miyako73
05-12-2012, 04:13 AM
I think the future of literary criticism lies in the new kind of Formalism, where forms are assessed to understand contents and vice-versa. It is like archaeology, but in the case of poetry, texts are the artifacts. A field survey, in literary practice, will mean critics have to do comparative reading, intertextuality, and an investigative look at the literary field, theme, or group a certain poem or author belongs. Excavation will be close-reading by digging and going deep. A poem is also composed of many layers of emotions and strata of meanings. Mapping surfaces and other topographies, implied or spelled out, can be done in poetry. Anne Sexton, an American suicide and poet, might not have written the word "suicide" in her works, but her poems could give hints pregnant of her suicidal tendencies.
Dating methods in this new literary analysis will focus on history of words, meanings, idiomatic expressions; and history of language. Like in archaeometry, poetry, which has beats, syllables, meter, is measurable too. Principles of association and superimposition will find relevance in the reading of set of words, their depth, and their placement in a poem. There is always a reason in a poet's mind why he uses the same related words or why he uses one of them first and the other last. Since a poem is the site, it will be deemed disturbed if words are added or missing due to bad translation, editing, censorship, or any malicious intent.
The goal of textual archaeology is to treat a text as a form that is a treasure trove of narratives, characters, ideas, images, metaphors, meanings. In archaeology, artifacts are studied to piece together a picture or story of a culture once lived by the people who made and used them. In literature or poetry, critics can study texts to piece together an image or narrative of emotions and thoughts crafted by authors and browsed by readers. Literary intent and experience are relevant. Morality, spirituality, and ideology are as important as iambic, trochee, and anapest.
Textual archaeology, at this stage, is experimental. Some will say archaeology is the study of the ancient and ask if contemporary literature is beyond its purview. I don't think it will be the case. Archaeologists study contemporary cultural phenomena too. Garbage archaeology is one such example where household wastes are dug up to study consumption and nutrition. Maybe in poetry, works that are rejected as garbage will be scrutinized because, in textual archaeology, why authors write such useless pieces of work can be a starting question to operate. Is it due to literary anarchy or due to lack of skills?
I just ordered Shakespeare's sonnets and poems by Spanish writers. His sonnets had never excited me until I thought of textual archaeology today. Etymology is definitely one of the methods I will use. It's akin to cultural history in archaeology. I hope to find out if my proposal is doable and worthy of the sixty dollars I spent on five books. My quest is to tame forms and snare contents and clip their wings- in common language, to study forms and contents vis-a-vis without misinterpretation, under-interpretation, and over-interpretation.
A Theory of Everything may be elusive in science, but in literature, where an ant can fly or a rose can sing, it may find a place for its existence and relevance.
Dating methods in this new literary analysis will focus on history of words, meanings, idiomatic expressions; and history of language. Like in archaeometry, poetry, which has beats, syllables, meter, is measurable too. Principles of association and superimposition will find relevance in the reading of set of words, their depth, and their placement in a poem. There is always a reason in a poet's mind why he uses the same related words or why he uses one of them first and the other last. Since a poem is the site, it will be deemed disturbed if words are added or missing due to bad translation, editing, censorship, or any malicious intent.
The goal of textual archaeology is to treat a text as a form that is a treasure trove of narratives, characters, ideas, images, metaphors, meanings. In archaeology, artifacts are studied to piece together a picture or story of a culture once lived by the people who made and used them. In literature or poetry, critics can study texts to piece together an image or narrative of emotions and thoughts crafted by authors and browsed by readers. Literary intent and experience are relevant. Morality, spirituality, and ideology are as important as iambic, trochee, and anapest.
Textual archaeology, at this stage, is experimental. Some will say archaeology is the study of the ancient and ask if contemporary literature is beyond its purview. I don't think it will be the case. Archaeologists study contemporary cultural phenomena too. Garbage archaeology is one such example where household wastes are dug up to study consumption and nutrition. Maybe in poetry, works that are rejected as garbage will be scrutinized because, in textual archaeology, why authors write such useless pieces of work can be a starting question to operate. Is it due to literary anarchy or due to lack of skills?
I just ordered Shakespeare's sonnets and poems by Spanish writers. His sonnets had never excited me until I thought of textual archaeology today. Etymology is definitely one of the methods I will use. It's akin to cultural history in archaeology. I hope to find out if my proposal is doable and worthy of the sixty dollars I spent on five books. My quest is to tame forms and snare contents and clip their wings- in common language, to study forms and contents vis-a-vis without misinterpretation, under-interpretation, and over-interpretation.
A Theory of Everything may be elusive in science, but in literature, where an ant can fly or a rose can sing, it may find a place for its existence and relevance.