THEO ADAM (U6)
This article placed as a finalist in the English category of the New College of the Humanities Essay Competition 2022.
Literary critics, in their many, have long existed in the surrounding space of literature, with a significant proportion of them gaining a degree of notoriety from such practice. Providing deeper scrutiny into texts and critiquing them from a specific perspective, they have historically done this task since as early as the Classical period. This length of time suggests the role is a stable one as times have changed over the last thousand years. Yet, as just declared, times have indeed changed - genres, people’s rights and views, and forms of media (among other things) have been drastically affected by the progression of time. Hence, it should be considered whether literary critics have adapted to the modern world and how they can continue to evolve, ensuring this long-standing practice does not fade away and remains to be something necessary.
Whilst the first image conjured up by someone hearing about a literary critic is likely to be a distinguished, older, wise individual, this is not what the term itself describes. In fact, the Collins dictionary defines one as “someone who evaluates, studies and discusses literature”. Going by this, it is clear that anybody could be classified as one, so long as they have a solid, evidenced opinion ready to discuss. Advancing further, what even is ‘literature’? Defining this word brings up a whole other argument that has gone on for a long time. Terry Eagleton (a prominent literary critic of today) famously stated in his book ‘Literary Theory: An Introduction’ that “there is no ‘essence’ of literature whatsoever” - a statement holding the sentiment that there are no rules or guidelines needing to be kept to in order to be classified as ‘literature’. A similar view is also held by Ezra Pound (considered one of the most influential poets of the 20th century), when noting in his book ‘ABC of Reading’ that “great literature is simply language charged with meaning to the utmost possible degree”. If anyone could be a literary critic and almost everything may be labelled as literature, why should people be hindered from making their own attempt at being a critic in the broad, multi-faceted world within the English language (and, in fact, any language)?
The birth of literary criticism is often traced back to the 4th century BC, when Aristotle’s ‘On Poetics’ was written. This provided civilisation with the first literary theory - classifying each genre with typical attributes allowing us now to study literature. He took the view that tragedies, and poetry generally, was a means of ‘mimesis’ (meaning ‘imitation’ in Greek) - they interested audiences due to their close connection with the real world, even if the themes found within were far from that (an outlook taking the form of a direct rebuttal to Plato’s argument to banish particular types of poetry from the Republic). As a result, he believed it important for individuals to absorb tragic works on a regular basis in order to counter their inclinations to judge and moralise: it served as a philosophical form of correction for personal awareness of judgement and ethics. However, the importance of Aristotle’s writing lies with the fact that it was previously rare to see such a unique opinion on a matter expressed as precisely and persuasively as he did, implementing solid reasoning and thus becoming a gold standard in the field. This then begs the question, is the recognition solely due to his works’ age or its calibre that still cannot be surpassed, even in the modern world today?
Yet, one does not need to peer so far into the past in order to see examples of this exercise still being carried out. As compulsory subjects for 16-year-olds to be publicly examined in at GCSE level, English Language and English Literature contain a great deal of literary criticism that students need to be skilled at in order to succeed and receive high grades. Weekly lessons from an early age are put in place to train children in the art of criticism. This in itself shows how seriously the topic is taken, necessary to enhance people’s ability to analyse and synthesise any knowledge they are faced with. Even when it is no longer a requirement, many still continue studying English and criticising works at A-Level level. This, together with the higher accessibility of texts through means such as the Internet, indicates that anybody can make an attempt at carrying out criticism.
The list of genres in existence nowadays is also growing and blending to produce a plethora of newer styles - it is no longer as simple to differentiate texts and assign them specific labels. To take an example, the dystopia category has now acquired many different aspects to it. In an article written for The Guardian newspaper, Margaret Atwood (a prolific author, particularly in this genre) described her dislike of her books being placed under the category of ‘science fiction’, arguing that these contain “things that could not possibly happen”. Rather, she likes to be known as a ‘speculative fiction’ writer - where “things that really could happen but just hadn't completely happened when the authors wrote the books” were instead explored. However, even within writers of this genre, disagreement materialised. Ursula Le Guin believed ‘science fiction’ “is speculative fiction about things that really could happen, whereas things that really could not happen [Le Guin] classifies under ‘fantasy’”. This stark difference exhibits the effects of modern-day changes to the classification system; indeed a challenging task to continue undertaking which leaves critics re-evaluating how they view texts. Similarly, the rise of both modernism and postmodernism; and structuralism and poststructuralism presented people with new styles of writing (and consequently critiquing), leaving them struggling to know where to start. A major example of this radical shift was the emergence of the ‘stream of consciousness’ - famously identified in James Joyce’s ‘Ulysses’, which is often referred to as being the longest sentence ever written. If these strange, latest developments are happening with published works, equivalent adjustments should undoubtedly be arising within the world of literary critics.
