Abstract
This essay argues that the self-consciously polemical tenor of recent conversations about critical method has hindered, rather than catalyzed, efforts to diversify our repertoire of approaches to literary form and aesthetics. In response to critical discourse around surface reading, postcritique, and the new formalism, Battersby suggests that those who seek to challenge the dominance of a given method need to refocus their efforts away from telling others that their preferred approaches have “run out of steam,” and towards giving readings which demonstrate, rather than merely assert, their novelty and value. The disciplinary history offered in the latter half of the essay illustrates that past movements that succeeded in transforming the field did so precisely through exemplary readings that illuminated literary texts in previously unprecedented ways.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
Notes
- 1.
I am grateful to Oxford University Press for permission to reprint material from my more wide-ranging essay on the same theme, “Reading Against Polemic: Disciplinary Histories, Critical Futures,” The Cambridge Quarterly 49, no. 2 (2020): 103–23.
- 2.
I allude to Bruno Latour’s widely-read essay “Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern.”
- 3.
In a fashion not dissimilar to Mir Ali Hosseini’s analysis of postcritical sensibility in his essay for this volume.
- 4.
Felski, Limits of Critique, 13.
- 5.
Felski, 1.
- 6.
Felski, Uses of Literature, 1.
- 7.
Robbins, “Not So Well Attached,” 371.
- 8.
Friedman, “Both/And,” 345.
- 9.
Felski, Limits of Critique, 12.
- 10.
Felski, 151.
- 11.
Felski, 172.
- 12.
Best, “La Foi Postcritique,” 388.
- 13.
Felski, “Response,” 389.
- 14.
Felski, Uses of Literature, 132.
- 15.
Felski, 76.
- 16.
Fuss, “But What About Love?,” 355, n. 1.
- 17.
Best and Marcus, “Surface Reading”; Cohen, “Narratology,” 51–75; Crane, “Spatial Imaginary,” 76–97; Price, “‘History of the Book,’” 120–38; Cheng, “Skins, Tattoos, and Susceptibility,” 98–119; Nealon, “Reading on the Left,” 22–50.
- 18.
Best and Marcus, “Surface Reading,” 16.
- 19.
Cheng, “Skins, Tattoos, and Susceptibility,” 102.
- 20.
Best and Marcus, “Surface Reading,” 16.
- 21.
Simpson, “Interrogation Over,” 378–79; Stewart, Deed of Reading, 16.
- 22.
Love, “Close but Not Deep,” 375.
- 23.
Love, 385.
- 24.
Love, 386.
- 25.
Love, 385.
- 26.
Lubbock, Craft of Fiction.
- 27.
The modesty of the modifiers critics use to describe their approaches—“mere reading,” “just reading,” and “minimal interpretation”—is a telling indication that such practices are characterised more by the critical manoeuvres they refuse to perform than any novel strategies for the interpretation of texts (Mitchell, Mere Reading; Marcus, Between Women; Attridge and Staten, Craft of Poetry).
- 28.
Levinson, “What Is New Formalism?,” 562. See also Otter, “Aesthetics in All Things,” 116–17.
- 29.
Wolfson, “Introduction: Reading for Form,” 5.
- 30.
Levinson, “What Is New Formalism?” 562.
- 31.
Theile, “New Formalism(s),” 6.
- 32.
Theile, 8–11.
- 33.
Theile, 10.
- 34.
The very pervasiveness of this idiom in the academy today reflects the shift in cultural expectations of the function of universities that Simon Grimble describes elsewhere in this volume.
- 35.
Menand and Rainey, “Introduction,” 10.
- 36.
Menand and Rainey, 11–12.
- 37.
Brooks and Warren, Understanding Poetry, ix. On the influence of New Critical textbooks, see Mark Jancovich, New Criticism, 87.
- 38.
Brooks and Warren, ix.
- 39.
Brooks, “New Criticism,” 593.
- 40.
Brooks, Well-Wrought Urn.
- 41.
De Man, Allegories of Reading, 9–13.
- 42.
Levine, Forms, ix.
- 43.
