In K. Burke’s book titled The Philosophy of Literary Form, Burke attempts to explain literary form by spinning up a fictitious tale located in one of the book’s passages. In this story, he asks the reader to imagine oneself entering a parlor, attempting to comprehend an ongoing debate that has captivated everyone in the premises. Eventually, the reader understands enough and speaks up; participating in this dispute, but after endless discussion, nightfall approaches and the reader departs, having given his two cents. Burke created this story in order to explain literary form, because a story can be told in many different ways. However, the passage can be interpreted to relate to the inner workings of the real world, or in other words, the
government. The protagonist of Burke’s story can be seen as a newly elected head of state that is following the footsteps of others before their own; the reason being that “others have long preceded you...engaged in a heated discussion” (Burke 2-4). The discussion itself could refer to common issues that societies might face, such as poverty, legalization of abortion; basically anything that has once been presided upon but has not been solved as of today. The strangers participating in the debate can be looked at as lower ranking members of the government, attempting to aid the head of state in current affairs by signaling their disapproval or approval of certain things. As time goes on, these common issues that societies face will lead on to more and more debates branching off from one another, and eventually the head of state will have to resign because the “discussion is interminable...you must depart” (Burke, 15-16), resulting in a call for a new election in order to get a fresh and completely new opinion. In conclusion, Burke’s passage in The Philosophy of Literary Form encourages the reader to interpret the section in many different ways and draw a conclusion that is purely opinionated, due to the nature of explaining literary form.
Carver, Raymond. “Cathedral.” Reading Literature and Writing Argument. Ed. Missy James and Alan Merickel. Fourth ed. Boston: Longman, 2011. 513-23. Print.
Grafton, Sue. "Full Circle." The Language of Literature. Ed. Arthur N. Applebee. Evanston, IL: McDougal Littell, 2002. 743-53. Print.
Tan, Amy. “Two Kinds.” Exploring Literature: Writing and Arguing About Fiction, Poetry, Drama and The Essay.4th e. Ed. Frank Madden. New York: Pearson Longman, 2009. 253-261. Print.
I frankly confess that I have, as a general thing, but little enjoyment of it, and that it has never seemed to me to be, as it were, a first-rate literary form. . . . But it is apt to spoil two good things – a story and a moral, a meaning and a form; and the taste for it is responsible for a large part of the forcible-feeding writing that has been inflicted upon the world. The only cases in whi...
Heberle, Mark. "Contemporary Literary Criticism." O'Brien, Tim. The Things They Carried. Vol. 74. New York, 2001. 312.
Lipking, Lawrence I, Stephen Greenblatt, and M H. Abrams. The Norton Anthology of English Literature: Volume 1c. New York: W.W. Norton & Co, 2006. Print.
Frye, Northrop. “The Archetypes of Literature.” Criticism Twenty Major Statements. Ed. Charles Kaplan. Bedford/St. Martins. 2000. 476-486.
Burke, Kenneth. "Literature as Equipment for Living." The Critical Tradition (1998): n. pag. Web. 7 May 2014. .
Literature emerges as an assemblage of external influence, literary form, readership, and authorial intent (Tyson 136). New Criticism asserts that only the analysis of literary form, being concrete and specific examples that exist within the text (135), can accurately assess a literary work. New Criticism discounts authorial agency and cultural force that informs the construction of a given text. New Critics believe that these sources of external evidence produce intentional fallacy, the flawed acceptance of the author’s intention as the text’s true meaning, and affective fallacy, the confusion of the text with the emotions it produces (136-37). Author’s intent, emotions provoked, and external influences of culture are indicated by New Criticism to result in chaos if used to assess literature (137). However, in Carol Ann Duffy’s “Little Red Cap”, such factors excluded by New Criticism aim to reinforce and embody complexity and wholeness unachieved by New Criticism’s limited assessment of “formal elements” (137). Due to New Criticism’s focus on objective form and its exclusion of all outside influences like authorship, readership, and culture, New Criticism fails to accurately assess Duffy’s “Little Red Cap”, thus showing the critique’s limitations as a universally applicable lens.
Steiner, Wendy. The Colors of Rhetoric: Problems in the Relation Between Modern Literature and Painting. Chicago and London: U of Chicago P, 1982. 93.
A Fable for Tomorrow by Carson How does the Author of the following extracts use language to convey
Abrams, MH, et al. Eds. The Norton Anthology of English Literature. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1993.
Literature emerges from an amalgamation of external influence, literary form, readership, and authorial intent (Tyson 136). New Criticism asserts that only analysis of concrete and specific examples existing within the text can accurately assess literary work (135). New Criticism also discounts authorial agency and cultural force that informs construction of a text. New Critics believe sources of external evidence produce intentional fallacy, the flawed acceptance of the author’s intention as the text’s true meaning, and affective fallacy, the confusion of the text with the emotions it produces (136-37). This literary lens indicates that author’s intent, emotions prompted, and culture’s external influences result in chaos if used to assess literature (137). However, in Carol Ann Duffy’s “Little Red Cap”, these omitted factors contrarily aim to reinforce complexity and wholeness unachieved by New Criticism’s limited assessment of “formal elements” (137). Due to New Criticism’s focus on objective form and exclusion of outside influences such as authorship, readership, and culture, New Criticism fails to accurately assess Duffy’s “Little Red Cap”, thus showing the critique’s limitations as a universally applicable lens.
Barry’s book discusses the major literary criticisms and theories within them. Within this particular chapter, Barry focuses on Freud’s work on the unconscious and its influence on the actions of individuals. Barry draws concentrate on repression and the idea that this “forgetting” of conflicts contributes to desires ultimately being “forced” out. This source is especially important as it blatantly expresses the phenomenon that occurs with Arthur Dimmesdale. Peter Barry, an expert on literary theory, is a member of the Higher Education Academy, the Fellowship Committee of the English Association, and was recently elected as a Fellow of the English Association.
Admitting the vagueness which afflicts all criticism of novels, let us hazard the opinion that for us at this moment the form of fiction most in vogue more often misses than secures the thing we seek. Whether we call it life or spirit, truth or reality, this, the essential thing, has moved off, or on, and refuses to be contained any longer in such ill-fitting vestments as we provide.” (Modern 2431).