Poetic
Study Poetic Language
Language are are considered
considered the the founders
founders of of modern
modern literary
criticism, establishing
criticism, establishing what is known as as Russian Formalism.
Coined by
Coined opponents of
by opponents of the
the movement
movement to to deprecate
deprecate RussianRussian
Formalism's supposedly strict methodological
Formalism's methodological approachapproach to to literary
literary interpre­
interpre-
Formalism
tation, the terms Form alism and F orm alist were first rejected
Formalist rejected byby the Russian
Formalists themselves,
themselves, forfor they
they believed
believed that that their
their approach
approach to to literature
literature was
both dynamic
both dynamic and evolutionary, not
and evolutionary, not aa "formal"
"form al" or or dogmatic
dogmatic one. one.
Nevertheless, the
Nevertheless, the terms ultimately became became the battlebattle cry
cry for
for the establish-
establish­
ment of what what they dubbed
dubbed aa science
science of literature.
The first task of the Russian Formalists
Formalists was was to define their new science. science.
Framing their
Framing their theory on the work work of of Ferdinand de Saussure,
Saussure, the French lin- lin­
guist and founder of modern linguistics, the the Formalists
Formalists emphasized
emphasized the au- au­
tonomous nature of literature. The proper study of literature, they declared, is
literature itself. Tostudy
itself. To study literature is to to study poetics, which is an analysis of of
a work's constituent parts—its linguistic and structural features—or its its form.
Form,
Form, they they asserted,
asserted, included the the internal
internal mechanics
mechanics of the work itself, espe­ espe-
cially
cially itsits poetic
poetic language.
language. ItIt is
is these
these internal
internal mechanics
mechanics or or what
what the Formalists
called devices that compose the artfulness and literariness
called devices literariness of any given text,
not a work's subjectsubject matter or or content.
content. Each
Each device or compositional feature
possesses peculiar
possesses peculiar properties that that can,
can, as in in any science, be analyzed. For the
science, be
Formalists,
Formalists, this this new
new science
science of of literature
literature became
became an an analysis
analysis of of the literary
and artistic devices that the writer manipulates manipulates in in creating
creating a text.
The
The Formalists' chief focus of of literary
literary analysis
analysis was the examination of a
text's
text's literariness, the the language
language employed
employed in in the
the actual
actual text.
text. Literary
Literary lan-lan­
guage,
guage, they they asserted, is different from from everyday language. Unlike Unlike everyday
speech, literary language
speech, literary language foregrounds itself, itself, shouting, "LookLook at me; me; I am
special; II am unique." ThroughThrough structure,
structure, imagery,
imagery, syntax, rhyme scheme,
syntax, rhyme scheme,
paradox
paradox and and a host of of other
other devices,
devices, literary
literary language
language identifies
identifies itself
itself as
 ation.coined
i:zCriticism
R
uss
ian Formaidilist and New
odaN
semfaam Criticism

N, Chap‘s 3
chapter
. v cneech patterns, ultimately
h patterns, ultimately produc
producin C hapter 3 •
Chapter • Russian Formalism
Russian Form andNew
alism and New CCriticism
riticism 51
51
do . g tt.,_
deviations from ^ ■ervday n e ss^ ssa
fT e fa, .m
,
^ i'ia
: i ; arization.
riw tio n . Coined
Coined by K,,
Fo 'lea;ejir::
" ^'i st
b r yrtnhael d^
ianrinferni
alovsky, BRIDGING THE
THE GAP
GAP BETWEEN
BETWEENRUSSIAN
RUSSIAN FORMALISM
FORMALISM
dt
n g feature
featurefrom
delviatic'n5
of
or
of literann
literariness,
. R:errv
litehk • *--- . fami|
dela iarization is
miliarization the process
is the proces. US$j
usslim
:ormahst Victor Shklovsky,
MR defam iliarixation is th tit
.e) the familiar, of putting th the old ;at AND NEW
AND NEW CRITICISM
CRITICISM
Formalist Victor S the familiar,
itrange (ostranenie) rau‘‘*“**' o--f putting
* ~ „ By De olH . new
.^r° CeSs lio
,ur cil
’ tight t 'Illswiii
strange
>hklovsky (ostran.dna
called a „7 "*,p‘ here
here of of new
new perception.
perception." By
•> R making
> making
^ ,r> new s t r nge
stra a n 'i^4, S1,
ihklovsky calk. ’P
zatIon (or what some
(or what some Russian
Russian F o ‘"aiKf.
rn ^ H Russian Formalism
Russian Formalismisissometimes
sometimes paired
pairedwith
withthe thefirst
first modern
modern school
school of of

