John Crow Ransom
“Criticism,
Inc.” Part 1
a. There
are three types of people who have some understanding of criticizing.
i. The
Artist – His understanding is more intuitive than objective and he doesn’t have
formal training in theory.
ii. The
Philosopher – Can describe the functions of fine art, but his understanding is
general and doesn’t have knowledge of specific works.
iii. The
University Professor – He is learned, but not critical and not committed to
making judgments.
b. Ransom’s
believes University Professors are best suited to create literary standards.
c. Criticism
must:
i. Become
more objective, more scientific.
1. It’ll
never be an exacting science, but moving towards objective standards enable
better understanding.
2 “Criticism,
Inc.” Part 2
a. People
need to be able to study literature itself.
b. Believes
the creation of systematic literary criticism would be revolutionary and
spectacular.
c. Criticism
– The attempt to define and enjoy the aesthetic or characteristic values of
literature.
d. Not
anybody can criticize.
i. It’s
not for those who require definitive answers.
ii. It’s
a balance of being critical and specific at the same.
iii. It’s
hard to critique new works as they haven’t stood the test of time.
3. “Criticism,
Inc.” Part 3
a. English
Departments are best suited to communicate the understanding of literary art.
i. Criticism
is public and speaks to universals.
ii. Appreciation
is individualistic and private.
b. We
need to adopt a mind frame of when the work was published to critique.
i. It’s
difficult and problematic to eliminate modern thought when critiquing and older
work.
c. Criticism
allows us understand more about the work including “dialectical possibilities.”
4. “Criticism,
Inc.” Part 4
a. It’s
easier to describe criticism by what it is not.
i. It’s
not a series of personal judgments. It
requires objectivity on the work itself, not the immediate effect on the
viewer.
ii. It’s
not the words we use to describe the work.
iii. It’s
not a synopsis or paraphrasing of the work.
The plot is an abstract from the content.
iv. It
is not a historical study. History can
be used in analyzing the work, but a comparative mechanical approach does not
do it justice.
5. “Criticism,
Inc.” Part 5
a. The
motives of the reviewer are as mixed as the performers.
i. The
critique evaluates the presentation, the interpretation, and provides
criticism.
ii. There
is no authority for criticism.
Works Cited
Ransom,
John Crowe. “Criticism, Inc.” .
The Norton Anthology of Theory and
Criticism. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch et
al. 2nd ed. New York: W.W.Norton & Co., 2010. 971-982.
Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment