Editing Literary criticism (section)

== History ==
=== Classical and medieval criticism ===
Literary criticism is thought to have existed as far back as the classical period.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Literary Theory {{!}} Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy|url=https://iep.utm.edu/literary/|access-date=1 December 2020|language=en-US|archive-date=27 November 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201127014400/https://iep.utm.edu/literary/|url-status=live}}</ref> In the 4th century BC [[Aristotle]] wrote the ''[[Poetics (Aristotle)|Poetics]]'', a typology and explanation along with understanding of literary forms with many specific criticisms of contemporary works of art. ''Poetics'' developed for the first time the concepts of [[mimesis]] and [[catharsis]], which are still crucial in literary studies.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Baxter |first=John |title=Aristotle's Poetics: Translated and with a Commentary by George Whalley |publisher=McGill-Queen's University Press |year=1997 |location=Montreal |pages=xxii–xxxiii}}</ref>

Later classical and [[medieval]] criticism often focused on religious texts, and the several long religious traditions of [[hermeneutics]] and textual [[exegesis]] have had a profound influence on the study of secular texts.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Gadamer |first1=Hans-Georg |title=Truth and Method |last2=Gadamer |first2=Hans-Georg |date=2003 |publisher=Continuum |isbn=978-0-8264-0585-2 |edition=2 |location=New York |pages=292}}</ref> This was particularly the case for the literary traditions of the three [[Abrahamic religions]]: [[Jewish literature]], [[Christian literature]] and [[Islamic literature]].

Literary criticism was also employed in other forms of medieval [[Arabic literature]] and [[Arabic poetry]] from the 9th century, notably by [[Al-Jahiz]] in his ''al-Bayan wa-'l-tabyin'' and ''al-Hayawan'', and by [[Abdullah ibn al-Mu'tazz]] in his ''Kitab al-Badi''.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Beyond the Line: Classical Arabic Literary Critics on the Coherence and Unity of the Poem|last=van. Gelder|first=G. J. H.|date=1982|publisher=Brill Publishers|isbn=978-90-04-06854-4|location=Leiden|oclc=10350183|pages=1–2}}</ref>

=== Renaissance criticism ===
The literary criticism of the [[Renaissance]] developed classical ideas of unity of form and content into literary [[neoclassicism]], proclaiming literature as central to culture, entrusting the poet and the author with preservation of a long literary tradition. The birth of Renaissance criticism was in 1498, with the recovery of classic texts, most notably, [[Giorgio Valla]]'s [[Latin]] translation of [[Aristotle]]'s ''Poetics''. The work of Aristotle, especially ''Poetics'', was the most important influence upon literary criticism until the late eighteenth century. [[Lodovico Castelvetro]] was one of the most influential Renaissance critics who wrote commentaries on Aristotle's ''Poetics'' in 1570.

=== Baroque criticism ===
The seventeenth-century  witnessed the first full-fledged crisis in modernity of the core critical-aesthetic principles inherited from [[classical antiquity]], such as proportion, harmony, unity, [[decorum]], that had long governed, guaranteed, and stabilized Western thinking about artworks.<ref>Jon R. Snyder, ''L’estetica del Barocco'' (Bologna: Il Mulino, 2005), 21–22.</ref> Although [[Classicism]] was very far from spent as a cultural force, it was to be gradually challenged by a rival movement, namely Baroque, that favoured the transgressive and the extreme, without laying claim to the unity, harmony, or decorum that supposedly distinguished both nature and its greatest imitator, namely ancient art. The key concepts of the [[Baroque]] aesthetic, such as "[[conceit]]' (''concetto''), "[[wit]]" (''[[acutezza]]'', ''ingegno''), and "[[Wonder (emotion)|wonder]]" (''meraviglia''), were not fully developed in literary theory until the publication of [[Emanuele Tesauro]]'s ''Il Cannocchiale aristotelico'' (The Aristotelian Telescope) in 1654. This seminal treatise – inspired by [[Giambattista Marino]]'s epic ''Adone'' and the work of the Spanish Jesuit philosopher [[Baltasar Gracián]] – developed a theory of [[metaphor]] as a universal language of images and as a supreme intellectual act, at once an artifice and an epistemologically privileged mode of access to truth.

=== Enlightenment criticism ===
[[File:Samuel Johnson by Joshua Reynolds 2.jpg|thumb|[[Samuel Johnson]], one of the most influential writers and critics of the 18th century. See: [[Samuel Johnson's literary criticism]].]]

