essay on types of criticism

Request Info

Waidner-Spahr Library

Do Research
About the Library
Dickinson Scholar

Ask a Librarian

My Library Account

Criticism: Literature, Film & Drama: Literature Criticism

Literature criticism.

Film Criticism
Drama Criticism

Introduction

This guide will help you locate criticism for Literature, Film, and Drama.

See the English Libguide for more assistance with Literary Criticism.

See the English Databases List for more resources.

Literary criticism is the comparison, analysis, interpretation, and/or evaluation of works of literature. Literary criticism is essentially an opinion, supported by evidence, relating to theme, style, setting or historical or political context. It usually includes discussion of the work’s content and integrates your ideas with other insights gained from research. Literary criticism may have a positive or a negative bias and may be a study of an individual piece of literature or an author’s body of work.

Although criticism may include some of the following elements in order to support an idea, literary criticism is NOT a plot summary, a biography of the author, or simply finding fault with the literature.

Researching, reading, and writing works of literary criticism will help you to make better sense of the work, form judgments about literature, study ideas from different points of view, and determine on an individual level whether a literary work is worth reading.

Examples of some types of literary criticism are:

Biographical
Comparative
Psychological
Theoretical

Literary Criticism Databases

Literary criticism in essays shortened from their original published versions can be found in the first two databases. Full text databases follow.

Literary Index (Gale Literary Sets) This link opens in a new window Search a master index to the major literature books published by Gale, including Contemporary Authors, Contemporary Literary Criticism, and Poetry Criticism. Coverage: historical to present. Citations only.
Gale Literary Criticism This link opens in a new window Explore an authoritative source of literary criticism, summarizing authors' lives and works and including excerpts from scholarly articles. IMPORTANT NOTE: Because this source is an encyclopedic work, it should NEVER be directly cited. Always look up the original source of the excerpted and reprinted articles. Coverage: varies. Mostly full text.
Essay and General Literature Index This link opens in a new window Search chapters and essays contained in books of collected works, focusing on humanities and social sciences, including works published in the United States, Great Britain and Canada. This index covers archaeology, folklore, architecture, history, art, linguistics, literature, music, classical studies, poetry, drama, political science, economics, religion women's studies, and film. Coverage: 1985 to present. Citations only.
Humanities Source This link opens in a new window Access journals, books and other published sources from around the world in all aspects of the humanities, including archaeology, area studies, art, classical studies, dance, film, gender studies, history, journalism, linguistics, literature, music, performing arts, philosophy, and religion. For citation searching: click "Cited References" at the top of the search screen. Coverage: late 1800s to present. Some full text.
Humanities and Social Sciences Retrospective This link opens in a new window Search for articles from English-language periodicals on subjects including anthropology, archaeology, art, classical studies, criminal justice, environmental studies, ethics, gender studies, international relations, law, literature, music, performing arts, philosophy, political science, psychiatry, psychology, religion and sociology. Use the library's "Get It!" button to obtain materials with no direct full text link. Coverage: 1907-1984. Citations only.
MLA International Bibliography (Modern Language Association) with Full Text This link opens in a new window Search for scholarly, international journals, books, and more, covering language, literature, composition, folklore, and film. Coverage: late 19th century to present. Some full text.
Times Literary Supplement Historical Archive This link opens in a new window Access historical issues of Times Literary Supplement, a literary journal which scrutinized, dissected, applauded, and occasionally disparaged, the work of the twentieth century's leading writers and thinkers. This journal is cross-searchable with other collections via Gale Primary Sources . Coverage: 1902-2019. Mostly full text.
Magill's Literary Annuals (On Campus Access Only) This link opens in a new window Access reviews of literature, both fiction and nonfiction, published in English, from writers in the United States and around the world. *This collection must be accessed from on campus.* Coverage: 1977-2021. Full text.

Have the citation?

If you already have a newspaper citation, and need to locate the article, use the following steps:

Search the Journal Locator using the title of the newspaper.
If your newspaper is not listed in the results, search the library catalog .
If not available in the Library Catalog or the Journal Locator, use ILLiad to request the article from another library.
Still having trouble? Ask a Librarian for help.