'rotor. '
Llamili^”"0"
••
_I.:familiar', ation
i downdown the
or
V '-'1
the act actofofperception
..
perception of
c
of everyday
,
everyday word vvord' call ^|| Anglo-American
Anglo-American criticism:
criticism: thetheNew
NewCriticism.
Criticism. Dominating
Dominating both both American
American
*estrangement)
T'll,ar' '■~n{\slowsslows - reader
reader . to to reexamnu:
to reexamine me
reexamine the imaj
the image. For
image. F0r 5 or ob. ob. and British criticism
and criticism from
from thethe 1930s
1930s to
to the 1950s,
1950s,New NewCriticism can be
Criticism can con-
be con­
’“ ['"fore**
leas, forcing the Its the wordswords"dazzling
"dazzling darkness,"
darkness," our r'canlPle sidered aa second
sidered secondcousin
cousinof ofRussian
RussianFormalism.
Formalism.Although
Although bothboth schools
schools em­
em-
°ur atteX
at tenhi, am ple . some similar
ploy some similar terminology
terminology and and are
are identified
identified as as types
types ofof Formalism,
Formalism,
Then we
when read in
we read in aat**™recn o... of pf the
,hcsese words.
words. OurOur ordinary
ordinaryexpel.;_experi rt is“
caught
aught by bythe
theunusual
unusual paindown
pa
slowed gdownbecause
because wewemustmustnow now unpack
unpack the ^ of there exists
there exists no
no direct
direct relation
relation between
betweenthem.them.New NewCriticism
Criticism hashas its
its own
own
theme
the unique history and
unique and development
development in in Great
Great Britain
Britain andand the
the United States.
States.
evervdav language
everyday language is .s slow
slow age whcn We we do do so,
so. poetrys wi,h >
ing of the author 's choice of language. When Pc't trY with i,a Interestingly, in
Interestingly, in the 1940s,
1940s, twotwo leading
leading Russian
Russian Formalists,
Formalists, Roman Jakobson
ing of the author scht calledattention
has eaUed d
attention to
to itself
itself as poetry
poetry and .t c-
and *
ving poehc
poetic diet.
diction and Rene
ReneWellek,
Wellek,camecametotothe theUnited
UnitedStates
Statesandand actively
activelyparticipated
participated in in the
companying
compan, wing its listeners n ororreaders
rea ers to experience aa small
to experience small p pal;I *fi,'
allowing a,its £ intensifying
2 ^ the mt ofi scholarly discussions
scholarly discussionsof of the
theNew
New Critics.
Critics. The
The interaction
interaction of these
these Russian
Russian
literariness,
literariness,
w way by . the act
act of of perception.
perception. o
their world
^ i ,Inworld ra
in tan
a new « . ,he constituent devices present in p0f Formalists with
Formalists with the New Critics does does evidence
evidence itself
itself in some of Russian
in some Russian
addition to era mining the constituent devices pr esent in
Formalism's ideas
Formalism's ideasbeing
beingmirrored
mirroredin inNew
NewCritical
Critical principles.
principles.
In addition toIvied narrative narrative proseprose and and declared
declared that the the structret'Y'
structure of'
also analy
Shklovsky also anal d^ {story) and syuzhet (p,ot) Fabu]a
narrative has two asp, . scts. tabula (story) and syuzhet (plot), Fabula re 1., Fa
iite
narrative has.twoasp
I of Inc story and and cancan be be considered
considered somewhatsomewhat akin akinto to Z
th.
raw matena
raw material ottnoutltae. Thisoutline APPLYING RUSSIAN FORMALISM TO A
A LITERARY
LITERARY TEXT
writer's working outline contains
contains the the chronological
chronologicalseriesot series of APPLYING
events of thes o r Th"
4ory. The svu? .he. is is
svuzhet thetheliterary
literarydevices
devices the the writer
writer us u ess ^to
6transform
f 1 aa story tabula)into
(the tabula) into plot.
plot. ByBy using
using such
such techniques
techniques as dig** Read carefully
Read carefully the
the following
following poem by the contemporary American essayist, essayist,
story (the as digres.
poet, scholar,
poet, scholar,and
andeditor
editorMary
MaryM.M.Brown.
Brown.After
After reading
reading the
the text
text several
several times,
times,
transform a story di tions, the writer dramatically alters the fabula
sions, surprises, and disruptions, the writer dramatically alters the fabula
sums, surpr^t
making it a work^ofliteralure
literaturethatthatnownowhas hasthe thepotential
potential to toprovoke
provokedefarnii:
defamil' be able
be abletotoapply,
apply,discuss,
discuss,andanddemonstrate
demonstrate howhowthethefollowing
followingterms
terms fromfrom
Russian Formalism
Russian Formalismcan canbe
beused
usedinindeveloping
developingan aninterpretation
interpretationof of this
this text:
iari/atfon "to
iarization. "to make
makestrange"
strange"the thelanguage
language of the text
of the textand andrender
render aa fresh
fresh
view of language and 'Or the reader's world. • poetics
View ^ ^
arv
What Russian Formalism contributed to the study of literature and liter-
ary theory
theoryisisaareevaluation
reevaluation ofofthe text
the textitself.
itself.Bringing
,lt"
sc.ent.ficapproach
Bringing a scientific
- *er-
approach to in
•• form
form
• devices
dev ices
literary studies
studies,the theFormalists
Formalistsredefined
redefinedaatext text to mean aaunified
to mean unifiedcollection
collection • literariness
of various literary
of literarydevices
devicesand andconventions
conventions that can he
that can be objectively
objectivelyanalyzed
analyzed • foregrounchng of of literary
literary language
foregrounding
Literature isisnot'thev
Literature not, they declared,
declared, thethevision
vision ofofananauthor
authoror or authorial
authorial in tent
intent • defamiliariza lion.
defamiliarization.
Using linguistic
linguisticprinciples,
principles,the theFormalists
Formalistsasserted
asserted that literature,like
that literature, likeallallscsci­i-
ences, isisaaself-enclosed,
ences, self-enclosed, law-governed
law-governedsystem. system.To Tostudy literature
study literature is is
toto study
stuck:
a text's
text'sform
formand andonly
onlyincidentally
incidentallyits itscontent.
content. For For the
theFormalists,
Formalists,form form isissu-
su­ Early
Early Spring A ubade
Anbade
perior to
perior to content. branchesoutside
The branches outsidethis
thisoffice
officewindow
window
As a group,
group,the theRussian
RussianFormalists
Formalistswere were suppressed
suppressed and anddisbanded
disbandedin in too often
too often block
block the
the light,
light, but
but today the early
1930 by
1930 bythe theSoviet
Soviet government
government because
because theythey were
wereunwilling
unwilling totoview viewlitera-
litera­
ture
ture through
throughthe theStalinist
Stalinistregime's
regime'spolitical
political and ideologicalperspective.
and ideological perspectives. morning sun wavers,
wavers, thenthenprevails,
prevails,stippling
stippling
Their
Their influence
influencedid didcontinue
continue to to
flourish
flourish ininCzechoslovakia
Czechoslovakia through through thethework
work spacewith
this space with aa tentative
tentative dawn
dawn that crawls
crawls
of the
the Prague
PragueLinguistic
Linguistic Circle
Circle (founded
(foundedinin1926, 1926,its its leading figure being
leadingfigurebeing
Roman Jakobson) and throughthe thework toward an even
even more
more fragile
fragile day.
day.All
All the failures
Roman Jakobson) and through work of of the
the Russian
Russian folktale
folktale scholar
scholar of my life
life on earth are
are erased
erasedininthis
thisquivering
quivering
Vladimir Propp. Fortunately
Vladimir Propp. Fortunately for for the
the advancement
advancementof of literary
literary theory and
theoryand crit­
crit-
icism, Russian Formalism
icism, Russian Formalism resurfaces
resurfaces in in the
the1960s1960s ininFrench
Frenchand andAmerican
American grace that
grace thatworks
works its
its lacy
lacyway
way through
through its
its own
own
structuralism(see
structuralism (see Chapter 5). curious birth. This is the one
one appointed
appointed hour
 Charter 4 • Rc.hler-ot wilted
Criticism
bti

Student B objects, declaring that Student A's interpretatio n is not

Yaw for the twenty-first century. Student Avsisticli(:rerveicit,itci • ameni
Brown reae i
ll z
f n
Iii esrsS:how-
When she notes that Goodman rve
ver
Brown does not recognize the evil in himself. IHa w'thorne's chief Purpo., .
ninhypocrisy within all of
"Young Goodman Brown" is to show the us. 1i
its meaning can be applied today. Such
story's significance rests in how Suc h
hypocrisy and prejudice, contends Student B, still exist in Our un' _.ivers,L-
town. We all have the potential to be Goodman Browns, people filled vv rY
prejudice and hypocrisy, thinking that we alone know and understandjth
truth
and goodness.
Student C affirms that although both Student A and Student B have ma d
e
valid criticisms
criticisms of of Hawthorne's
Hawthorne's text,
text, Jthey have ov«
ey haV(f overlooked
rl™ k(ed1the cha"gechange that that
takes place in Goodman Brown himself. himself. After
After the events
events of of that
thatfateful
fateful ninight
ght
forest-cither real
in the forest—either real or
or im agined-no longer
imagined—no longer do we we seesee aaGoodmGoodman an
Brown who trusts in the
Brown the goodness
goodness of of humanity.
humanity. We We nownowhave havea acharacter
character
whose entire
whose entire life—his
life—his thoughts andand actions—is
actions—is one oneofofdespair,
despair,aalife lifethat
thatsees
sees
no good in in anyone. Everyone in the Salem village, Brown Brown believes,
believes, isis living
living aa
lie because all are hypocrites.
hypocrites. And
And for the rest of his his life
life he
he remains
remainsaasolem solemn n
person who castscasts suspicious
suspicious and supposedly
supposedly knowing
knowingglances
glancesatathis hispeers
peers
and his
his wife,
wife, all
all of
of whom, he believes,
believes, have pledged
pledged theirtheirallegiance
allegiance to to
evil. And thus Brown's "dying hour hour was
was gloom,"
gloom,"just justlike
likehis
hislife lifeafter
afterthethe
forest scene.
voice, Student
With a quiver in her voice, Student D remarks
remarks thatthatGoodman
GoodmanBrown Brownre- re­
minds
minds herher of
of her friend Rita. Whenever Rita's husband
Rita. Whenever husband meets
meetsher herininpublic—
public—
at the
the mall,
mall, grocery
grocery store, or McDonald's—he gives her her aaquick
quickstare starethen
then
looks the other way. Even Even when
when they are at homehome together,
together,he heprefers
preferstotosit sitin
in
his study watching a movie movie onon his
his computer
computer than sitting with
than sitting withher herand andtheir
their
two children in the family room watching one of
family room of the
the children's
children'sfavoritefavorite
movies. Like
movies. Like Faith
Faith Brown,
Brown,sayssaysStudent
Student D, D, Rita
Rita has
has no idea idea what
whatshe shehas has
done to to distance herself from her husband. Nightly Nightlyshe shecries
criesherself
herselftotosleep,sleep,
wishing her husband would would hold
hold her.
her. In
In "Young
"Young Goodman
GoodmanBrown," Brown,"asserts asserts
Student D, D, Hawthorne has successfully
successfully captured the the predicament
predicamentofofsome some
twenty-first-century
twenty-first-century wives, wives, women
women whose
whose lives
lives are filled with withdespair
despairand and
they know not not why.
why.
Each of
Each these four
of these four students
students sees
sees something
something slightly
slightlydifferent
different inin
Hawthorne's passage, peeking into the text from different windows and,
thus, seeing
aww fmm m0;rdifferent scenes, receiving
....... jc^iving different
different impressions,
impressions, andand coming
coming
away from their readings with different interpretations. Consciously or un-
consciously, each of their interpretations rests upon different theoretical as-
sumptions with their corresponding interpretative methodologies. Of the
four interpretations, Student A's is the
.
the passage. Seeing an overall textual most theoretically distinct approach from' that
to
the
text is autonomous; it student presupposes
must •interpret itself with little or no help
cal, societal, or any
other extrinsic factors, withwith all itsparts relating back to its
 Chapter
C hapter 44 •• Reader-oriented
Reader-orientedCriticism
Criticism 73
73