In the [[Enlightenment Period|Enlightenment period]] (1700s–1800s), literary criticism became more popular. During this time [[literacy]] rates started to rise in the public;<ref>{{Cite book|last=Van Horn Melton|first=James|title=The Rise of the Public in Enlightenment Europe|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2001|isbn=978-0-521-46573-1|location=Cambridge, UK|pages=82}}</ref> no longer was reading exclusive for the wealthy or scholarly. With the rise of the literate public, the swiftness of printing and commercialization of literature, criticism arose too.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Voskuhl|first=Adelheid|title=Androids in the Enlightenment: Mechanics, Artisans, and Cultures of the Self|date=2013|publisher=University of Chicago Press|isbn=978-0-226-03402-7|location=Chicago|pages=71–72}}</ref> Reading was no longer viewed solely as educational or as a sacred source of religion; it was a form of entertainment.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The Library: An Illustrated History|last=Murray|first=Stuart|date=2009|publisher=Skyhorse|isbn=978-1-61608-453-0|location=New York|oclc=277203534|pages=132–133}}</ref> Literary criticism was influenced by the values and stylistic writing, including clear, bold, precise writing and the more controversial criteria of the author's religious beliefs.<ref name="Regan">{{cite book |last1=Regan |first1=Shaun|last2=Dawson|first2=Books|date=2013 |title=Reading 1759: Literary Culture in Mid-Eighteenth-Century Britain and France|publisher=Lewisburg [Pa.]: Bucknell University Press |pages=125–130|isbn=978-1-61148-478-6}}</ref> These critical reviews were published in many magazines, newspapers, and journals. The commercialization of literature and its mass production had its downside. The emergent literary market, which was expected to educate the public and keep them away from [[superstition]] and prejudice, increasingly diverged from the idealistic control of the Enlightenment theoreticians so that the business of Enlightenment became a business with the Enlightenment.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|author1-link=Peter Uwe Hohendahl|last1=Hohendahl|first1=Peter Uwe|title=A History of German Literary Criticism: 173–1980|last2=Berghahn|first2=Klaus L.|publisher=University of Nebraska Press|year=1988|isbn=978-0-8032-7232-3|location=Lincoln|pages=25}}</ref> This development – particularly of emergence of entertainment literature – was addressed through an intensification of criticism.<ref name=":0" /> Many works of [[Jonathan Swift]], for instance, were criticized including his book ''[[Gulliver's Travels]]'', which one critic described as "the detestable story of the Yahoos".<ref name="Regan" />

=== 19th-century Romantic criticism ===
The British [[Romanticism|Romantic]] movement of the early nineteenth century introduced new [[aesthetic]] ideas to literary studies, including the idea that the object of literature need not always be beautiful, noble, or perfect, but that literature itself could enlighten and add to the knowledge of a common subject to the level of the [[sublime (philosophy)|sublime]]. [[German Romanticism]], which followed closely after the late development of German [[classicism]], emphasized an understanding and beauty of fragmentation that can appear startlingly modern to the reader of English literature, and valued ''Witz'' – that is, "wit" or "humor" of a certain sort – more highly than the serious Anglophone Romanticism. The late nineteenth century brought renown to authors known more for their literary criticism than for their own literary work, such as [[Matthew Arnold]].

=== The New Criticism ===
However important all of these aesthetic movements were as antecedents, current ideas about literary criticism derive almost entirely from the new direction taken in the early twentieth century. Early in the century the school of criticism known as [[Russian Formalism]], and slightly later the [[New Criticism]] in Britain and in the United States, came to dominate the study and discussion of literature in the English-speaking world. Both schools emphasized the [[close reading]] of texts, elevating it far above generalizing discussion and speculation about either [[Authorial intentionality|authorial intention]]<ref>{{Citation |last=Lamarque |first=Peter |title=The intentional fallacy |date=2006-01-26 |work=Literary Theory and Criticism |pages=177–188 |url=https://academic.oup.com/book/48815/chapter-abstract/422790298?redirectedFrom=fulltext |access-date=2024-10-25 |publisher=Oxford University PressOxford |doi=10.1093/oso/9780199291335.003.0014 |isbn=978-0-19-929133-5}}</ref> (to say nothing of the author's psychology or biography, which became almost taboo subjects) or [[reader response]]:<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9781444337839 |title=The Encyclopedia of Literary and Cultural Theory |date=2010-12-24 |publisher=Wiley |isbn=978-1-4051-8312-3 |editor-last=Ryan |editor-first=Michael |edition=1 |language=en |doi=10.1002/9781444337839.wbelctv1a006 |last1=Claborn |first1=John |chapter=Affective Fallacy }}</ref> together known as [[William K. Wimsatt|Wimsatt]] and [[Monroe Beardsley|Beardsley's]] intentional fallacy and [[affective fallacy]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Wimsatt |first1=W. K. |last2=Beardsley |first2=M. C. |date=1946 |title=The Intentional Fallacy |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/27537676 |journal=The Sewanee Review |volume=54 |issue=3 |pages=468–488 |jstor=27537676 |issn=0037-3052}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Wimsatt |first1=W. K. |last2=Beardsley |first2=M. C. |date=1949 |title=The Affective Fallacy |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/27537883 |journal=The Sewanee Review |volume=57 |issue=1 |pages=31–55 |jstor=27537883 |issn=0037-3052}}</ref> This emphasis on form and precise attention to "the words themselves" has persisted, after the decline of these critical doctrines themselves.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Cohen |first=Stephan |url=http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780190699604.001.0001/acref-9780190699604 |title=The Oxford Encyclopedia of Literary Theory |date=2022 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-069960-4 |editor-last=Frow |editor-first=John |edition=1 |language=en |chapter=Form and Formalism |doi=10.1093/acref/9780190699604.001.0001}}</ref>