Librarians: [email protected] Text us: 717-366-6623 Librarians by Department

Circulation desk: 717-245-1397

Next: Film Criticism >>
Last Updated: Feb 5, 2024 10:22 AM
URL: https://libguides.dickinson.edu/criticism

Search Menu
Author Guidelines
Open Access
Join the author community
About Essays in Criticism
Editorial Board
Advertising and Corporate Services
Journals Career Network
Self-Archiving Policy
Dispatch Dates
Terms and Conditions
Journals on Oxford Academic
Books on Oxford Academic

Freya Johnston

Seamus Perry

Book reviews Editor

Christopher Ricks

About the journal

Founded in 1951, by F. W. Bateson, Essays in Criticism soon achieved world-wide circulation, and is today regarded as one of Britain's most distinguished journals of literary criticism …

Latest articles

The f.w. bateson memorial lecture 2019.

Professor Dinah Birch CBE (University of Liverpool) delivered the 2019 Bateson Lecture on 'Utopian Topics: Ruskin & Oxford' in the MBI Al Jaber Building, Corpus Christi College, Oxford on Wednesday 13 February.

Find out more and read previous lectures

Beauty in Literature: A Collection of Works

Ideas on beauty and what it means to be beautiful have changed over the years and this evolution has been documented throughout literature. This collection comprises a selection of high quality literary research from Essays in Criticism and our other literature journals exploring the concept of beauty. The articles in the collection investigate a broad range of literary works from the ancient classics through to the twentieth century, and use the latest in English studies to interrogate the nature of beauty.

Browse the collection here.

Email Alerts

Recommend to your library

Fill out our simple online form to recommend Essays in Criticism to your library.

Recommend now

Accepting high quality academic papers relating to all aspects of Essays in Criticism

Related Titles

Cover image of current issue from Contemporary Women's Writing

Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

Online ISSN 1471-6852
Print ISSN 0014-0856
Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Institutional account management
Rights and permissions
Get help with access
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Approaches to Literary Criticism

One useful way to think about the different approaches or schools of literary criticism is to regard them as different methodologies. We defined a methodology as a “a system of methods that an academic discipline uses to carry out its research and pursue the answers to its questions, combined with an overarching philosophical attitude and interpretive framework for applying those methods.” That’s a good guide to understanding the nature of the different literary critical theories/methodologies. There’s a whole host of different interpretive methodologies for approaching works of literature. You’ll learn more about these in the next section. Collectively, these individual methodologies or theories add up, more or less, to the larger realm of literary theory as a whole.

Schools of Literary Criticism

To put meat on these bones, here are brief descriptions of some of the most prominent schools of literary criticism. (Bear in mind that this is hardly a comprehensive list!) When you research the available scholarly writings on a given work of literature, you may come across essays and articles that use one or more of these approaches. We’ve grouped them into four categories—author-focused, text-focused, reader-focused and context-focused—each with its own central approach and central question about literary works and effective ways to understand them.

Author-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding their authors?

Biographical criticism focuses on the author’s life. It tries to gain a better understanding of the literary work by understanding the person who wrote it. Typical questions involved in this approach include the following:

What aspects of the author’s life are relevant to understanding the work?
How are the author’s personal beliefs encoded into the work?
Does the work reflect the writer’s personal experiences and concerns? How or how not?

Reader-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding the subjective experience of reading them?

Reader-response criticism emphasizes the reader as much as the text. It seeks to understand how a given reader comes together with a given literary work to produce a unique reading. This school of criticism rests on the assumption that literary works don’t contain or embody a stable, fixed meaning but can have many meanings—in fact, as many meanings as there are readers, since each reader will engage with the text differently. In the words of literature scholar Tyson (2006), “reader-response theorists share two beliefs: (1) that the role of the reader cannot be omitted from our understanding of literature and (2) that readers do not passively consume the meaning presented to them by an objective literary text; rather they actively make the meaning they find in literature” (p. 170). Typical questions involved in this approach include the following:

Who is the reader? Also, who is the implied reader (the one “posited” by the text)?
What kinds of memories, knowledge, and thoughts does the text evoke from the reader?
How exactly does the interaction between the reader and the text create meaning on both the text side and the reader side? How does this meaning change from person to person, or if the same person rereads it?

Context-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding the contextual circumstances—historical, societal, cultural, political, economic—out of which they emerged?

Historical criticism focuses on the historical and social circumstances that surrounded the writing of a text. It may examine biographical facts about the author’s life (which can therefore connect this approach with biographical criticism) as well as the influence of social, political, national, and international events. It may also consider the influence of other literary works. New Historicism, a particular type of historical criticism, focuses not so much on the role of historical facts and events as on the ways these things are remembered and interpreted, and the way this interpreted historical memory contributes to the interpretation of literature. Typical questions involved in historical criticism include the following:

How (and how accurately) does the work reflect the historical period in which it was written?
What specific historical events influenced the author?
How important is the work’s historical context to understanding it?
How does the work represent an interpretation of its time and culture? (New Historicism)

Useful Metaphors: Literary Critical Methods as Toolboxes and Lenses

Two useful metaphors for understanding what literary critical theories do and how they’re intended to work are the metaphor of the toolbox and the metaphor of the lens .

The toolbox is the older metaphor. It was more popular before the turn of the twenty-first century, and it says that each critical/theoretical approach provides a set of tools, in the form of specialized concepts and vocabulary, for thinking and talking meaningfully about literature. As this metaphor would have it, once you’ve learned the right concepts and terminology, you’re better equipped with the tools to think and talk about literature in a rich and deep way.

Beginning roughly around the turn of the century, the lens began to supplant the toolbox as the preferred metaphor. Tyson (2006) explains it well: “Think of each theory as a new pair of eyeglasses through which certain elements of our world are brought into focus while others . . . fade into the background” (p. 170). In other words, the lens metaphor characterizes each critical/theoretical approach as a different way of seeing the text, with the different lenses rendering different aspects of the text more prominent or less prominent, more visible or less visible, resulting in the possibility of substantially and even fundamentally different overall readings of the same text depending on which lens is used.

For example, consider the case of Homer’s Iliad as it might appear through several of the different lenses described above.

Biographical criticism would highlight the influence of Homer himself—his biographical facts and major life experiences—on the text.
Reader-response criticism would consider the relationship between the individual reader and the text. Since the Iliad is more than two thousand years old, one possible reader-response approach (but only one among any) might be to consider how the modern reader’s experience and understanding of this work harmonizes or clashes with the implied/intended reader of a poem that was written down in vastly different cultural circumstances some 2,800 years ago, and that was composed even earlier than that.
Historical criticism would try to understand the Iliad by understanding the historical, cultural, and literary contexts out of which it emerged in ancient Greece, and of which it is at least partly a reflection.

It’s also important to recognize that not all literary works are equally amenable to being examined through all critical/theoretical lenses. When it comes to the Iliad, for example, post-colonial critics have found relatively little to “work with” and respond to. However, it’s a different story with Homer’s Odyssey, where the post-colonial lens has produced readings of the text that highlight Odysseus’ role as a colonizer, even as the same lens has also produced readings that highlight Odysseus’ role as a wretched refugee (Greenwood, 2020, pp. 532-535).

Watch it: An Introduction to Literary Theory

Watch Methodology: An introduction to literary theory (17 minutes) on YouTube

Video source: The Nature of Writing. (2017, May 25). Methodology: An introduction to literary theory [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/hXLm3zZYhc0

Attribution & References

Except where otherwise noted, this section is adapted from “Approaches to Literary Criticism” In English Composition II by Lumen Learning, licensed under CC BY 4.0 . / Adaptations include removal of feminist and Marxism critical theory sections.