For Rosenblatt, readers

For Rosenblatt, readers can and do do read
read in in one
one of of two
two ways: efferentlu
efferentlu oror
aesthetically.
aesthetically. WhenW hen we read for for information—for
information— for example, example, when we read the
directions for heating
directions for heating a can a can of soup—we are engaging
soup we are engaging in in efferent
efferent reading
(from Latin effere
the Latin
(from the aw ay"). During
effere "to carry away"). During thisthis process,
process, we we are interested
only
only inin newly
newly gained
gained information
inform ation that that we
we cancan "carry
"carry away"
aw ay" from
from the the text,
text,
not in
not in thethe actual words as words themselves. When
w ords as words themselves. When we read efferently, we read efferently, we
are motivated by a specific need to to acquire
acquire information.
information. When When we we engage in
aesthetic reading,
aesthetic reading, we experience the the text.
text. We
We note its its every
every word,
word, itsits sounds,
sounds,
its patterns,
patterns, and so so on.
on. InIn essence,
essence, we we live
live through
through the the transactional
transactional experi-
experi­
ence
ence ofof creating
creating the the poem.
poem. O Off primary importance is our engagement or our
unique "lived-through"
"lived-through" experienceexperience with withthethetext.
text. Rosenblatt
Rosenblatt adds that at any
given m moment
om ent in the readingreading process
process aa reader
reader may may shift
shift back and forth along
a continuum between betw een an an efferent
efferent and and anan aesthetic
aesthetic modemode of of reading.
When
When reading aesthetically,
aesthetically, Rosenblatt maintains maintains that we involve involve our-our­
selves
selves in in anan elaborate
elaborate give-and-take encounter encounter with with the
the text.
text. Though the text
may allow for
may allow for mmanyany interpretations
interpretations by by eliciting
eliciting andand highlighting
highlighting different
different
experiences
experiences of of the
the reader,
reader, it simultaneously
sim ultaneously limits the valid meanings the
poem can can acquire. For Rosenblatt, a poem's meaning meaning is is not a smorgasbord of
infinite interpretations; rather, itit is
infinite interpretations; is aa transactional experience in which sev-
transactional experience sev­
eral different yet probable meanings m eanings emergeemerge in in aa particular
particular social
social context
context
and thereby create create aa variety of "poem"poems." s."
What differentiates Rosenblatt's and other other reader-oriented
reader-oriented critics' critics' con-
con­
cerns from oth
cerns from otherer critical approaches
approaches (especially
(especially New New Criticism)
Criticism ) is is their
purposive shift in emphasis
purposive em phasis away away from from thethe text,
text, asas the
the sole
sole determiner
determiner of of
meaning and toward toward the the significance
significance of of the reader as an essential participant
essential participant
in the
the reading process and the the creation
creation of of meaning.
meaning. Such Such a shift negates the
Formalists'
Formalists' assum assumptionption that
that the
the text
text isis autonomous
autonomous and andcan can bebe scientifically
scientifically
analyzed to discover its meaning. meaning. No No longer
longer isis the reader passive, merely ap-
plying a laundry list
list of learned, poetic devices to a text
of learned, poetic devices text in the hope of dis- dis­
covering
covering its its intricate
intricate patterns of of paradox
paradox and and irony,
irony, which, in turn, will lead,
supposedly,
supposedly, to to the one correct interpretation. For For reader-oriented
reader-oriented critics, the
reader
reader is is anan active
active participant along with with thethe text
text inin creating
creating meaning. It is
from thethe literacy experience (an event that occurs
literacy experience occurs whenwhen aa reader
reader andand print
transact),
transact), they they believe,
believe, that
that meaning evolves.

A S S U M P T IO N S
ASSUMPTIONS

Similarr to
Simila to most
most approach.-* to literary 4111d lytilti, reader
analysis, oriented criticism
reader-oriented cri.totsmLioes
does
approaches to
not provide
provide us us with unified body 01
with aa unified of theory or a sm,;le n.ethodoloK>ca! ai3-
or a single methodological ap­
proach hat those who call themselves reader-response
proach for
for textual
textual analysis.
analysis. WWhat those who call themselves reader-response
Cr’hcs, reader-oriented
critics, s, reader
critics,
reader-oriented critic reader ccr,tics,
ritic s, or or audience-oriented
and ience-oriented critics
cnt.es
•**M* is aa concern
share concern for the reach
reader.r. Relieving that a literary work's interpretation
• Ilelievin,; that a literary work s interpretation
for the
 ......H II- --------------------------------------. ----------- .. - > * * ..,.*

Chapter 44•• Reader-oriented

Chapter Reader-oriented Criticism
Criticism 83
•• Using Bleich's
Using Bteich s subjective
subjective criticism,
criticism, can
can you
you state
state the
the difference between your re- re­
sponse
sponse toto"Young
Young Goodman
GoodmanBrown"Brown" andand your
yourinterpretation?
interpretation?
•• In a classroom setting, develop
developyouryourclass's
class'sinterpretive
interpretivestrategies
strategies for
for arriving
arriving at
the meaning of of "Young
"Young Goodman Brown."Brown."
•• you interpret
As you interpret "Young
Young Goodman
Goodman Brown,"
Brown," can you cite the interpretive com­ com-
communities to
munity or communities to which
whichyou,
you,the
thereader,
reader, belong? ByBy so
so doing,
doing, you
you will
be identifying howhow this
this community
community or or communities
communities havehave influenced
influenced your
interpretation.

C R ITIQ U ES A
CRITIQUES N D RESPONSES
AND R ESPO N SES

Like most schools

Like most schools of criticism
criticism that have emerged emerged sincesince thethe 1960s,
1960s, reader-
oriented criticism is a collective noun noun embodying
embodying aa variety of critical positions. positions.
Unlike
Unlike New New Criticism
Criticism's "text and text alone"
's "text alone" approach
approach to to interpretation
that claims
claims that the meaning
meaning of of aa text
text is is enclosed
enclosed in the text itself, itself, reader-
oriented critics emphasize the reader of a text,
critics emphasize declaring that
text, declaring that thethe reader is
just as
just as much (or more) a producer producer of of meaning
meaning as as is
is the
the text
text itself.
itself. To vary­
vary-
ing degrees,
degrees, thethe reader helps createcreate the the meaning
meaning of any text. text. In In approach­
approach-
ing
ing a work,
work, the the reader
reader brings
brings to to thethe interpretive
interpretive process
process his his or
or her
her
forestructure, one's accrued accrued life
life experiences,
experiences, memories,
memories, beliefs,
beliefs, values,
characteristics that make an individual unique. In making sense
and other characteristics
of the
the text—what
text—what we we call
call the
the interpretation—the
interpretation—the elements elements of of the
the reader's
reader's
forestructure interact, transact,
forestructure interact, transact, or or intermingle
intermingle (depending
(depending on on thethe reader's
reader's
theoretical stance), thereby
theoretical stance), thereby producing the actual actual interpretation.
interpretation. Because Because
reader-oriented
reader-oriented critics critics agree
agree that
that anan individual
individual reader
reader creates
creates the the text's
text's
meaning,
meaning, reader-orientated criticism criticism declares
declares that there can can bebe no one cor- cor­
rect meaning
rect meaning for for any
any text,
text, but
but many
many validvalid interpretations.
interpretations. What What the the reading
process is
process is and
and how readers read read areare major
major concerns
concerns for all all reader-oriented
critics. Their answers
critics. Their answers to to these
these and similar questions, however, however, are are widely
divergent.
Reader-oriented criticism has
Reader-oriented criticism has been
been harshly
harshly critiqued
critiqued by by scholars
scholars who
believe that
believe that the
the text,
text, not the reader, creates
creates meaning.
meaning. If If multiple
multiple interpreta­
interpreta-
tions ofof the
the same
same text can can exist
exist side
side byby side,
side, how
how can
can we we ever
ever say
say whatwhat a text
means?
means? Can Can aa text
text actually
actually mean anything a reader says it means? Are Are there
no clearly
clearly delineated
delineated guidelines for interpretation? Are there no fixed val-
Are there val­
ues
ues inin any
any text?
text? IfIf the
the reader
reader isis the
the producer
producer of of meaning,
meaning, then then the the reader's
reader's
physical or
physical or mental
mental condition while reading a text will directly influence the
interpretation,
interpretation, producing an array of bizarre and, more more frequently
frequently than not,
misguided
misguided and pointless interpretations. In response, reader-oriented critics
provide
provide aa widewide range of of answers,
answers, from from Wolfgang
Wolfgang Iser'sIser's gapgap theory,
theory, to
Louise Rosenblatt's transactional
Louise Rosenblatt's transactional theory,
theory, to to Stanley
Stanley Fish's
Fish's rather
rather relativistic
assumption
assumption that that nono text
text can
can exist
exist until
until either
either the
the reader
reader or or an interpretive
community creates it.
 Chapter
Chapter 55•• M
Modernity/Postmodernism
odernity/Postm odernism 93
93

language system and how how ititoperates

operatesrather
rather than
than its evolution, Saussure drew
aattention
ttention toto the
the nature
nature and
and composition of of language
language andand its
its constituent
constituent parts.
parts.
For example, along with examining the phonological
For example, along with exam ining the phonological antecedents antecedents of the
the
English sound
English sound h, as in the word boy (a
b as in the word toyanalysis),
(a diachronic analysis), Saussure ope
diachronic Saussure opened
a new avenue of investigation, asking how
new avenue of investigation, asking how the b sound isthe is related
related to other
sounds in use at at the
the same
same time
time by
by speakers
speakers of of Modern
Modern English
English (a (a synchronic
ana lysis). This new concern
analysis). concern necessitated
necessitated aa rethinking
rethinking of language theorytheory and
a reevaluation
reevaluation of of the
the aims of language
language research,
research, and
and it finally resulted
resulted in
Saussure's articulating the basic
Saussure s articulating basic principles of modem
modern linguistics.
Unlike
Unlike many
m any of of his
hiscontemporary
contem porary linguists,
linguists, Saussure
Saussure rejected
rejected the
the
mimetic theory
mimetic theory of language
language structure.
structure. In its place, he asserted that language
asserted that
is primarily
primarily determined
determined by its own internally structured and highly
internally structured and highly system­ system-
atized rules.
atized rules. These
These rules
rules govern
govern all aspects
aspects of a language,
language, including
including the
sounds
sounds itsits speakers
speakers will identify
identify asas meaningful,
meaningful, the the grouping of various
combinations
combinations of of these
these sounds intointo words,
words, andand the
the process
process whereby these
words
words maymay be be arranged
arranged to produce meaningful
meaningful communication
communication within a
given language.

The Structure
The Structure of
of Language

According
According to to Saussure,
Saussure, all all languages are governed by their
are governed their own internal
internal
rules that do
rules that do not mirror
mirror or or imitate
imitate the structure
structure of of the
the world.
world. Emphasizing
the
the systematized nature of language, Saussure Saussure asserts that all all languages are
composed of basic units called emes. ernes. The
The task of a linguist
linguist is is to
to identify
identify these
(sometimes called paradigms or
units (sometimes
units models) and/or
and/or to identify their
to identify their rela-
rela­
tionships among symbols—like
symbols— like the the letters
letters of
of the
the alphabet, for example—
example—in in a
given language.
language. This This task
task becomes
becomes especially
especially difficult
difficult when
when the the ernes
emes in the
linguist's native language and those in an unfamiliar
linguist's native language under
unfamiliar language under inves­
inves-
tigation differ.According
tigation differ. According to to Saussure,
Saussure, the the basic
basic building
building blockblock or or unit of
language
language is is the
the phonem
phoneme—the e— the smallest
smallest meaningful (significant)
(significant) sound in a
language.
language. The The number
number of of phonemes
phonemes differs
differs from
from language
language to to language,
language, with
with
the least number
the least number of of total
total phonemes
phonemes for any one language being around
for any around
eleven (Rotokas,
(Rotokas, aa language
language spoken
spoken by approximately
approximately four four thousand
thousand people
people
in Bougainville,
Bougainville, an an island
island east
east of New Guinea) and the most being 112, 112, found
in several
several tonal
tonal languages.
languages. American English, for
American English, for example,
example, consists
consists of ap-ap­
proximately forty-threeto
proximately forty-three toforty-five
forty-fivephonemes,
phonemes, depending
depending on on the specific
dialect
dialect of of American
American English
English being
being spoken.
spoken. Although
Although nativenative speakers
speakers of
American
American EnglishEnglishare arecapable
capableof of producing
producing phonemes
phonemes found found in other lan- lan­
guages,
guages, it it is
is these
these forty-five
forty-five distinct sounds that serve as as the
the building blocks
of American
American English.
English. ForForexample,
example, the the first
first sound
sound heard
heard in in the
the word pin pin is
is
the /p/ phoneme,
the /p/ phoneme, the second second /I/,
/1/, and
and thethe last /n/.
/n/. AAphoneme
phoneme is is identified
identified
in writing
writing by by enclosing
enclosing the grapheme—the
grapheme— the written written symbol that that represents
represents
the phoneme's sound—
the phoneme's sound—in in virgules or diagonal lines.
 ialism
,lon>‘jU»m
„ r
Chapter 10
ii) •
•
Pos
r °
trolon
stcl Ne w Critics, 'who Wh° believe
beUf VCthat
^ the
14s Chap** lu thee t f efrom
.,. untlike ,b * the
,b language
e la off scien
nguage o science_ and
1 0reanalr''
is willow . w different . . . t that the language of texts
..
toat4 and of Myra.y ^ g s f c t ^to
s ain
s t s s s s a
lyszi5e such writings. For their,
.wse iof Sliterature
I S ation,
" " “ It!"` S tP“)Setni S 5 i:
" Uts)eddecr to
<»
, * " ’ discourse
& » " • or “ culturally
‘ “I T * " ’ , boundI“ ” >
lativik
ueveryday
„u^e of u T
the iiit;tlacgt,afie u B a * the dl8 ru
the nape and form the text
sha
aoe and form the te
c,"ntveThm , In other Wor i helps
analysis ^ ^ a i n , xt
^isenotr’ yday
distinct f- t"e 'p o th er w®^\y8i»
a discour4L. anatiLy maintain, the text
text and
and the
the I an
, in literary arate,
isn
langttag
;4
" a d ias
e -7-i,1
o » dfe‘! * 01 " 0d
use *'i'n U ‘crary ,? e tW Y n ' a ' " aKe hhelps
arate, e l p s create
c r e a te andan d shape
shape --
W « y * e e of 'l'" ideas
e-- f
„ ^nnot nnot Seps e p a 'fce itics, tons’18*
fare cage *
language i 'cs, g
analyzed. .W- ca it. For these crib,
being ue
page used used t°,to al« ». ti^qfve
“e reality."
.
be created
created bby language,
y la n g u a g e , many m any post.
pos(.
5 3 we call '• objec
« * £ *i tive reaUty
e reality can
can b onstruct. From
From this point of view,
view.
what we objectiv .. •
i Believing that hat « ^ all reality 1S is aa see1*
social c instead, instead , many many realities realities exist.
exist. IIn n
4 modernists assert a ssert t ob- . _aiity
ctive reality eexists; ^ critics that reality
reality is
modernists ob3ectwe re reality, these cr itics bbelieve
e lie v e that is
no single or or primary
P" obje ctive
objective his
hisor orherhersubjective
subjectiveunderstand- understand-
disavowing aa unive • rsal h ,individual ere
creating g co m e to ag ree upon b
disavowing if. How, then, do we come to agree upon public
perspectival, with eac . . tself ,
? erSP(eihe nature of reality I tv itself
i the co m
thsicse,rarodr tthheesceom p m o n g ood , if reality is
i ing of the nature of ma-1-J
“ Asocial social concerns,
concerns, “such ^ as " avalues,aen
n s w e r .tforr th.ese p o s torn
o stm r ioogd
doe
eorn
rd
n, thin kleitY
thinkers rs iis
! acid
different for each The
individual? T h e a ^ within itself aa dominant d o m in a n t cultural
different for each individual? contains cultural
that eacheach society
society or culture c u ltu r e .deo)ogy or, or, uusing
sin g theth e Marxist
M arxist term,term, its its
tthat determines that culture's ideology
group who
group who determines that c ^ sense of o f right
rig h t aand n d wron
w rong, g, and its
1i hegemony—that
hegemony-that is, is,its
itsdodominant values,^ its a iven cu ltu re are consciously and
sense of personal self-worth. All people in a given culture are consciously and
sense of P ^ n a l " r t h AU P^ P g prescribed hegem on y.
1 unconsciously asked to conform to the prescribed hegemony.
i UnC°What happens,however,
l ^ t happens, however, whenone's
when one'sideas,ideas,oone'sn e 's ththinking,
in k in g , or or one's
one'sper- per-
sonal backgrounddoes
sonal background does notnot conform?
conform? WWhat
hat h ap happens,
p en s fofor r exa example,
m p le, when
when the the
dominant
dominant culture consists of white, A nglo-Saxon m ales an d one is a black fe-
culture consists of white, Anglo-Saxon males and one is a black fe-
male?
male? Or Orhow howdoes doesone onerespond
respond totoa aculturecultureddominated
o m in a ted bby y white
w h ite males
males ifif
one
one is is aa Native
NativeAmerican? American? For Forpeoplepeople ofofcocolor
lo r livliving
in g in Africa A frica or or inin thethe
Americas,
Americas, for forNative
NativeAmericans,
Americans, forfor femfemales,
ales, and andfor forggaysa y s an and d lesbians,
lesbians, and and
a host
host of of others,
others,the thetraditional
traditionalanswer answeralready alreadyhhas a s bbeene e n articulated
articulated by by the the
I dominant
dominant class classand anditsitsaccompanying
accompanyinghegem hegemony: ony: silence.
silen ce. Live L iv e quietly,
quietly,work work
quietly,
quietly, think thinkquietly.
quietly. The The message
message senttotothese
sent these "O "Others"
th e r s " b byy the
thedominant
dominant
I culture
culture has hasbeen beenclear clearand and consistent—conform
consistent— conform and andbbe e q quiet;
u iet; deny
denyyourself,
yourself,
and all willwill bebe well.
But
But many manyhave havenot notbeen beenquiet.quiet. W Writers
riters aand n d thinkers,
th in k e r s , such su chasasToni Toni.
1
Morrison,
Morrison Alice AliceWalker, Walker,Gabriel GabrielG Garcia arcia MMarquez,a rq u e z , CCarlos
a rlo s Fuentes,
F u en tes,Gayatn
Gayatri
1 Spivak, Edwar,dEdwardSaid' Said,FFrantz
jantz Fanon,Fanon,and andJuJudith
d ith BButler,
u tler, to name n am e aafew,few,have have
dared to speak
fhese cultmes d pout?1 andandchallen§
challenge e the theddominant
o m in a n t cultures
c u ltu re s and andthe dictatess
thedictate
these cultures
necessary. Thevdecree. B pV Th<l7 Theycontinue
continuet °torefuse refusesilensilence ce andand choose defiance, ifif
choosedefiance,
necessary. They believe that an individual's view of life, of values, and of
ethics really
ethics reallymatters'They
matters. They assTrt'adiff' differentSpperspective,
V‘eW ° f ^ ° f Va' UeS’ “ fno
of the dominant culture bmassert
“ , adlfferent ersp ectiv e, a a vantage
vantage pointpoint not
of the dominant culture, but one from which to view the world and its pee
pies: They speak for
ples: fornni'
not one ? fr° m w h ich v iew th e w orld and its peo-
culture, but many; not one cultural perspectiv e'
but a host; not one interpretatio intermvt n* ^ Ut m any ; n o t one cultural perspective'
n of life, but countless.
Speaking fo
Speaking forr the
the onn oppressed, ^ ' supp Ufe' b u t co u n tless, critic`
scholars— African, A
scholars—African, u s h ^ iin,
Austral T x i ' su P P ressed re ss e d , , and sile n c e d , these
a n d silenced, these cr cn«
n ' Native
N ative American,
A m erican , female, fem ale, gay and lesbin, le^bi
1

