|
| |
New
Criticism Explained
|
New
Criticism was a highly influential school of Formalist criticism that flourished from the
40s to late 60s.New Criticism
Occurred Partially in Response To:
 | Biographical Criticism that understood art primarily as a
reflection of the author's life (sometimes to the point that the texts themselves weren't
even read!). |
 | Competition for dollars and students from sciences in academia. |
 | New forms of mass literature and literacy, an increasingly
consumerist society and the increasingly visible role of commerce, mass media, and
advertising in people's lives. |
|
New Criticism Tends to Emphasize:
 | The text as an autotelic artifact, something complete with in
itself, written for its own sake, unified in its form and not dependent on its relation to
the author's life or intent, history, or anything else. |
 | The formal and technical properties of work of art. |
|
New Critical Assumptions:
 | The critic's job is to help us appreciate the technique and form
of art and the mastery of the artist. |
 | That the "Western tradition" is an unbroken, internally
consistent set of artistic conventions and traditions going back to ancient Greece and
continuing up to this day, and that good art participates in and extends these traditions.
Similarly, criticism's job is to uphold these traditions and protect them from
encroachments from commercialism, political posturing, and vulgarity. |
 | That there are a finite number of good texts (a notion now often
tied to "the canon" of texts traditionally taught). The closer that a text comes
to achieving an ideal unity, where each element contributes to an overall effect, the more
worthy it is of discussion. |
 | Studying literature is an intrinsically edifying process. It hones
the sensibilities and discrimination of students and sets them apart from the unreflective
masses. |
 | That "cream rises," and works of genius will eventually
be "vindicated by posterity." |
 | That there is a firm and fast distinction between "high"
art and popular art. |
 | That good art reflects unchanging, universal human issues,
experiences, and values. |
 | Technical definitions and analyses are vital to understanding
literature. The text's relationship to a world that extends beyond it is of little
interest. |
|
Critics Associated With It:
John Crowe Ransom, Allen Tate, Robert Penn Warren, and Cleanth Brooks. New Critics also
frequently looked to the work and criticism of T.S. Eliot and the essays of Matthew Arnold
for inspiration. |
Criticisms Sometimes Made of New Criticism:
 | That it's emphases on technique, unity of effect, and the
autotelic status of art works best on the lyric poem, but has problems with larger, more
historically recent forms like the novel. |
 | That it makes the Western tradition out to be more unified than it
is by ignoring diversity and contradictory forces within it, and more monadic than it is
by ignoring the exchange between non-western and western cultures (Aristotle, for
instance, central to new critical concepts, was introduced to medieval Europe via the
Islamic world). |
 | That artistic standards of value are variable and posterity is
fickle. Particular pieces of art are viewed as important because they do important
cultural work, represent values that segments of the culture (say editors and English
professors) believe are of vital import, or help us understand our history. |
 | That the values New Critics celebrated were neither unchanging nor
universal, but instead reflected their own, historically and experientially specific
concerns, values and ambitions. |
 | That context is just as important as form to understanding a work
of art. |
|
|