Tyson, L. (2006). Critical theory today: A user-friendly guide (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203479698

Greenwood, E. (2020). Postcolonial perceptions of Homeric epic. In C. O. Pache (Ed.), T he Cambridge Guide to Homer (pp. 532-535). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139225649

English for Degree Entrance (EDE) Copyright © by Carrie Molinski and Sue Slessor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

An Essay on Criticism Summary & Analysis by Alexander Pope

Line-by-Line Explanation & Analysis
Poetic Devices
Vocabulary & References
Form, Meter, & Rhyme Scheme
Line-by-Line Explanations

Alexander Pope's "An Essay on Criticism" seeks to lay down rules of good taste in poetry criticism, and in poetry itself. Structured as an essay in rhyming verse, it offers advice to the aspiring critic while satirizing amateurish criticism and poetry. The famous passage beginning "A little learning is a dangerous thing" advises would-be critics to learn their field in depth, warning that the arts demand much longer and more arduous study than beginners expect. The passage can also be read as a warning against shallow learning in general. Published in 1711, when Alexander Pope was just 23, the "Essay" brought its author fame and notoriety while he was still a young poet himself.

Read the full text of “From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing”

The Full Text of “From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing”

1 A little learning is a dangerous thing;

2 Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:

3 There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,

4 And drinking largely sobers us again.

5 Fired at first sight with what the Muse imparts,

6 In fearless youth we tempt the heights of Arts,

7 While from the bounded level of our mind,

8 Short views we take, nor see the lengths behind,

9 But, more advanced, behold with strange surprise

10 New, distant scenes of endless science rise!

11 So pleased at first, the towering Alps we try,

12 Mount o'er the vales, and seem to tread the sky;

13 The eternal snows appear already past,

14 And the first clouds and mountains seem the last;

15 But those attained, we tremble to survey

16 The growing labours of the lengthened way,

17 The increasing prospect tires our wandering eyes,

18 Hills peep o'er hills, and Alps on Alps arise!

“From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing” Summary

“from an essay on criticism: a little learning is a dangerous thing” themes.

Shallow Learning vs. Deep Understanding

See where this theme is active in the poem.

Line-by-Line Explanation & Analysis of “From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing”

A little learning is a dangerous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, And drinking largely sobers us again.

Fired at first sight with what the Muse imparts, In fearless youth we tempt the heights of Arts, While from the bounded level of our mind, Short views we take, nor see the lengths behind,

But, more advanced, behold with strange surprise New, distant scenes of endless science rise!

Lines 11-14

So pleased at first, the towering Alps we try, Mount o'er the vales, and seem to tread the sky; The eternal snows appear already past, And the first clouds and mountains seem the last;

Lines 15-18

But those attained, we tremble to survey The growing labours of the lengthened way, The increasing prospect tires our wandering eyes, Hills peep o'er hills, and Alps on Alps arise!

“From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing” Symbols

The Mountains/Alps

See where this symbol appears in the poem.

“From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing” Poetic Devices & Figurative Language

Alliteration.

See where this poetic device appears in the poem.

Extended Metaphor

“from an essay on criticism: a little learning is a dangerous thing” vocabulary.

Select any word below to get its definition in the context of the poem. The words are listed in the order in which they appear in the poem.

A little learning
Pierian spring
Bounded level
Short views
The lengthened way
See where this vocabulary word appears in the poem.

Form, Meter, & Rhyme Scheme of “From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing”

Rhyme scheme, “from an essay on criticism: a little learning is a dangerous thing” speaker, “from an essay on criticism: a little learning is a dangerous thing” setting, literary and historical context of “from an essay on criticism: a little learning is a dangerous thing”, more “from an essay on criticism: a little learning is a dangerous thing” resources, external resources.

The Poem Aloud — Listen to an audiobook of Pope's "Essay on Criticism" (the "A little learning" passage starts at 12:57).

The Poet's Life — Read a biography of Alexander Pope at the Poetry Foundation.

"Alexander Pope: Rediscovering a Genius" — Watch a BBC documentary on Alexander Pope.

More on Pope's Life — A summary of Pope's life and work at Poets.org.