:J W
 • •alie.6...S.seabilia....."
' •••••• • •••••,..a

2t41 Readings on Literary Criticism

ration supplementaire o f sign. f.
(It could no
no doubt
doubt be
be demonstrated
domonstr.i that this
(It could h.i
itself.) The word reappears a little.rther -l
cation is
cation is the
the origin
origin of the ratio
of the ratio it:
mentioned 'this floating signifier, which is the ser-:
has mentione un
after Levi-Strauss
Ltfvi-Strauss has '
tude of all finite
finite thought':
thought':

In other words—and taking as our guide Mauss's precept that all social phe_
mana, Wakau, oranda and
nomena can be assimilated to language—we see in
other notions of the same type, the conscious expression of a semantic function,
whose role it is to permit symbolic thought to operate in spite of the contradic-
tion which is proper to it. In this way are explained the apparently insoluble
antinomies attached to this notion. .. . At one and the same time force and ac-
tion, quality and state, noun and verb, abstract and concrete, omnipresent and
localized—mana is in effect all these things. But is it not precisely because it is
a symbol in the
none of these things that mana is a simple form, or more exactly,
pure state, and therefore capable oof
therefore capable f bbecoming
eco m in g ch w ith any
a rg e d with
charged o fsyrn_
so rtof
a n y sort sym-
bolic content whatever?
bolic content w hatever? In
In the
the system
sy stem of
o f symbols
sy m b o ls cconstituted
o n stitu te d by
b y all
all cosmolo-
cosm olo­
gies, mana
gies, w ould simply
m a m would sim ply be zero sy
be aa zero m b olic vvalue,
symbolic alu e, ththatat is to say, aa sigsign
n mmarking
arking
the
the necessity
necessity of
of aa sym bolic content
symbolic su pplem en tary [m y italics] to th a t w ith which
content supplementary [my italics] to that with which
signified isisalready
the signified loaded,bbut
alreadyloaded, u t wwhich
h ich cancantaktake
e on onaanyn y vvalue
a lu e requ ired , p
required, ro_
pro­
vided only
vided that this
only that value still
this value ains ppart
remains
stillrem art oof the aavailable
f the reservee and is
v a ila b le reserv is not,
group-term..
phonologists put it, aa group-term
as phonologists

Levi-Strauss
Levi-Strauss adds note:
adds the note:
'Linguists
'Linguists have been led
already been
have already ulate hypotheses of
formulate
to form
led to this type.
of this type.
For example: "A
For example: phoneme
zerophonem
"Azero opposed to
e isisopposed all the
to all phonem es in
o th er phonemes
the other in
French
French in entails no
that itit entails
in that characters and
differential characters
no differential constant phonetic
and no constant phonetic
contrary, the
value. On the contrary, function of
proper function
the proper phonem e is
the zero phoneme
of the be op-
to be
is to op­
posed to phoneme absence." (R. Jakobson and
(R. Jakobson and J.J. Lutz, otes on
'Notes
Lutz, 'N theFrench
on the French
Phonemic Pattern', Word 5, no. 2 [August[August 1949]:155).
1949]:155). Similarly,
Sim ilarly, if we schema-
schema­
tize the conception II am am proposing could alm
here, itit could
proposing here, thatthe
said that
ost be said
almost the func-
func­
tion of notions like mana is to be opposed to to the absenceof
the absence ofsignification,
signification,
without entailing by
without entailing particular signification.'xiv
itself any particular
by itself signification.'xiv
The overabundance of the signifier, its supplementary character, is is thus
thus the
the
result finitude, that
of a finitude,
result of to say,
that is to result of
say, the result of a lack w hich must be
a lack which must be
supplemented.
now be
can now
It can be understood
understood why w hy thethe concept o f play
co n cep t of im portant in
is important
p lay is in
Levi-Strauss. Flis
Levi-Strauss. references to
His references to all notably to
gam es, notably
sorts of games,
all sorts roulette, are
to roulette, are
frequent, especially
very frequent,
very in his
especially in his Conversations,"
C onversations in Race and History
History,™ and
,"°i and
,x v

