The Formalistic Approach to Literature PDF

Preview

Summary

various approaches to Literature Formalistic is one of them...

Description

The Formalistic Approach to Literature The formalistic approach started with Aristotle (384-322 BC), who was a philosopher of Greece, he in his book The Poetics defined the form of tragedy. Aristotle asserted that the tragic hero is essentially nothing but noble individual who, nevertheless, manifested a flaw in character that caused him or her to fall from a high to a low position. The flaw in character (hamartia) was a kind of blindness or lack of insight that resulted from an arrogant pride (hubris). During the course of the tragic action, the hero came to a moment of insight-today it might be seen as an epiphany-that Aristotle called anagnorsis. Thus the tragic plot moves from blindness to insight. As an imitation (mimesis) of a serious action, the tragic plot had to be written in a dignified style. The effect of the tragedy was supposed to be catharsis or the purging of the emotions of pity and fear. All the elements of tragedy went together to produce a formal unity: this is the essence of the formalistic approach. The twentieth century formalistic approach, often referred to as the New Criticism, also assumes that a work of literary art is an organic unity in which every element contributes to the total meaning of the work. This approach is as old as literary criticism itself, but it was developed in the twentieth century by John Crowe Ransom (1888-1974), Allen Tate (18991979), T.S. Eliot (1888- 1965), and others. The formalist critic embraces an objective theory of art and examines plot, characterization, dialogue, and style to show how these elements contribute to the theme or unity of the literary work. Moral, historical, psychological, and sociological concerns are considered extrinsic to criticism and of secondary importance to the examination of craftsmanship and form. Content and form in a work constitute a unity, and it is the task of the critic to examine and evaluate the integrity of the work. Paradox, irony, dynamic tension, and unity are the primary values of formalist criticism. Because it posits an objective theory of art, there are two axioms central to formalist criticism. One of these is The Intentional Fallacy which states that an author's intention (plan or purpose) in creating a work of literature is irrelevant in analyzing or evaluating that work of literature because the meaning and value of a literary work must reside in the text itself, independent of authorial intent. Another axiom of formalist criticism is The Affective Fallacy which states that the evaluation of a work of art cannot be based solely on its emotional effects on the audience. Instead, criticism must concentrate upon the qualities of the work itself that

produce such effects. The formalistic approach stresses the close reading of the text and insists that all statements about the work be supported by references to the text. Although it has been challenged by other approaches recently, the New Criticism is the most influential form of criticism in this century. Formalism is intrinsic literary criticism because it does not require mastery of any body of knowledge besides literature. As an example of how formalistic criticism approaches literary works, consider Shakespeare's Macbeth. All the elements of the play form an organic whole. The imagery of the gradual growth of plants is contrasted with the imagery of leaping over obstacles: Macbeth is an ambitious character who cannot wait to grow gradually into the full stature of power, but, instead, must grasp everything immediately. A related series of clothing images reinforces this point: because Macbeth does not grow gradually, his clothing does not fit. At the end of the play, his "Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow" soliloquy drives home the point as we see, and pity, a man trapped in the lock-step pace of gradual time. Formalistic critics would immediately see that the repetition of the word "tomorrow" and the natural iambic stress on "and" enhance the meaninglessness and frustration that the character feels. References to blood and water pervade the play, and blood comes to symbolize the guilt Macbeth feels for murdering Duncan. Even the drunken porter's speech provides more than comic relief, for his characterization of alcohol as "an equivocator" is linked to the equivocation of the witches. Shakespeare's craftsmanship has formed an aesthetic unity in which every part is connected and in which the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

1. Formalism / New Criticism / Aristotelian •

Focusing on the elements such as the exposition, rising action, conflict, complication, climax, falling action, and conclusion (denouement).

•

This also includes characters, setting, theme, point of view, and literary devices employed by the author.

•

There is no need to bring in outside information about the history, politics, or society of the time, or about the author's life.

Terms used in New Criticism

•

tension - the integral unity of the poem which results from the resolution of opposites, often in irony of paradox

•

intentional fallacy - the belief that the meaning or value of a work may be determined by the author's intention

•

affective fallacy - the belief that the meaning or value of a work may be determined by its affect on the reader.

•

external form - rhyme scheme, meter, stanza form, etc.

•

objective correlative - originated by T.S. Eliot, •

this term refers to a collection of objects, situations, or events that instantly evoke a particular emotion. (symbolism)

•

Practitioners: I.A. Richards, William Emerson, John Crowe Ransom, Robert Penn Warren, Cleanth Brooks, Allen Tate, and others.

• Advantages of Formalism •

This approach can be performed without much research, and it emphasizes the value of literature apart from its context (in effect makes literature timeless).

•

Virtually all critical approaches must begin here.

• Disadvantages of Formalism •

The text is seen in isolation.

•

Formalism ignores the context of the work.(other factors)

•

It cannot account for allusions.

•

It tends to reduce literature to little more than a collection of rhetorical devices.

Examples •

A formalistic approach to John Milton's Paradise Lost would take into account the physical description of the Garden of Eden and its prescribed location, the symbols of hands, seed, and flower, the characters of Adam, Eve, Satan, and God, the epic similes and metaphors, and the point of view from which the tale is being told (whether it be the narrator's, God's, or Satan's).

•

But such an approach would not discuss the work in terms of Milton's own blindness, or in terms of his Puritan beliefs.

•

Therefore when the narrator says "what in me is dark / Illumine," a formalistic critic could not interpret that in light of Milton's blindness.

•

He would have to find its meaning in the text itself, and therefore would have to overlook the potential double-meaning....