=== Theory ===
In 1957 [[Northrop Frye]] published the influential ''[[Anatomy of Criticism]]''. In his works Frye noted that some critics tend to embrace an ideology, and to judge literary pieces on the basis of their adherence to such ideology. This has been a highly influential viewpoint among modern conservative thinkers. E. Michael Jones, for example, argues in his ''Degenerate Moderns'' that [[Stanley Fish]] was influenced by his own adulterous affairs to reject classic literature that condemned adultery.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Degenerate Moderns: Modernity as Rationalized Sexual Misbehaviour|last=Jones|first=E. Michael|date=1991|publisher=[[Ignatius Press]]|isbn=978-0-89870-447-1|location=San Francisco|oclc=28241358|pages=[https://archive.org/details/degeneratemodern00jone/page/79 79–84]|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/degeneratemodern00jone/page/79}}</ref> [[Jürgen Habermas]], in ''Erkenntnis und Interesse'' [1968] (''[[Knowledge and Human Interests]]''), described literary critical theory in literary studies as a form of [[hermeneutics]]: knowledge via interpretation to understand the meaning of human texts and symbolic expressions{{snd}}including the interpretation of texts which themselves interpret other texts.

[[File:Ferdinand de Saussure by Jullien Restored.png|thumb|[[Ferdinand de Saussure]]'s theories of [[linguistics]] and [[semiotics]] were influential in developing [[Structural linguistics|structuralist]] approach to literary criticism.]]

In the British and American literary establishment, the [[New Criticism]] was more or less dominant until the late 1960s. Around that time Anglo-American university literature departments began to witness a rise of a more explicitly philosophical [[literary theory]], influenced by [[structuralism]], then [[post-structuralism]], and other kinds of [[Continental philosophy]]. It continued until the 1990s when interest in "concept" peaked. Many later critics, though undoubtedly still influenced by theoretical work, have been comfortable simply interpreting literature rather than writing explicitly about methodology and philosophical presumptions.

=== Current state ===
Today, approaches based in [[literary theory]] and [[continental philosophy]] largely coexist in university literature departments, while conventional methods, some informed by the [[New Critics]], also remain active. Disagreements over the goals and methods of literary criticism, which characterized both sides taken by critics during the "rise" of theory, have declined.

Some critics work largely with theoretical texts, while others read traditional literature; interest in the literary [[Western canon|canon]] is still great, but many critics are also interested in nontraditional texts and [[Women's writing in English|women's literature]], as elaborated on by certain academic journals such as ''Contemporary Women's Writing'',<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://academic.oup.com/cww|title=Contemporary Women's Writing {{!}} Oxford Academic|website=OUP Academic|language=en|access-date=1 August 2019|archive-date=7 August 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190807221421/https://academic.oup.com/cww|url-status=live}}</ref> while some critics influenced by [[cultural studies]] read popular texts like comic books or [[Pulp magazine|pulp]]/[[genre fiction]]. [[Ecocriticism|Ecocritics]] have drawn connections between literature and the natural sciences. [[Darwinian literary studies]] studies literature in the context of [[evolutionary]] influences on human nature. And [[postcritique]] has sought to develop new ways of reading and responding to literary texts that go beyond the interpretive methods of [[critique]]. Many literary critics also work in [[film criticism]] or [[media studies]].

=== History of the book ===
Related to other forms of literary criticism, the [[history of the book]] is a field of an inter-disciplinary inquiry drawing on the methods of [[bibliography]], [[cultural history]], [[history of literature]], and [[media influence|media theory]]. Principally concerned with the production, circulation, and reception of texts and their material forms, book history seeks to connect forms of textuality with their material aspects.

Among the issues within the history of literature with which book history can be seen to intersect are: the development of authorship as a profession, the formation of reading audiences, the constraints of censorship and copyright, and the economics of literary form.

=== Major twentieth-century schools of critical analysis ===
==== Historicist approaches ====
* [[New Historicism]]
 
==== Formalist approaches ====
* [[Russian Formalism]]
* [[Narratology]]
* [[Structuralism]]
* [[Post-structuralism]]
* [[Deconstructionism]]
* [[Literary Modernism]]
* [[Post-modernism]]
* [[Reader-response criticism]]
* [[Semiotic literary criticism]]
* [[New Criticism]]
* [[Genre studies]]
* [[Hermeneutics]]
 
==== Political approaches ====
* [[Marxist literary criticism]]
* [[Cultural studies]]
* [[Postcolonialism]]
* [[Feminist literary criticism]]
* [[Ecocriticism]]
 
==== Psychological approaches ====
* [[Archetypal literary criticism]]
* [[Phenomenology (philosophy)|Phenomenology]]
* [[Psychoanalytic literary criticism]]
* [[New humanism (literature)|New Humanism]]
 
==== Race and sexuality approaches ====
* [[African-American literature]]
* [[Queer theory]]
* [[Critical race theory]]
* [[Affect theory]]
* [[Disability studies]]