in
in The Savage Mind. Further, the reference
Savage Mind. reference to play is caught up
alw ays caught
is always up in
in
tension.
tension.
Tension with
Tension first of
history, first
w ith history, This is
all. This
of all. problem ,objections
classicalproblem,
is aa classical objections
w hich are
to which sim ply indicate what
well worn. I shall simply
are now well seems to me the
w hat seems
formality of the
form ality of problem : by reducing history, Levi
the problem: L evi-Strauss
-Strauss hashastreated
treatedasas it
d eserves aa concept
deserves alw aysbeen
hasalways
which has
concept which beeninincomplicity w ithaateleologic
com plicitywith al
teleological
and eschatological
eschatological metaphysics,
metaphysics, in in other
otherwords, paradoxically,inincomplicity
words,paradoxically, complicity
278
278 Readings on Literary Critici
Criticism
°f mauve purple quiet, lying content
Veys‘6 in in West
West Africa, a little
Africa, a little a thing
,
thing velvet re oaonin d where on a fthrone 'room rest w h ere o n a
Veys S,
and shininB
shining in the sun; black
tire sun; a the broken and
^ c u rcurves v e s of the V enus
enusof ofMilo;
M ilo 7/ a Suipi. •
marble; the b kuth_ utter m elody, h a u n tin g and apPe8'e
South—utter melody haunting and appeal-
old and
old yellowing
andye.lowing
I "
•
phrase of music in the South^ the Southernf night . andand eternity,
eternity,bbeneathen eath th thee m oon .
moon. real-
P al'
ing, suddenly arising out o , nb
ot its possibility
is infinite, its possibility endless. In no is en d less. In norTv^ ,
Such is Beauty.
Beauty. Its Its variety is * The w o rld o f it; Ve? ? ? al
have it yet again• The world is full of it; and yet t,,, *.am ay
life all may have it and away it, and their lives distorted
the mass of human beings are choked is silly. Who shall right this well-
and made ugly. This is not only wrong, tIt well.
Who shall let this world be beautiful? Who shall
nigh universal failing?of sunsets and the peace of quiet sleep? re-
store to men the glory * ■ -
We black
We blackfolk folkmaymayhelp help for for we have within us as a
we have w ith in us a s a race n ew stirrin race new stirrings, g
stirrings
stirrings of ofthethebeginning
beginningofofa anew newappreciation
appreciationof ofjoy,
joy,of of aa nnewew desire
desire to to cre-
cre­
ate,
ate, ofofaanewnewwill willtotobe; be;asas though
though ininthisthismmorning
orning o ofggroup ro u p life life w wee hadhad awak- awak-
ened
ened from fromsome somesleep sleepthat thatatatonce oncedim dimlyly mmourns
o u rn s th the
e ppasta s t and
an d dreamdreamss aa
splendid future;
future;and andtheretherehas hascomecomethe theconviction
conviction th that
at ththee Youth
Y outh that that is is here
her
today,
today, the theNegro
NegroYouth, Youth, is is a different
a different kindkindofofY Youth,
ou th , bbecause
e ca u se in in some new ^
way
way it it bears
bearsthis thismighty
mightyprophecy prophecyononitsitsb breast, reast, wwith ith aa nnew e w realization
realization of
itself, with new
itself, with new determination
determinationfor forallallm mankind.
ankind. °*
What
What has hasthisthisBeauty
Beautytotododowith withthe thewworld?
orld? W Whathat h hasas Beauty
B eau ty to todo d With
Truth
Truth and andGoodness—with
Goodness—with thethe facts
facts of ofthe thew world
o rld aand n d th the right
e rie h t acti
art °ons Wltb
of
men? "Nothing," the artists rush to
men? "Nothing," the artists rush to answer. They m ay be righ t answer. They may be right. I a m
m but an^ 8 °f
humble
humbie disdpiediscipleofofart artand andcannotcannotpresum presume e totosay. say.I Iaam m one one w whoh o tells
tel th
truth
truth and andexposes
exposesevil eviland andseeks seekswithwithBeauty
Beautyand andfor for BBeauty
e a u ts to set c wuthe world thee
right.
n 8 HtRTThat somehow,s osomewhere
^ atTSOmehOW' m e w h e r e e teternal
e r n a l a nand
d p perfect
e r f e c t BBeauty
e a u t y ssits
i t s aabov
h ^ e Truth
and RightI Icacan
an d Right n c oconceive,
n c e iv e , b ubutt h ehere
r e a nand
d n onoww a nand d i nint hthe
e w world
o rld in • 1which I TrUth wor
they are fofor
th ey are r mmee uunseparated
n s e p a ra te d aand n d i inseparable.
n s e p a r a b le . d w h l c h 1 w ork k
This is brought to us peculiarly when as artists we face our own past as
a ppeople.
e o p leThere
.T h e mhas h a come
s c o mto e ^us—and
r u t-a ^ ^itChas s T ocome
m e 5^ WC
especially ° Ur own
through thePast man as
we are going to honor tonight8_ a realiz^Ho
we are going to honor tonights—a realization of that past, of which for long 1 P e c ,ally through the man
years we
years we have
havebeen beenashamed,
ashamed,for forwwhich
hir i f wef have thatapologized.
P a st' of w hich for long
We thought
nothing could come out of that nagf u- u"6 b av e a P °lo g iz e d . We thoueht
nothing
we wanted could comedown
to hand
hand out of to that
ou east which we wanted to remember; which
to to ^ e m e m b ^ ; S
on form, color and reality, an r children. Suddenly, this same past is taking
b e p ro u d o f ° t " w rea lity ' a n d ir >a h a l f s h a m t h l s s a m e p a s t is taking
be proud of it. We are rememberin din a half shamefaced way we are beginning to
d L a n d lie f ^ ^ U m b e r i n gg th t h t th ^ W * Y W e are b e g ^ 8 t o
die at the romance of the an
antrom
w ith y o u m u st h°ate n ^ in^ theMMiddle
and lie forgotten i d d le AAge;g e - that I ? if
! n you
a n c ewo f t h e wo w o rrlicd
cle ddtoid eoatl
iddnnot
with yyou u m must
u st hhave
a v e itith here
e r e a nand
d n onoww a nand d in yourYown ° U Whands.a n t r o m a n c e to deal
d m y ou r ow n hands.
6
_0ne
of the !vlandingo peoples of Senegal, West Africa.
'Famous classical statue of Aphrodite, Greek
original), now armless.
8 goddess
torAfriSnV
for A°OdSOn(187S- 1950)/to > °of love
loVe(2d
<2dC.
c- B.C.E.
B-C.E. copy
copy ofof aa 4th
4th c.
c.
Carter G.
African Woodson
American (1875-1950),
achievement, to whom the NAACP in 1926 awarded the
1916 founded the
1916 f°Unde d T e ^of Negro
~ t , W a s ° ^ A fen^ Sp in ga m Medal
C P in 1926 a w a rd e d the Spinarnvvi_o
Journal
°f "egro H furyn Atncan
History. African American
American educator and historian
historian who n in
 Rea d
ings on
Readings 1.1 teritv Criticism
on Literary r ritti,::)...:
: '•
the self-chosen big
instance is
. a a n c e l•S tthe self-chosen inscription .
inscriptio n 0 on K eats'stisia( tomb'" 2S9
nenip: oil Which
Arwther ^hich
lie* one whose name wasln. writ
s cosnoemwehoofstehneacr:0-ine.,awmaes i„ Vv„
aj 'sf
A„o
ttri ece t"*r
tiaeiv i n . ....................
w - •
tsrtihtain
ilese are some of the comments thatt tm wh:ip"r.(piprr tlIts 0/
T
Ther identify
dent ify with Keats's
Kea .
tt sIns t htlit
a
idealism, Kism t, ,anal
an ,/
. will !?r,,P < > , y,cDecicitsotry ruektion
and self_
v i t i a t e their contention that Keats's 1.._ s s i/ W."1 Pfincip ° « o ,
ironic
‘‘'nn0totiate their con,cteonns
--“h' .i ns. him him aa Deconstructionist
U econconstructionist.
•su u m u.eiuai. .....' mn,c °nd sJ f‘CH v Ci>|>ih
^itradictory
''ha<lic char-
'`11t,7;rftaim‘lke
nal'`e.s,thl,„
iiriLint here is
illel:ti)t is that
that thesetheseremarks,rem arks, withinwithin ti mle c
citnmt‘tell(d
3'' The ai 4a' no t, be taken
ajSl ta ken to to represent
rep resen tKeats's K eats'sironic
ironic and a n /n T 'aithiliifsebecom-
(c)nslatr(:
bTO,m-
o.x.ical con-
irt4,
nC sh° sin 11sIin n thethe strict
strict rhetorical
rh etoricalimplications
im plicationsof ofthe
thewords,
words ?nor d<
a hisi*‘Cal con'
life- They positively point roc
pointess to
to the fact
f a c that
Za/sfhihaneaviw
e Z acshin
l"
contra-
46° 'lle,
,.,,
' t -i nce in _ns cious
J i^ 'v / ex
ilit''''tic5' p ressio n
expression s a n a e s thiteiv
.asaaenyapeostsh tieclyp
e tic process rather than than a finali achievement.
acu m en /
P:)f,:“Che
4of Pt ^ had had no no doubt
d o u b t written
w ritten mature m aturepoetry, poetry, but his his sense
sense . ofof aesthetic
aesSc
in
By1' wiosophic
Sy •insophic vision v isio n was w a s not not satisfactory.
satisfactory. Nature plays plays a vital1 role in the
h
iriaJerstanding
PPhl1
hi ' ding - of ofhis
hisaesth
aestheticetic am bitionss and
ambition and achie
achievements.
tfd The
tin e fstanmajor .Qy qquestion
u e stio n is, is, hhow o w does d oes Keats's
K eats's ec o-consciousness
eco-consciousness engender
. ess engender
aestheticarid and pphilosophical expression
h ilo s o p h ic a l exp ressio n and sspeculations? N — the
Nature is
• aesthV dd by
his by Coleridge, example,
C o le rid g e ,, for exam p le, from a from a panth
pantheistic • - .
and monistic
apprehende a u n iv e r s a
dimension as a universal force which sheds light o l fo rce w h ich sheds light on man's 's spirituality.
spirituality,
jjjnensioir means, asin ^other er WOrd
words, s, that
th a t thethequestion
question isis exa nmill
examined * an
ed from
from an an eco-
fhis
Thi s means, m dimension.
metaphysical ngion B eco m in g can
Becoming can be be seen
seen criticall
critically mas
tyta .onstructive
hseaa cconstructive
m etaphys^l a
deferral of spiritualidealism idealism, / the argum ent being that the visionary
the argument being tha isilonary ex-
deferral of encapsulated
periences sp . j jin n texts
tex ts are arean anindicator
indicatorofofsupra-textua
supra-textualreadings readings
^ therefore'no^
Is this the case
and therefore notdc^sures closures bbut u t dynamic
d yn am ic open-endedness.
open-endedness. Is this the case