Pope at the British Library — More resources and articles on the poet.

LitCharts on Other Poems by Alexander Pope

Ode on Solitude

Everything you need for every book you read.

school Campus Bookshelves
menu_book Bookshelves
perm_media Learning Objects
login Login
how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
hub Instructor Commons
Download Page (PDF)
Download Full Book (PDF)
Periodic Table
Physics Constants
Scientific Calculator
Reference & Cite
Tools expand_more
Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

6.4: Literary Theory and Schools of Criticism

Last updated
Save as PDF
Page ID 86457

Introduction

A very basic way of thinking about literary theory is that these ideas act as different lenses critics use to view and talk about art, literature, and even culture. These different lenses allow critics to consider works of art based on certain assumptions within that school of theory. The different lenses also allow critics to focus on particular aspects of a work they consider important.

For example, if a critic is working with certain Marxist theories, s/he might focus on how the characters in a story interact based on their economic situation. If a critic is working with post-colonial theories, s/he might consider the same story but look at how characters from colonial powers (Britain, France, and even America) treat characters from, say, Africa or the Caribbean. Hopefully, after reading through and working with the resources in this area of the OWL, literary theory will become a little easier to understand and use.

Please note that the schools of literary criticism and their explanations included here are by no means the only ways of distinguishing these separate areas of theory. Indeed, many critics use tools from two or more schools in their work. Some would define differently or greatly expand the (very) general statements given here. Our explanations are meant only as starting places for your own investigation into literary theory. We encourage you to use the list of scholars and works provided for each school to further your understanding of these theories.

We also recommend the following secondary sources for study of literary theory:

The Critical Tradition: Classical Texts and Contemporary Trends , 1998, edited by David H. Richter
Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide , 1999, by Lois Tyson
Beginning Theory , 2002, by Peter Barry

Although philosophers, critics, educators and authors have been writing about writing since ancient times, contemporary schools of literary theory have cohered from these discussions and now influence how scholars look at and write about literature. The following sections overview these movements in critical theory. Though the timeline below roughly follows a chronological order, we have placed some schools closer together because they are so closely aligned.

Timeline (most of these overlap)

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)
Critical Race Theory (1970s-present)
Literary Theory and Schools of Criticism. Authored by : Allen Brizee, J. Case Tompkins, Libby Chernouski, Elizabeth Boyle. Located at : https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/722/01/ . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright

Literary Theory and Criticism

Home › Archetypal Criticism › Archetypal Criticism

Archetypal Criticism

By NASRULLAH MAMBROL on October 22, 2020 • ( 0 )

Archetypal theory and criticism, although often used synonymously with Myth theory and crticism, has a distinct history and process. The term “archetype” can be traced to Plato ( arche , “original”; typos , “form”), but the concept gained currency in twentieth-century literary theory and criticism through the work of the Swiss founder of analytical psychology, C. G. Jung (1875-1961). Jung’s Psychology of the Unconscious (1916, B. M. Hinkle’s translation of the 1911-12 Wandlungen und Symbole der Libido ) appeared in English one year after publication of the concluding volume with bibliography of the third edition of J. G. Frazer’s The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion (2 vols., 1890,3d ed., 12 vols., 1911-15). Frazer’s and Jung’s texts formed the basis of two allied but ultimately different courses of influence on literary history.

Jung most frequently used “myth” (or “mythologem”) for the narrative expression, “on the ethnological level” ( Collected 9, pt. 1: 67), of the “archetypes,” which he described as patterns of psychic energy originating in the collective unconscious and finding their “most common and most normal” manifestation in dreams (8:287). Thus criticism evolving from his work is more accurately named “archetypal” and is quite distinct from “myth” criticism.

For Jung, “archetype is an explanatory paraphrase of the Platonic eidos ” (9, pt. 1: 4), but he distinguishes his concept and use of the term from that of philosophical idealism as being more empirical and less metaphysical, though most of his “empirical” data were dreams. In addition, he modified and extended his concept over the many decades of his professional life, often insisting that “archetype” named a process, a perspective, and not a content, although this flexibility was lost through the codifying, nominalizing tendencies of his followers.

