New Criticism is a formalist approach to literary analysis that emerged in the early to mid-20th century, primarily in the United States and Britain. This movement emphasised the close reading of texts, focusing on the text itself as an independent, self-contained work of art. New Critics argued that literary analysis should concentrate on the formal elements of a text—such as language, structure, imagery, symbolism, and irony —while disregarding the author’s biography, historical context, or reader responses.
New Criticism was a reaction against earlier literary criticism, which often emphasised the author’s intentions (biographical criticism) or the historical and social context of a work. Instead, New Critics believed that all the meaning needed to understand a literary work could be found within the text itself. The goal was to analyse how the different elements of a text functioned together to produce meaning and evoke emotional or intellectual responses. Major figures in New Criticism include John Crowe Ransom, Cleanth Brooks, and W.K.Wimsatt.
- Treats the text as a self-contained unit
- Emphasises the importance of close reading
- Focuses on the formal elements of literature (structure, tone, imagery, etc.)
- Aims for objective analysis of texts
Paradox
Paradox is a central concept in New Criticism, defined as a statement or situation that appears to be self-contradictory or absurd but, upon closer examination, reveals a deeper truth. New Critics valued paradox because it often highlighted the complexity of a text, showing how seemingly contradictory elements could coexist to create meaning.
For example, in poetry, a paradox might express conflicting emotions or ideas in a way that reflects the multifaceted nature of human experience. Cleanth Brooks, in his analysis of poetry, emphasised that the tension created by paradox was one of the ways literature could express profound truths. An example of a famous literary paradox is John Donne’s line from his Holy Sonnet 10: “Death, thou shalt die.” This statement seems contradictory but reveals a deeper insight into the Christian belief in eternal life after death.
- Creates tension within the text
- Encourages deeper analysis and interpretation
- Often seen as a mark of complexity and sophistication in literature
Ambiguity
Ambiguity refers to the presence of multiple meanings or interpretations in a literary work. For New Critics, ambiguity was not seen as a flaw but as a sign of richness and complexity in a text. A word, phrase, or situation could have several layers of meaning, all contributing to the work’s overall impact.
In William Empson’s influential work Seven Types of Ambiguity (1930), he outlined different ways literary language can create multiple meanings. Ambiguity can arise from word choice, syntax, or imagery, and it often serves to deepen a reader’s engagement with the text by encouraging them to explore its various possible interpretations.
New Criticism celebrated ambiguity because it required close attention to the text and often revealed tensions or conflicts between different elements of a work. This complexity was seen as essential to the artistic value of literature.
- Seen as a positive feature in the literature
- Adds depth and complexity to the text
- Encourages active engagement from the reader
Denotation
Denotation is the literal, dictionary definition of a word —its explicit, direct meaning. In the context of New Criticism, understanding the denotative meaning of a word is essential as a starting point for analysis. However, New Critics argue that the richness of a text often comes from its use of language that goes beyond the surface, literal meaning, inviting readers to explore deeper layers of meaning.
Denotation is contrasted with connotation, and the interplay between the two is important for literary analysis. For instance, while the denotation of the word “home” is simply a place where someone lives, its connotations might include feelings of safety, warmth, or belonging. The tension between denotation and connotation can add to a text’s complexity and richness, a key focus of New Criticism.
- Provides the basic meaning of words
- Serves as a starting point for analysis
- Contrasts with connotation
Connotation
Connotation refers to the associations, emotional responses, and secondary meanings a word evokes beyond its literal denotation. In New Criticism, connotation is critical to understanding how a text creates depth and complexity. Words are not just containers for their basic meanings; they carry cultural, emotional, and symbolic significance, all of which contribute to the meaning of a literary work.
For example, consider the word “snake.” Its denotation is a type of reptile, but its connotations can include danger, deceit, or evil (as in the biblical serpent in the Garden of Eden). New Critics would focus on how an author uses words not only for their literal meanings but also for the subtle, nuanced connotations they bring to the text. This interplay between denotation and connotation is a crucial aspect of close reading.