Bloom, Western Canon.
- 44.
Sedgwick, Between Men, 30–33, 31.
- 45.
Sedgwick, Epistemology of the Closet, 94–97.
- 46.
Sedgwick, “Masturbating Girl,” 818–37; Fraiman, “Austen and Edward Said,” 807.
- 47.
Said, Culture and Imperialism, 80–97.
- 48.
Said, 95.
- 49.
Said, 95.
- 50.
Fraiman, “Austen and Edward Said,” 805.
- 51.
See Love, “Close but Not Deep,” 372.
- 52.
North, Literary Criticism, 86.
- 53.
North, 87.
- 54.
Gallagher and Greenblatt, Practicing New Historicism, 1.
- 55.
Greenblatt, Learning to Curse, 6.
- 56.
Greenblatt, Renaissance Self-Fashioning, 246–52; Shakespearean Negotiations, 21–65.
- 57.
In Attridge, Singularity of Literature and Work of Literature.
- 58.
Attridge and Staten, Craft of Poetry, 13.
- 59.
Attridge and Staten, 5.
- 60.
Culler, Structuralist Poetics, xiv.
- 61.
Woloch, One vs. the Many, 4.
- 62.
Sedgwick, Touching Feeling, 123–51.
- 63.
North, Literary Criticism, 162, 168.
- 64.
As Staten elucidates in Chapter 2 of this volume, aspects of Brooks’s own practice were in turn taken up by critics who did not share his convictions about the organic unity of literary texts.
- 65.
North, Literary Criticism, 168.
- 66.
Sedgwick, Touching Feeling, 135–36.
- 67.
Lynch, Loving Literature, 1.
- 68.
Sedgwick, Touching Feeling, 150.
- 69.
Armstrong, “In Defense of Reading,” 89.
References
Abbott, H. Porter. Real Mysteries: Narrative and the Unknowable. Theory and Interpretation of Narrative Series. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2013.
Armstrong, Paul B. “In Defense of Reading: Or, Why Reading Still Matters in a Contextualist Age.” New Literary History 42, no. 1 (2011): 87–113.
Attridge, Derek. The Singularity of Literature. New York: Routledge, 2004.
Attridge, Derek. The Work of Literature. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
Attridge, Derek, and Henry Staten. The Craft of Poetry: Dialogues on Minimal Interpretation. New York: Routledge, 2015.
Best, Stephen. “La Foi Postcritique, on Second Thought.” PMLA 132, no. 2 (2017): 337–43.
Best, Stephen, and Sharon Marcus. “Surface Reading: An Introduction.” Representations 108, no. 108 (2009): 1–21.
Bloom, Harold. The Western Canon: The Books and School of the Ages. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1994.
Brooks, Cleanth. “The New Criticism.” The Sewanee Review 87, no. 4 (1979): 592–607.
———. The Well-Wrought Urn: Studies in the Structure of Poetry. Revised ed. London: Dobson, 1968.
Brooks, Cleanth, and Robert Penn Warren, eds. Understanding Poetry: An Anthology for College Students. New York: Holt, 1938.
Brooks, Peter. The Melodramatic Imagination: Balzac, Henry James, Melodrama, and the Mode of Excess. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.
Cheng, Anne Anlin. “Skins, Tattoos, and Susceptibility.” Representations 108, no. 1 (2009): 98–119.
Cohen, Margaret. “Narratology in the Archive of Literature.” Representations 108, no. 108 (2009): 51–75.
Crane, Mary Thomas. “Surface, Depth, and the Spatial Imaginary: A Cognitive Reading of The Political Unconscious.” Representations 108, no. 1 (2009): 76–97.
Culler, Jonathan. Structuralist Poetics: Structuralism, Linguistics and the Study of Literature. New York: Routledge, 2002.
Empson, William. Seven Types of Ambiguity. 2nd ed. London: Chatto & Windus, 1949.
Felski, Rita. “Response.” PMLA 132, no. 2 (March 2017): 384–91.
———. The Limits of Critique. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2015.