At mid-century, Canadian critic Northrop Frye (1912-91) introduced new distinctions in literary criticism between myth and archetype. For Frye, as William K. Wimsatt and Cleanth Brooks put it, “archetype, borrowed from Jung, means a primordial image, a part of the collective unconscious, the psychic residue of numberless experiences of the same kind, and thus part of the inherited response-pattern of the race” ( Literary Criticism 709). Frye frequently acknowledged his debt to Jung, accepted some of Jung’s specifically named archetypes—” persona and anima and counsellor and shadow” —and referred to his theory as Jungian criticism (Anatomy 291), a practice subsequently followed in some hand books of literary terms and histories of literary criticism, including one edited by Frye himself, which obscured crucial differences and contributed to the confusion in terminology reigning today. Frye, however, notably in Anatomy of Criticism , essentially redefined and relocated archetype on grounds that would remove him unequivocally from the ranks of “Jungian” critics by severing the connection between archetype and depth psychology: “This emphasis on impersonal content has been developed by Jung and his school, where the communicability of archetypes is accounted for by a theory of a collective unconscious—an unnecessary hypothesis in literary criticism, so far as I can judge” (m-12). Frye, then, first misinterprets Jungian theory by insisting on a Lamarckian view of genetic transmission of archetypes, which Jung explicitly rejected, and later settles on a concept of “archetype” as a literary occurrence per se, an exclusively intertextual recurring phenomenon resembling a convention (99).

Northrope Frye/Pinterest

On a general level, Jung’s and Frye’s theorizings about archetypes, however labeled, overlap, and boundaries are elusive, but in the disciplines of literature the two schools have largely ignored each other’s work. Myth criticism grew in part as a reaction to the formalism of New Criticism , while archetypal criticism based on Jung was never linked with any academic tradition and remained organically bound to its roots in depth psychology: the individual and collective psyche, dreams, and the analytic process. Further, myth critics, aligned with writers in comparative anthropology and philosophy, are said to include Frazer, Jessie Weston, Leslie Fiedler, Ernst Cassirer, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Richard Chase, Joseph Campbell, Philip Wheelwright, and Francis Fergusson. But Wheelwright, for example, barely mentions Jung ( The Burning Fountain , 1954), and he, Fergusson, and others often owe more to Sigmund Freud, Ernest Jones, Oedipus Rex, and the Oedipus complex than to anything taken from Jung. Indeed, myth criticism seems singularly unaffected by any of the archetypal theorists who have remained faithful to the origins and traditions of depth, especially analytical, psychology—James Hillman, Henri Corbin, Gilbert Durand, Rafael Lopez-Pedraza, Evangelos Christou. This article, then, treats the only form of literary theory and criticism consistent with and derived directly from the psychological principles advanced by Jung. Other forms previously labeled “Jungian” are here subsumed under the term “archetypal” because whatever their immediate specific focus, these forms operate on a set of assumptions derived from Jung and accept the depth-psychological structure posited by Jung. Further, Jung termed his own theory “analytical psychology,” as it is still known especially in Europe, but Jungian thought is more commonly referred to today in all disciplines as “archetypal psychology.”

The first systematic application of Jung’s ideas to literature was made in 1934 by Maud Bodkin in Archetypal Patterns in Poetry : “An attempt is here made to bring psychological analysis and reflection to bear upon the imaginative experience communicated by great poetry, and to examine those forms or patterns in which the universal forces of our nature there find objectification” (vii). This book established the priority of interest in the archetypal over the mythological.

