Literary Criticism: Purpose and Method

[Ellen (tellyouwhat)]

At the start of the thread Ellen stated that we should discuss “works of literary criticism, preferably (but not limited to) criticism and analysis by authoritative voices in arts and letters...”
I don’t think I’m an authoritative voice, despite your mentioning earlier elsewhere that I was, but I would hope that my opinions, in discussing “works of literature” (and, perhaps peripherally, “arts”, unless we drift significantly OT) were understood to be my personal thoughts, and nobody is obliged to agree with them.

If my thoughts wandered a bit I apologise...

I give everyone here credit for understanding the topic of this thread, and that we don't need to split hairs and explain that clearly our own opinions are part of the discussion.

I give everyone here credit for understanding that this thread is not a re-hash of "were they gay" or "elements and themes of BBM" or "Character Analysis of Ennis del Mar."

Carry on.

Engaging in “critical appraisal” of a work (to determine its merit/s) surely involves analysis of only what was presented, and the creator’s decision about that should be respected.
Otherwise “The centre cannot hold...”  

I agree that a critic or analyst has only the piece as it's presented -- in literature-- to work with.  (and I agree a film is meant to be taken as presented too.)  I presume the author presented what s/he wanted me to see and know.  

Especially the prose in literary short stories should be tight and no word should be there that the author hasn't considered leaving in or taking out.  I believe that is the case with BBM which is why I trust the intention of the author so much.

Regarding the passage about the mountains and the krumholz in BBM (or however she spelled it) that is a bit of dramatic pacing (in addition to being beautifully descriptive of Wyoming).  The pacing (slowing down) of the story is relevant because of how much happens in the beginning of the story.  In reading the story, by the time Ennis and Alma were divorced I was reeling with all the action in just a few pages (sex on the mountain! Ennis and Jack say goodbye! Ennis has the dry heaves!  Four years and no sign of life!  A postcard from Jack!  The Reunion!  The Motel!) and so forth.  And even the Thanksgiving scene where Ennis nearly mops the floor with Alma.

So then the author slows things down a bit to show us a close-up of interaction between Ennis and Jack, (get beaver fever doin' that) and the scenery, which is part of all the stories, and it leads up to --- late and unexpected for the reader -- the confrontation (wish I knew how to quit you).

Which I thought, when I read it first, was the climax.

But it's not.  The climax of the short story is the discovery of the shirts.

So regarding the mountain scenery passage, my explanation is that it is dramatic pacing.

[Paul029]

I give everyone here credit for understanding the topic of this thread, and that we don't need to split hairs and explain that clearly our own opinions are part of the discussion.

Well, I wasn’t sure, so—thank you. 

I give everyone here credit for understanding that this thread is not a re-hash of "were they gay" or "elements and themes of BBM" or "Character Analysis of Ennis del Mar."

That’s a relief. 

I agree that a critic or analyst has only the piece as it's presented -- in literature-- to work with.  (and I agree a film is meant to be taken as presented too.)  I presume the author presented what s/he wanted me to see and know.  

Especially the prose in literary short stories should be tight and no word should be there that the author hasn't considered leaving in or taking out.  ~ snip ~

I concur.

[AZ.bbm]

*I meant that while film exists (in celluloid), and occurs in time, as does music, and reading a book, a film and a book are "fixed" permanently—whereas performance of music isn't, unless we consider the printed score.
Does that make sense?

Thanks for the discussion, Paul.
I thought we were discussing the creative process, not the creative product.


Also, I was referring to the process that authors and producers use to determine what to leave out (edit), rather than any imputed deficiencies.

[AZ.bbm]

I have another question to which I've not yet received a satisfying answer.

I don't know on which thread it should be posted, but it is in regard to the boys' wordless sex, specifically the use of the expletive, "goddamned," by the narrator, in the phrase "not a goddamned word"..

Where on the forum would this phrase be discussed?

[garyd]

I have another question to which I've not yet received a satisfying answer.

 it is in regard to the boys' wordless sex, specifically the use of the expletive, "goddamned," by the narrator, in the phrase "not a goddamned word"..

Verfremdungseffekt

let the satisfaction begin.

[Sandy]

The recent New Yorker Magazine includes an essay on Edith Wharton on the occasion of her 150th birthday. He claims that she is not a person with whom one would ordinarily sympathize, and that that makes her big novels (Age of Innocence, House of Mirth, Custom of the Country) hard to sympathize with. Then he goes on to say why we should sympathize with the novels.

His evidence that we shouldn't sympathize with her is that she came from a privileged background. It looks like a literary critical set-up to me. Unlike what we had been discussing earlier, Frantzen, the author of the article, encourages readers to identify with characters.

Any thoughts?

[Paul029]

The recent New Yorker Magazine includes an essay on Edith Wharton on the occasion of her 150th birthday. He claims that she is not a person with whom one would ordinarily sympathize, and that that makes her big novels (Age of Innocence, House of Mirth, Custom of the Country) hard to sympathize with. Then he goes on to say why we should sympathize with the novels.

Does it have a link, Sandy?
I've read only The House of Mirth (love that title  ), but it'd be interesting to read the essay.

His evidence that we shouldn't sympathize with her is that she came from a privileged background. It looks like a literary critical set-up to me. Unlike what we had been discussing earlier, Frantzen, the author of the article, encourages readers to identify with characters.

Any thoughts?

Which ones, I wonder?

[Sandy]

Sorry, I don't have a link. I read the essay in a physical copy of the magazine. Yes, "House of Mirth" is a great title; it's taken from a Biblical phrase. I imagine Frantzen wanted folks to identify with Lily Bart and the other heroines of the major novels.

[Ellen (tellyouwhat)]

Does it have a link, Sandy?
I've read only The House of Mirth (love that title  ), but it'd be interesting to read the essay.
Which ones, I wonder?

There's a New Yorker website, you might be able to google it, but they might ask you to register.  I subscribe so I'm registered, I don't know how hard it is to see their content.

I'm going to look up this article, although I'm eternally behind on my New Yorker reading.

[Sandy]

I picked up the magazine over the weekend at Barnes & Noble, so I assume it is a recent issue.

[Ellen (tellyouwhat)]

The recent New Yorker Magazine includes an essay on Edith Wharton on the occasion of her 150th birthday. He claims that she is not a person with whom one would ordinarily sympathize, and that that makes her big novels (Age of Innocence, House of Mirth, Custom of the Country) hard to sympathize with. Then he goes on to say why we should sympathize with the novels.

His evidence that we shouldn't sympathize with her is that she came from a privileged background. It looks like a literary critical set-up to me. Unlike what we had been discussing earlier, Frantzen, the author of the article, encourages readers to identify with characters.

Any thoughts?

Sandy, I read the article and I have to say I thought it seemed a bit contrived to me.  It leaves me wondering whether Jonathan Franzen really felt committed to this view, or whether he was merely writing about Edith Wharton on the occasion of her 150th birthday.

Oh well, giving him the benefit of the doubt-- after all Franzen is one of my favorite novelists and usually his essays in New Yorker are fabulous reads --

I would say that identifying with fictional characters in the way we usually think of it, outside the forum, is probably necessary.  But usually we aren't talking about the need to absolutely find a parallel in your own life.  As a woman I empathize with Ennis and Jack as human beings who are experiencing gut-wrenching physical and emotional love and heartache-- and I was induced into Brokeback fever upon my first reading of the story, feeling so sad that Jack died. 

I think good fiction needs to tie into something universal for readers.