In Literary
Criticism, Bressler explains how the Russian Formalists developed a
scientific model based on devices for analyzing literature as an entity
separate from religious or political notions.
The Formalists were more concerned with the structure of a text than the
text’s subject matter. They also seemed
to consider literary language as different from and better than vernacular
language. I agree with the Formalists
that literature should be studied as its own field. However, I do not agree that a text’s content
should be deemed less important than a text’s form. I think that structure and content work
together to unify a work of writing.
I appreciate the way that New Critics concentrate on the
close reading of a poem. I agree with
Bressler that this approach is very useful for all types of readers. I also agree with the New Critics that
literature should be treated as an art and not be bound by scientific
analysis. Also, I think the New Critics
are wise about the intentional fallacy in regards to the poet. However, I do not think that historical or
biographical information should be completely ignored. I would argue that after a close reading of
the text where the reader discerns the meaning of the poems denotations and
connotations, then the reader may turn to historical or biographical
information since this information may be able to shed even more light on the
importance of the poem’s content and provide it even more contextual
perspectives.
No comments:
Post a Comment