New Criticism

New Criticism: 

New Criticism Steve Wood TCCC

The Fugitives: 

The Fugitives A group of writers, poets, scholars, and students gathered at Vanderbilt University in the early 1920s. They shared common interests in literature and politics. They called themselves “the Fugitives.”

Members: 

Members This group included John Crowe Ransom, Donald Davidson, Allen Tate, and Robert Penn Warren. They represented a unique combination of writers and scholars united in their desire to see the study of literature gain respect at the university. Keep in mind that there are often intense and bitter rivalries between departments on a university campus (I saw two old professors almost come to blows over a classroom once – pretty funny).

Motivations: 

Motivations They wanted to elevate the study of literature, which had lagged in reputation behind the sciences. They felt that focusing too much on history, religion, or politics in literary study made literature a secondary aspect of culture. They wanted to make the study of literature more objective, less emotional. They believed that would elevate the study of literature. Being writers and poets themselves, they wanted literary study to focus on the works, not the lives of the authors.

The Problem with Biography: 

The Problem with Biography That last point is an important one. For example, the study of Poe’s work often is sidetracked into a discussion of his personal life (think Charlie Sheen with an extra helping of weird). The Fugitives were frustrated by the prospect of someone ignoring their work in favor of a discussion of their personal issues.

New Criticism: 

New Criticism So, the Fugitives decided to embark on a new kind of literary study – new criticism. The term “new criticism” comes from John Crowe Ransom’s book The New Criticism (1941).

Hearts and Minds: 

Hearts and Minds Along with several other American critics (in particular, two guys named Wimsatt and Beardsley), the Fugitives set out to change the study of literature from the ground up; that is, they decided to write basic textbooks for literary study. Cleanth Brooks and Robert Penn Warren produced Understanding Poetry (1938) and Understanding Fiction (1943). Their arguments eventually became the dominant approach to literary study in the United States in the 1940s, 1950s, and early 1960s.

Four Fallacies: 

Four Fallacies One of the most influential ideas of their movement was an elaboration of the various fallacies (mistakes, errors) that occur in literary study. Affective Fallacy – It is a mistake to speak of the effect of a work of literature on the reader. That is a personal and subjective measure unfit of objective literary study. Biographical Fallacy – It is a mistake to include a discussion of the life of the author. The work should stand on its own; the life of the author is not the work. Intentional Fallacy – It is a mistake to speak of the author’s intent; we do not know what an author intended to do. Rather than speculate, we should focus on the work itself. Genetic Fallacy – It is a mistake to discuss the cultural or historical context of the work.

Objective Criticism: 

Objective Criticism New Criticism is also called objective criticism; it seeks to make the study of literature objective, instead of being a personal, subjective speculation. This meant the study of literature would theoretically be on a par with the sciences and social sciences, which are factual and objective (at least in theory).

Dissecting a Story or Poem: 

Dissecting a Story or Poem New Critical analysis means dissecting a poem or story like dissecting a frog. The work is broken down into its parts, examining how the parts fit together and how each part works

“Nothing Is Very Much Fun Anymore”: 

“Nothing Is Very Much Fun Anymore”

The Problem with Objectivity: 

The Problem with Objectivity Of course, making the study of literature more objective and scientific has a potential disadvantage: dissecting a poem can take away much of what people enjoy about poetry. Also, the life of the author is a useful and potentially illuminating consideration – the work of Wilfred Owen, for example.