The next significant development in archetypal theory that affected literary studies grew out of the effort made by U.S.-born, Zurich-trained analyst James Hillman (b. 1924) “to move beyond clinical inquiry within the consulting room of psychotherapy” to formulate archetypal theory as a multidisciplinary field ( Archetypal 1). Hillman invokes Henri Corbin (1903-78), French scholar, philosopher, and mystic known for his work on Islam, as the “second father” of archetypal psychology. As Hillman puts it, Corbin’s insight that Jung’s “mundus archetypalis” is also the “mundus imaginalis” that corresponds to the Islamic “alam al-mithl” (3) was an early move toward “a reappraisal of psychology itself as an activity of poesis” (24). Hillman also discovers archetypal precursors in Neoplatonism, Heraclitus, Plotinus, Proclus, Marsilio Ficino, and Giambattista Vico . In Re-Visioning Psychology , the published text of his 1972 Yale Terry Lectures (the same lecture series Jung gave in 1937), Hillman locates the archetypal neither “in the physiology of the brain, the structure of language, the organization of society, nor the analysis of behavior, but in the processes of imagination” (xi).

Archetypal theory then took shape principally in the multidisciplinary journal refounded by Hillman in 1970 in Zurich, Spring: An Annual of Archetypal Psychology and Jungian Thought . According to Hillman, that discourse was anticipated by Evangelos Christou’s Logos of the Soul (1963) and extended in religion (David L. Miller’s New Polytheism , 1974), philosophy (Edward Casey’s Imagining: A Phenomenological Study , 1976), mythology (Rafael Lopez-Pedraza’s Hermes and His Children , 1977), psycholinguistics (Paul Kugler’s Alchemy of Discourse: An Archetypal Approach to Language , 1982), and the theory of analysis (Patricia Berry’s Echo’s Subtle Body , 1982).

These archetypalists, focusing on the imaginal’and making central the concept that in English they call “soul,” assert their kinship with Semiotics and Structuralism but maintain an insistent focus on psychoid phenomena, which they characterize as meaningful. Their discourse is conducted in poetic language; that is, their notions of “soul-making” come from the Romantics , especially William Blake and John Keats. “By speaking of soul as a primary metaphor , rather than defining soul substantively and attempting to derive its ontological status from empirical demonstration or theological (metaphysical) argument, archetypal psychology recognizes that psychic reality is inextricably involved with rhetoric” (Hillman, Archetypal 19).

Carl Jung’s Contribution to Psychoanalytic Theory

This burgeoning theoretical movement and the generally unsatisfying nature of so much early “Jungian literary criticism” are both linked to the problematic nature of Jung’s own writing on literature, which comprises a handful of essays: “The Type Problem in Poetry,” “On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to Poetry,” “Psychology and Literature,” “ Ulysses : A Monologue,” and “Is There a Freudian Type of Poetry?” These essays reveal Jung’s lack of awareness as a reader despite his sense that they “may show how ideas that play a considerable role in my work can be applied to literary material” ( Collected 15:109^. They also attest to his self-confessed lack of interest in literature: “I feel not naturally drawn to what one calls literature, but I am strangely attracted by genuine fiction, i.e., fantastical invention” ( Letters 1:509). This explains his fascination with a text like Rider Haggard’s novel She: The History of an Adventure (1886-87), with its unmediated representation of the “anima.” As Jung himself noted: “Literary products of highly dubious merit are often of the greatest interest to the psychologist” ( Collected 15:87-88). Jung was also more preoccupied with dreams and fantasies, because he saw them as exclusively (purely) products of the unconscious, in contrast to literature, which he oddly believed, citing Joyce’s Ulysses as an example, was created “in the full light of consciousness” (15:123).

Issues of genre, period, and language were ignored or subjected to gross generalization as Jung searched for universals in texts as disparate as the fourth-century Shepherd of Hermas, the Divine Comedy, Francesco Colonna’s Hypnerotomachia Poliphili (1499), E. T. A. Hoffman’s tales, Pierre Benoit’s L’Atlantide (1919-20), and Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s “Hiawatha,” as well as works by Carl Spitteler and William Blake. But the great literary text for Jung’s life and work was Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s Faust , not because of its literary qualities but because he sensed that the drama expressed his own personal myth ( Letters 1:309-10). Further, the text offered confirmation (and poetic representation) of the only direct contribution Jung made to literary theory: a distinction between “psychological” and “visionary” texts ( Collected 15:89-90). This heuristic distinction was formed, however, solely on psychobiographical grounds: Did the text originate in, and remain principally shaped by, the author’s experience of consciousness and the personal unconscious or his or her experience at the level of the archetypal collective unconscious? And concomitantly, on which of these levels was the reader affected? Confirmation of this theory was Jung’s reading of Faust: part 1 was “psychological”; part 2, “visionary.”