wifh Keats?
with Keats? herr of
b of characteristic
characteristicfeatures
featuresininKeats's
Keats'spoetry
poetry
Though there
Though there are a n
a Hum_u m VVordsworth, his ature-consciousness
nature-consciousness
n
which affiliatewwith
u ffiliate ith CColeridge
o le rid g e and Wordsworth, Keats'shispoetry and prose show
will be seen to take a slightly different turn. Keats's poetry and prose show
proof of certain monistic traits common in the two elder poets, justifying Romantic
the assertion that he can be discussed within the mainstream of
idealism with regard to nature, even if he does not handle the matter in a
z h a n d le the mat,er in a
credence to apprehend na-
I K
like can- be argued
Itmanner. re83dr equally
q u a lly that b i spoetry
that his t r y - d s tics
p o e lends c " as we intend to
It can b e argued e q u a l I y^ Yet, h is eco -p transcendental and,
ture fromanano rorganicist
hire from g a m c is t vie viewpoint.
P ^ the Yet, his eco-poe
visionary a ^ ^, like ,hat of
m that of his
his
analyse, does not place priority on the visionary and transcendental and,
analyse, does n o t p la ce p ^ d im ension o n jly wjthin
within the confines
thecon ,
therefore, the dominant
therefore, the d o m in a n t s p in spiritual ' dimension of nature is not
nature pnm j ntal|y as a un,ve a universal
lleagues, for it tends to reduce nature it fundamentally as
elder co
colleagues, fo r it ten d * to ^ over ,tpriman
fund sym.
elder urged sym-
of his
of his aesthetic
aesthetic quest
q u est ra ratherj than brood over-
iongings- an • 'tely p
exq uisitc-ly
exquisi P *j aS an
force
force ororthethe basiso fofh .s
b asis hiss spiritual
p a f " * longings.
* genius a » ! °
- d aesthetic
Je H c creativity .as if
shaping itself,
itse ,
Keats
Keats saw sawthe the se secret
cre t oof f «creative
**• genius
n a tu re asand a ^ ^
that. was
wasi ah»P' % iden<
.-evident
pathy with
w ith nnature. Apprehending
a tu r e . A p p re . m nature
of life hension- qua^ rem-,r14-55
o m c n t' 0an
Pathy progressive momen
. with important
a philosophical remarks
ever-increasing
ever-increasing aand nd w ith this PP
Keats
Keats ininfused
fu sed mmosto s t o off hhis
lS Ppoetry re i P
ggS/ w o re
in his
in hisepepistolary
isto lary s eself-corisciousness,
lf- c o n s c io u we
 Readings on Literory I UornrvCriticism
191
2»)2 Readingson . ct on the the creativ
creative e im agina-
imagina-
..
and its
0 f the breeze and it* 11 t lin
impact on afe_
e«Isliety
eviv, iis
itsyhhteere evo kaeed
the
ore evwok yda.. :D
Or ne
n
The Romantic symbol of the breeze
The Romantic sy W orJsW orth,
lion, common in Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Sse Coleridge, an gitivity to the w ay air af-
tmn, commoi ■ obviously express” K
also notit.ses that Keats is obviously expressing
0 . and
an d psycho-pathology,
psycho-pathology,
physio -
connects with and points to the therapeu-
fects bodily health. It therefore ,
which
w hich K Keats
eats had had stustudied
died in in hhis
is medical .training e to th e b o d y a n d soul. s o u l. This is eco-
e co -
tic or ppharmaceutical
tic or h arm aceu tical im importance
p o rtan ce o fofmnature
d to thec bodyo n n e cand t io n , b u t b r in g s to
therapeutic
th erap eu tic pperspective
ersp ectiv e isisn notot j u just
s t aaCColeridgean
o connection, but brings to
mind post-Novalian philosophy. , burg 1 7 7 2 -1 8 0 1 ) w as very preoc-
Novalis (Friedrich Freiherr
Novalis (Friedrich Freiherr von H von Hardenburg 1772-4801)
of mature in human was life,
very
life, a cele-
cele-
cupied with with the the pharmaceutical
pharmaceuticalope operations of of nature
m a n in . H e ad o p ted a hom e-
bration of of both
boththe psychic and
thepsychic and somasomatic nature of cg man. o f natUHe re an d h u m an
nature
opathic tradition to explain is ^ P ^ aceutical p rin cip le, a poison poison
consciousness, stressing
consciousness, stressing that nat that nature is a^I pharmaceutical principle,
nuisite for w h o len ess and the a the
and a healer. He saw illness as a positive prerequisite
and a healer. He saw illness as a P ° s,t^ P ^ £ * e p h arm aceu tical principle. for wholeness principle.
mbodiment of the ambivalence of the pharmaceutical
soul
soul as the eembodiment
as the in th is ph enom en on.
There
There is is aa connection
connectionbetw between Novaiisanu
een Novaiis andisko Keats. in this rphenomenon.
, ,
121 In fact, Keats's broodings over nature actually point to a number of con-
121 In f a " . Keats’s brooding* over nature actually p e n t to a n u m b er o f con­
cerns that
that are intricately and
n ce s and h is phi-
h. Is
cerns intricately related
relatedto tohis
hisstudy
study of ofm edical sc.e
medical sciences phi­
losophy of
losophy of the
the imagination.
imagination.The Thenature
natureofofthe theRRomantic
om antic im ag in atio n here is
imagination
its aesthetic
aesthetic implications
implicationsand andhow howititconnects
connectsinextricably
inextricablywwith it his is progres-
progres-
sive philosophy
philosophy of oflife.
life.TheTheconcern
concern here
here is is
not
notunrelated
unrelatedtotoKKeats's eats s im agina­
imagina-
tive view
tive view of of art,
art,expressed
expressedininaaletter lettertotoGGeorge
eorge and andTThomas hom as K ea ts, dated
Keats,
December 21,
December 21,1817.
1817.

