Tampamamba
11-02-2014, 05:52 PM
The Artistry of Attitudes:
After reviewing voluminous protocols available to analyze and discuss artistic communications, especially literature, I chose The Purdue Owl (https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/4/17/) as a representative model of how decision makers set curricula standards for analysis of the tools, techniques, meaning, and even the value of a particular artistic work, and implicitly it's author.
While the array [see list below courtesy of the Purdue Owl] of critical schools of thought and deconstruction tools is impressive, any list is just a list, until we give it a focus. Perhaps a concern for political correctness dissuades postulating an ecumenical focus that can help today's students develop a confident understanding of what at seemed an enigma. Unfortunately, only by offering a painless, eye-opening, easily transferable, approach do we motivate the kind of work that will ultimately argue the student's opinion.
I argue for an approach to literary (artistic) analysis that speaks to our youth without chaos, yet encompasses today's multimedia universe of art. At the same time I venture to demonstrate it's viable support of traditional standards of artistic analysis.
List of Critical Approaches in Purdue Owl
Moral Criticism, Dramatic Construction (~360 BC-present)
Formalism, New Criticism, Neo-Aristotelian Criticism (1930s-present)
Psychoanalytic Criticism, Jungian Criticism(1930s-present)
Marxist Criticism (1930s-present)
Reader-Response Criticism (1960s-present)
Structuralism/Semiotics (1920s-present)
Post-Structuralism/Deconstruction (1966-present)
New Historicism/Cultural Studies (1980s-present)
Post-Colonial Criticism (1990s-present)
Feminist Criticism (1960s-present)
Gender/Queer Studies (1970s-present)
After reviewing voluminous protocols available to analyze and discuss artistic communications, especially literature, I chose The Purdue Owl (https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/4/17/) as a representative model of how decision makers set curricula standards for analysis of the tools, techniques, meaning, and even the value of a particular artistic work, and implicitly it's author.
While the array [see list below courtesy of the Purdue Owl] of critical schools of thought and deconstruction tools is impressive, any list is just a list, until we give it a focus. Perhaps a concern for political correctness dissuades postulating an ecumenical focus that can help today's students develop a confident understanding of what at seemed an enigma. Unfortunately, only by offering a painless, eye-opening, easily transferable, approach do we motivate the kind of work that will ultimately argue the student's opinion.
I argue for an approach to literary (artistic) analysis that speaks to our youth without chaos, yet encompasses today's multimedia universe of art. At the same time I venture to demonstrate it's viable support of traditional standards of artistic analysis.
List of Critical Approaches in Purdue Owl
Moral Criticism, Dramatic Construction (~360 BC-present)
Formalism, New Criticism, Neo-Aristotelian Criticism (1930s-present)
Psychoanalytic Criticism, Jungian Criticism(1930s-present)
Marxist Criticism (1930s-present)
Reader-Response Criticism (1960s-present)
Structuralism/Semiotics (1920s-present)
Post-Structuralism/Deconstruction (1966-present)
New Historicism/Cultural Studies (1980s-present)
Post-Colonial Criticism (1990s-present)
Feminist Criticism (1960s-present)
Gender/Queer Studies (1970s-present)