An essay on the New Critics and New
Criticism of the twentieth century.
During the late twenties
and early thirties of the present century, New Criticism was born and cultivated.
Sociological or Marxian criticism is regarded as a litterateur, who is
considered as a product of the society in which he lived. Generally New Critics
are opposed to the biographical, historical, sociological and comparative
approach of conventional criticism. Similarly, they reject the traditional
division of literature into periods and groups for the purpose of criticism.
Their criticism is Basic
or Ontological, and not Extrinsic. A poem which is a piece of literature is the
thing in itself, with a definite entity of its own separate both from the poet
and the socio-cultural milieu in which it is produced. The
music of a poem must be taken into account to arrive at its meaning. Words must
be studied with reference to their sound, and their emotional and symbolic
significance.
New Criticism is mainly written,
and the new critics have purified valuable service to literature by their study
and interpretation of literary classics. The poem is the thing, and it must be
studied in itself, but he is against the ‘lemon-squeezer’ critics who press the
words too closely. The term ‘new criticism’ was first used by Joel E. Spingam
in his address at Columbia University, it came in general use after John Crow
Ransom published his book, The New Criticism in 1941. And I.
A. Richards provided the theoretical foundations.
Contribution of the New Critics:
The contribution of the new critics and their
concentration upon linguistic expression has benefited the study of poetry. The
self-evaluation of the New Critics during the past few years, and the
indications that they are increasingly ready to widen their study, are
encouraging signs.
The Basic Views of
the New Critics: The basic
doctrines and principles view of the New Critics are summarized in the bellow:
(a)
Permission: The critic must not permit himself to be
hampered and narrow-minded by any literary theories.
(b)
Concentration: A poem, or a work of art, is the thing in
itself to the new critics. The critic must concentrate all attention on it and
illuminated it.
(c)
Function of the critics: The function of the
critic is to analyze, understand and value a work of art. A poem is separated
from the poet and his social environment; it is a certain object in itself and
must be studied as such. The critic must dedicate himself to close stylistic
study, free by any unnecessary concerns.
(d)
Irrelevant works of literature: Moral and religious
considerations, social, political and environmental conditions, the details of
the poet’s biography, are all irrelevant and are all obstacles in the way of a
real understanding of a work of literature. The literary critic must approach
the work with an open mind, ready to study it.
(e)
Form and content:
A poem has both form and content. Both should be closely studied and analyzed
before a true understanding of its meaning becomes possible.
(f)
The form of poetry: Words, images, rhythm, metre, etc. create
the form of poetry and they are to be closely studied. A poem is a living whole
and these different parts are inter-connected and these inter-connections, the
reaction of one upon the other, and upon the total meaning, is to be closely
followed, and examined.
(g)
Important elements: The study of words, their arrangement,
the way in which they act and react on each other is all important. Words,
besides their literal significance, also have emotional, associative, and
symbolic significance, and only close application and analysis can bring out
their total meaning. The new critics, in their minute scrutiny of words, and
the structure of poetry, have propounded different theories.
(h) Poetic language:
Poetry is considered as the communication and language is considered as the
meaning of communication, so the New Critics seek to understand the full
meaning of a poem through a study of poetic language. So, the words of the New
Critics are all important, and their study is the only key to the poetic
meaning of the poem.
(i) Different:
The New Critics are opposed both to the historical and comparative methods of
criticism. Historical considerations are extraneous to the work of literature,
and comparison of works of art is to be resorted to with great caution. So their methods, their techniques and their
forms are bound to be different.
Limitations and Shortcomings of New
Criticism:
(a)
Pre-occupied with textual analysis: The
New Critics are too much pre-occupied with textual analysis. Their excessive
pre-occupation with words, images, paradox, irony, etc., makes them forget that
the poem is an organic whole. In their pre occupation with the parts they
ignore the beauty of the whole.
(b)
Their Approach: Their approach is dogmatic and narrow. According to them,
it is through Textual study and analyses alone that truth can be arrived at.
However, there are a number of other approaches—the historical, the sociological,
the psychological, etc., and each has its own value and significance. All
possible ways should be tried to arrive at the full truth about a poem.
(c) Functions:
A work of art has two functions, artistic and moral.
While the older criticism erred in its over-emphasis on the moral concern of
literature, the New Critics go to the other extreme in their entire neglect of
it. Art cannot be divorced entirely from life.
(d) An art-form: Literature is certainly
an art-form, but it has other values also, besides the literary. Stylistic
analysis can establish only the literary quality of a work, to determine its
greatness. Other methods are also necessary.
(e) Documentary approach:
The textual or documentary approach may work well with some categories, but
it is not equally effective with all categories. There are
different kinds of poetry, and different critical techniques are needed for
their evaluation. The same technique cannot be effective both with the lyric
and the epic.
(f) A poem is an artistic structure: A
poem is certainly an artistic structure, and it must be studied as such. The
understanding of the poetic meaning of a poem is essential, and textual and
structural study is an effective tool for the purpose. But social and
biographical factors may also determine its meaning and knowledge of them may
also help the critic to brighten the work under study.
(g) Fault:
The New Critics are wrong in ignoring the study of the history of literary
criticism. A historical study shows that various critical tools have been used
effectively in different ages and countries, and their use may be worthwhile in
the present also. A historical study is the only way of understanding the
comparative merits of the rival schools of criticism.
Edited by: Mahbub Murad. Dhaka, Bangladesh. Cell: +8801919879309, +8801761519111. Email: Mahbub_murad@yahoo.com
