I think people write about literature in order to challenge themselves and get a further understanding of what they are reading. Upon a quick first read, it is difficult to take away anything more than the face value of a literary work; however, after carefully rereading and assessing a text, one can pick out key elements and see how various features work together to make a unified plot.
Literary criticism should evaluate and interpret a work of literature. It should show with evidence how a piece does or does not fulfill a certain goal or task. To make a literary criticism, one must determine the overarching theme or goal of the work. Then, symbols, characters and events must be analyzed to see how they add to the work and help the author achieve his goal or establish his theme.
Literary critics must be open minded. They often read other literary criticisms on the same novel. Reading other people's ideas may show them a different point of view or an element of the novel that they missed.
In my opinion, literature is a form of expression. Though it is entertainment, it is also a way for an author to deliver a message or portray an event. Literature connects people and challenges the reader. Personally, I look for literature with which I can connect. Also, I like a story that has a purpose- a moral, a theme, or a goal.
Hopefully after reading more about the different styles of literary criticism I will be better able to form my own opinions of literature and discuss them with other critics.
I really like your idea that literary critics have to be open minded. That's something that didn't really cross my mind as I was thinking about the topic (I instead said something about critics being focused and collaborating), but being open to what other people notice and take away is an important part of the process.
ReplyDeleteAlso, reading your explanation of what good criticism does was really helpful in sort of visualizing the process-- picking out individual elements and seeing how they unite overall.