———. Uses of Literature. Blackwell Manifestos. Oxford: Blackwell, 2008.
Fraiman, Susan. “Jane Austen and Edward Said: Gender, Culture, and Imperialism.” Critical Inquiry 21, no. 4 (1995): 805–21.
Friedman, Susan Stanford. “Both/and: Critique and Discovery in the Humanities.” PMLA 132, no. 2 (2017): 344–51.
Frow, John. Character and Person. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
Fuss, Diana. “But What About Love?” PMLA 132, no. 2 (March 2017): 352–55.
Gallagher, Catherine, and Stephen Greenblatt. Practicing New Historicism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
Greenblatt, Stephen. Learning to Curse: Essays in Early Modern Culture. Routledge Classics. New York, 2007.
———. Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
———. Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in Renaissance England. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988.
Jancovich, Mark. The Cultural Politics of the New Criticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Johnson, Barbara. The Critical Difference: Essays in the Contemporary Rhetoric of Reading. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1985.
Latour, Bruno. “Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern.” Critical Inquiry 30, no. 2 (2004): 225–48.
Levine, Caroline. Forms: Whole, Rhythm, Hierarchy, Network. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2015.
Levinson, Marjorie. “What Is New Formalism?” PMLA 122, no. 2 (March 2007): 558–69.
Love, Heather. “Close but Not Deep: Literary Ethics and the Descriptive Turn.” New Literary History 41, no. 2 (2010): 371–91.
Lubbock, Percy. The Craft of Fiction. London: Jonathan Cape, 1921.
Lynch, Deidre. Loving Literature: A Cultural History. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2015.
Man, Paul de. Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979.
Marcus, Sharon. Between Women: Friendship, Desire, and Marriage in Victorian England. Princeton and Woodstock. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2007.
Menand, Louis, and Lawrence Rainey. “Introduction.” In The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, vol. 7, Modernism and the New Criticism, edited by A. Walton Litz, Louis Menand, and Lawrence Rainey. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Miller, D. A. Jane Austen, or, The Secret of Style. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003.
———. The Novel and the Police. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988.
Mitchell, Lee Clark. Mere Reading: The Poetics of Wonder in Modern American Novels. Bloomsbury Collections. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2017.
Nealon, Christopher. “Reading on the Left.” Representations 108, no. 1 (2009): 22–50.
Ngai, Sianne. Ugly Feelings. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007.
North, Joseph. Literary Criticism: A Concise Political History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2017.
Otter, Samuel. “An Aesthetics in All Things.” Representations, no. 104 (2008): 116–25.
Price, Leah. “From The History of a Book to a ‘History of the Book.’” Representations 108, no. 1 (November 2009): 120–38.
Robbins, Bruce. “Not So Well Attached.” PMLA 132, no. 2 (2017): 371–76.
Said, Edward. Culture and Imperialism. New York: Knopf, 1993.
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky. Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire. New York: Columbia University Press, 1985.
———. Epistemology of the Closet. Revised ed. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008.
———. “Jane Austen and the Masturbating Girl.” Critical Inquiry 17, no. 4 (1991): 818–37.
———. Touching Feeling: Affect, Pedagogy, Performativity. Durham: Duke University Press, 2003.
Simpson, James. “Interrogation over.” PMLA 132, no. 2 (2017): 377–83.
Stewart, Garrett. The Deed of Reading: Literature, Writing, Language, Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2015.
Theile, Verena. “New Formalism(s): A Prologue.” In New Formalisms and Literary Theory, edited by Verena Theile and Linda Tredennick, 3–28. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
Wolfson, Susan J. “Introduction: Reading for Form.” In Reading for Form, edited by Susan J. Wolfson and Marshall Brown, 3–24. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2006.
Woloch, Alex. The One vs. the Many: Minor Characters and the Space of the Protagonist in the Novel. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Battersby, D. (2021). Reading by Example: Disciplinary History for a Polemical Age. In: Sridhar, A., Hosseini, M.A., Attridge, D. (eds) The Work of Reading. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71139-9_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71139-9_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-71138-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-71139-9
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)