The balance of privilege has greatly varied over time, and so has the level of rights individuals have. Legislation like the ‘Equality Act 2010’ serves as proof that, whilst there will unfortunately still be exceptions, the state of these issues has significantly improved when compared with bygone days. This means both writers and readers have also changed, resulting in a movement in the social role of the critic. Roland Greene (a scholar of Early Modern Literature and Culture) noted in an article that “the critic of sixty or seventy years ago...stood between a circumscribed canon of past literature and a fairly elite class of professional writers in the present, and explained all of that to a general audience of readers”. He summarised that “while the role of the critic in society has changed, criticism itself has been slow to respond”. This in itself creates a bit of a predicament where, at least in his view, critics are not keeping up at a suitable rate. In spite of that, using the basics of literary criticism, there is a wealth of perspectives on any singular piece of text and ambition still exists for the next generation to take over where their seniors left off. At the same time, in a world with an abundance of social media presence providing excessive self-righteousness and the ability to cancel individuals for the crime of eliciting offence, is the renown that comes with the role of a critic becoming obsolete? Or possibly, does it indicate a higher demand for more rigorous, informed criticism that omits the vitriolic tone frequently observed nowadays?
This satisfyingly leads onto the final point of discussion: what is the future of literary criticism? A cloud of mystery hovers over this question. On the one hand, individuals may expect it to continue decreasing in popularity until eventually fizzling out. On the other, enthusiasm levels from many are still high and the innate philosophical desire for interpretation and debate is not going anywhere. In his journal article, Richard A. Posner (an American judge with a degree in English Literature) expresses his belief that “when critics propose criteria that they think will distinguish the great from the non-great, they end up narrowing the canon of great literature in arbitrary ways”. In a society where genres are expanding at a fast rate, this endeavour to produce a “criteria” is inevitably going to cause a clash. He goes on to suggest “critics can point to the features of literary works that they like or dislike without assuming the authority to tell people what they should read”. This, as I see it, gives rise to a glimpse of hope; it is an acknowledgement of literary critics having their own lane to stick to that should not be affected by the ever-shifting realm of composition. Therefore, the upsurge of new commentators (with their own contemporary takes) mingled with those of the past (who may have come from a different time) ensures there are always fresh, interesting discussion points to throw a spanner into the minds of those who formerly thought they could completely grasp a text’s true essence. Perhaps, the ‘need’ is instead for wide-ranging viewpoints surfacing in order to supply a multiplicity of thought processes.
Upon considering all the facts, I feel as though the existence of literary critics in the modern day is blatantly necessary. They provide casual readers and scholars alike with the means to query elements of texts, and serve as a starting point for various forms of exploration into the domain of the literary canon. The metaphysical aspect of the practice is also of great value, giving the audience profound responses in relation to what is right, wrong and everything in between. Literary critics are undeniably essential in the modern day and can dwell within anyone. As Wendell Phillips (an American abolitionist) once said: “boredom, after all, is a form of criticism”.
Works Cited
Atwood, Margaret. “Margaret Atwood: the road to Ustopia | Margaret Atwood.” The Guardian, 14 October 2011, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/oct/14/margaret-atwood-road-to-ustopia.
Collins. “Literary critic definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary.” Collins Dictionary, https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/literary-critic.
Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Blackwell, 1996.
Greene, Roland. “The Social Role of the Critic | Literature, the Humanities, & the World.” Arcade (Stanford), https://arcade.stanford.edu/blogs/social-role-critic.
Joyce, James. Ulysses. Shakespeare and Company, 1922.
Posner, Richard A. “The Decline of Literary Criticism.” Chicago Unbound, https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1611&context=journal_articles.
Pound, Ezra. ABC of Reading. New Directions Publishing Corporation, 2010.