- Adds layers of meaning to the text
- Can vary based on cultural or personal context
- Often crucial for understanding the full implications of a text
Close Reading
Close reading is the cornerstone of New Criticism. It refers to a detailed, careful analysis of a literary text, paying attention to the language, structure, and formal elements rather than external factors like the author’s biography or historical context. Through close reading, New Critics aimed to uncover how the various aspects of a text —such as metaphor, imagery, rhyme, and tone —work together to create meaning and aesthetic experience.
Close reading involves examining every word, sentence, and paragraph for its contribution to the text’s overall meaning and emotional impact. By focusing solely on the text itself, New Critics believed that they could arrive at a more objective understanding of a literary work. This method encouraged readers to think deeply about the text’s form, structure, and use of language, revealing hidden complexities and tensions that might otherwise be missed.
- Focuses on the words on the page
- Examines formal elements such as diction, syntax, and literary devices
- Aims to uncover layers of meaning within the text
Intentional Fallacy
Intentional Fallacy is a concept introduced by W.K.Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley in their essay of the same name, which argues that it is a mistake (or fallacy) to interpret a literary work based on the author’s intentions. According to New Criticism, what the author intended to convey is irrelevant to understanding the text. Instead, the meaning of a text should be derived from the text itself, as the text exists independently of its author once it has been written and published.
For example, trying to determine what Shakespeare “meant” when he wrote Hamlet by analysing his personal life or the historical period he lived would be considered an intentional fallacy. New Critics argue that the focus should remain on the language, structure, and elements within the play, not on external factors. The text’s meaning is embedded in its form, and authorial intent should not influence its interpretation.
- Separates the text from its author
- Focuses on what the text says, not what the author meant to say
- Encourages readers to find meaning within the text itself
Affective Fallacy
Affective Fallacy is another critical concept introduced by Wimsatt and Beardsley, which refers to the error of evaluating a literary work based on the emotional responses it elicits from readers. According to New Criticism, a reader’s personal feelings or reactions to a text should not be used as a basis for interpreting or judging its value.
For instance, if someone reads a poem and feels sad, that personal emotional reaction (the affective response) is not a valid way to understand the poem’s meaning. New Critics argued that such responses are subjective and unreliable. Instead, analysis should focus on the text itself, specifically on how its formal elements work together to produce meaning. The affective fallacy cautions against reducing literary analysis to mere emotional engagement or reader responses, insisting on the importance of objective, text-based analysis.
- Separates the text from the reader’s emotional response
- Aims for objective analysis of the text
- Focuses on the work itself rather than its impact
Importance of New Criticism
- Shifted focus to the text itself, away from biographical and historical approaches
- Developed techniques for close reading that remain influential
- Emphasised the complexity and ambiguity of literary texts
- Promoted the idea of literature as a unique form of knowledge
- Influenced the development of subsequent critical theories, even those that opposed its principles
Criticisms of New Criticism
- Can neglect historical and cultural contexts
- May overlook the role of the reader in creating meaning
- Can be overly focused on certain types of poetry at the expense of other genres
- Has been criticised for promoting a narrow canon of literature
Despite these criticisms, New Criticism has had a lasting impact on how literature is taught and analysed, particularly in its emphasis on close reading and attention to the formal elements of texts. Many of its techniques and concepts continue to be valuable tools in literary analysis, even as they’re combined with other critical approaches.
New Criticism fundamentally reshaped literary analysis by focusing on the intrinsic elements of a text —its form, structure, language, and internal contradictions —while rejecting external factors like authorial intent or reader emotions. Concepts like paradox, ambiguity, denotation, and connotation are central to this approach, as they highlight the complexities and subtleties within a text that close reading can uncover. The rejection of the intentional fallacy and affective fallacy further underscores New Criticism’s emphasis on objectivity and the autonomy of the text, establishing a rigorous framework for analysing literature as a self-contained work of art.