T he excellence of every
The every Art
Art isisits
itsintensity,
intensity,cacapable
p a b le o of
f mmaking
a k in g aall
ll ddisagreeables
is a g re e a b le s
evaporate, from their
evaporate, from theirbein
being
g ininclose
closerelation
relationship
sh ip wwith
ith BBeauty
e a u ty aand
nd T Truth
ru th (John
(Jo h n
K eats: Letters, 370)
Keats: 370)

Keats's notion
Keats's notion ofofbeauty
beautyand andtruth
truth isishighly
highly inclusive.
inclusive.TThat h at is,
is, it
it bblends
lend s allall
life's experiences
life's experiences or or apprehensions,
apprehensions,negativ negative e ororppositive,
o sitiv e , in to a holistic
into h o listic
vision. Art andand nature,
nature, therefore,
therefore,are areseen
seenas astherapeutic
therapeutic in in function.
function.
Keats's views
Keats's views on on nature
nature are
arenotnottotobe
befound
foundonly onlyininhis
his poetry
poetry bbutu t also in
Writing to
his letters. Writing toTom
Tom(1818),
(1818), hehe associates
associates naturewwith
nature poetic inspiration
ith poetic inspiration
and expression. other letters
expression. In other letters to
to George
George andand Thom
Thomas as Keats
K eats (1817),
(1817), he talks
of the negative
of the capabilityof
negative capability ofthe
thepoet
poetthat
that calls
calls for
for aa sy
synaesthetic
n aesth etic and em- em-
pathic vision in life,
life, to
to Reynolds
Reynolds (1818),
(1818),he heasserts
assertsthe
theconviction
conviction that all all de-
de­
partments of knowledge are to be seen as excellence
of knowledge are to be seen as excellence and calculated and calculated towards
a great whole,
w hole, to
to John
John Taylor (1818),he
Taylor (1818), heoutlines
outlines certain
certain axiom
axioms s of poetry
among
among which
which is
is the
the notion
notion that
that if
if poetry
poetry com
comes es not
not naturally
naturally as as the
the leaves
leaves to to
a tree, it had better not not come
come at all. All these
all. All these connect
connect the imagination
im agination with with
nature-consciousness and
nature-consciousness and dem onstrate an
demonstrate an affinity
affinity w ith the
with the Plotinist
Plotinist or or
Spinozist
Spinozist monism
m onism inherent
inherent in Wordsworth
W ordsw orth and Coleridge.
C olerid ge. But But thethe major
major
issue lies in apprehending nature as part of
lies in of the
the creative
creative process rather than than
adherence to nature's spirituality.
the poet's adherence spirituality.
 11(..itlings
inH»onurn I.jj,.
Liturdry
r‘,ry C.ritjt is,,,
297
,errito Li ha_ e, tii
so a nother
in:aginett
argument on the Aut
tigiinti
ichtionn of k
A_.t.tt:rtintilit."a i.v.e and p.1.1iloso c..,,,nd to
ll► lit:I:li]rer to 1.
ix' as a sli I-1 a death into life Suffice
:: :II" yelilb!,:ii(i's)i.i'r:v
e,illicl}.(sr)i:jitinrii:la:
with cJeath, which to hip-
;:itioo .a.1: 1) r henom enon .4l'ici
is :
a wel
11: 1:,diti Ili' c
moment of existence, since he u - { onie relief rather
ecologltnepti.ve
Itiii i141.t:il ri...:sitt-c,..1('.Irfiflit,:,enatil.,L,er,xK
ist.t.ta5ntsceis. a tternptingt dc-
centre the tradition ii n
v To Pt" .,,..10 of the seasons to whichpar ti cular mofcharacteristic fea‘tur(e:
tio , of t be cv '
a4crioe--•--- ci Not only is Autumn a seas r i pe ness and
lov-.0All bet then ' hot..e
he r seasons can philosophically or metaphorically fruitful-
T.ez.. serve the
of one another from a creative and aesthetic perspective. That
„..1nie OS .f,e r artistically inspiring while engendering deep philosophical
is, theY c.- 1 matters of life and death, each season can be spring as well as
d .iritua . .
The critical stance taken here is that ecology has a mutually enriching
an
death relationship with ethics and psychology. Dissociating any
re• warding
and i human activity from ecological diversity seems impossible.
reaira
alm iOn
01or the Grasshopper s s h o p p e r and a n d Cricket'
C ric k e t'and
and'Bright
'BrightStar, Star,would
would II were were sted-
** 'On the art' C raare two^of GfKeats's
K e a ts 'ssonnets
so n n ets that
that necessitate
necessitate criticalinvestiga-
critical investiga-
fasts t ho u
-t aas th °u art are to the th e present
p r e s e n tdebate
d eb a teononnature.
nature.InInthe theformerformerpoem, poem,
reference
on .with advances statements
with sta te m e n tsthat th a tgog obeyond
b ey o n dthethe deceptive
deceptive simplicity
simplicity of of the the
geat.0
nfjeM'S title:
!2m 's title:
rr The poetry of f parth
earthisisnever
never dead.
dead:
n e p0euThe
When thebirds
alltne are ffaint withth
ait
n wit hott sun,
thehoun sun,
When all vbirds
i aretreeS/,aavoihe
v o icci
ewe ll r
w ill ru n
And hide in
And hide in ccooling trees th e new-mown
oo i g new-mown m mead;
ead ;
From hedge to hedge about the
Fr0ffl heh
That is dgG ra ssh o p p e r's-h e takes the lead
the Grasshopper's—he
That is the Gras PP_ hag never done
In Summer's
In Summer s luxu y, luxury,---he has never
tjred out donewith fun
With his delights; for when tired out with fun
Wi*hrests
? a at ease
, eeag s e bbeneath
e n e a th ssome
om e p pleasant
le a s a n t heed.
h ee d .
He rests at ea reasing never.
never.
The poetryofofear
The poetry earth is ceasing when the frost
On a lone winter e v e n in g , hen
On
a lone winter evening, w the frost
^ gtove there shnUs
Has wrought a silence,
Has w rou ght a s ile n c ,
from the stove there shrills
th in c r e a s in g ever,
The Cricket's song, in warmth
The C rick et's s o n g , i
increasing ever,
sin eSS h a lf lo st,
And
A
And seems
ndseem
seem s wtotoo one in drowsiness
---------
n e •" c half
g r a ssylost,
h ills.
The
The GGrasshopper's
rassh o p p er's among
among
The G rassh o p p er s a m o i g some grassy hills.• ^ exhausted
exhausted is is a ^
be
,t ._ t flao n n p tfV
The poet's
e poet's ecological
ecological assertionthat
assertion that thethe P°*~*P[a ot have
poetry ofn nearth enough
enough of
cannot
have of the
the great
great
we cannot
^iteration o f the
reverberation the SSpinozist idea that ™ inspired by any season, give" th
p in o z ist idea
treasures
asures of nature. P oetic com p ositionacan
of nature. Poetic composition be inspired
generative
ca andby
^and any season,
creative
creative spring.given
spring- This the
re-
prehension that be
apprehension thatanany
y seaso
lready
season n can be a geabove, takes
mentioned
can takesa aseemingly
seeminglysimplistic
simf
rrent thematic atic iissue,
?matic ssue, aalread y m entioned
menuox
The grasshopper anda*•-cricket
b o j e,, ^are
. are natui*'s
enature's
naturc =>—e,em In
elements ^ com
that-
current th emin this poem . T h e grasshopp er and seasons.
season. In com
tension in
di-..nension his poem
in tthis poem.. T h e grasshop p er
nt tim
time axes in terms
^ the changing
ofUK>nd
the changing aesthetics and nature,
’ nature,
aland convey
convey Aifft,rpnt
different
differe tim ee axes
axes min ter
tenJ?^ blend
lend of0f
0 f aesthetics
aesthetics a ^
an> ^
Spirarisolnand sees tne
the
to th
the n ich
e ni g tin eale p
. htingale
nightingale o em ,
poem, one sees . d spiritual dispos
time an insight
insighttotophilosophlicalband
philosophical andspiritual P dispositions.
andatatthe thesame
same time an ’n<