Thus Jungian theory provided no clear avenue of access for those outside of psychology, and orthodox Jungians were left with little in the way of models for the psychological analysis of literature. Many fell prey to Jung’s idiosyncrasies as a reader, ranging widely and naively over genres, periods, and languages in search of the universal archetypes, while sweeping aside cultureand text-specific problems, ignoring their own role in the act of reading and basing critical evaluation solely on a text’s contribution to the advancement of the reader’s individuation process, a kind of literature-astherapy standard. This way of proceeding had the effect of putting, and keeping, archetypal criticism on the margins of academic discourse and outside the boundaries of traditional academic disciplines and departments.

Bettina Knapp’s 1984 effort at an authoritative demonstration of archetypal literary criticism exemplified this pattern. Her Jungian Approach to Literature attempts to cover the Finnish epic The Kalevala , the Persian Atar’s The Conference of the Birds , and texts by Euripides, Wolfram von Eschenbach, Michel de Montaigne, Pierre Corneille, Goethe, Novalis, Rabbi ben Simhah Nachman, and W. B. Yeats. And despite frequently perceptive readings, the work is marred by the characteristic limitless expansionism and psychological utilitarianism of her interpretive scheme.

Given this background, it is not surprising to find in a 1976 essay entitled “Jungian Psychology in Criticism: Theoretical Problems” the statement that “no purely Jungian criticism of literature has yet appeared” (Baird 22). But Jos van Meurs’s critically annotated 1988 bibliography, Jungian Literary Criticism, 1920-1980, effectively challenges this claim. Despite his deliberately selective focus on critical works written in English on literary texts that are, for the most part, also written in English, van Meurs, with the early assistance of John Kidd, has collected 902 entries, of which he identifies slightly over 80 as valid and valuable literary criticism.

While acknowledging the grave weaknesses of much Jungian writing on literature as “unsubtle and rigid application of preconceived psychological notions and schemes” resulting in “particularly ill-judged or distorted readings,” van Meurs still finds that “sensitively, flexibly and cautiously used, Jungian psychological theory may stimulate illuminating literary interpretations” (14-15). The critical annotations are astute and, given their brevity, surprisingly thorough and suggestive. Van Meurs also does a service by resurrecting successful but neglected early studies, such as Elizabeth Drew’s of T. S. Eliot (1949), and discovering value even in reductionist and impressionistic studies, such as June Singer’s of Blake. He notes that Singer’s Unholy Bible: A Psychological Interpretation of William Blake (1970), though oversimplified in its psychobiographical approach and its treatment of characters as psychological projections of the author, does make original use in a literary context of such Jungian techniques of dream interpretation as “amplification” and of such fantasy-evoking procedures as “active imagination.”

Van Meurs’s bibliography conveys the great variety of Jungian writings on literature even within one language, the increasingly recognized potential for further development and use of Jung’s ideas, and the growth in numbers of literary scholars falling under the influence of Jung. A few names form a core of writers in English (including many Canadians)—Martin Bickman, Albert Gelpi, Elliott Gose, Evelyn Hinz, Henry Murray, Barton L. St. Armand, Harold Schechter, and William Stein— though no single figure has attracted the attention of academic literary specialists, and no persistent commonalities fuse into a recognizable school critics who draw on Jung’s theories. To date, the British Journal of Analytical Psychology and the retitled American Spring: A Journal of Archetype and Culture are the best resources for archetypal criticism of literature and the arts even though only a small percentage of their published articles treat such topics.

Thus, with the archetypal theorists multiplying across disciplines on the one hand and the clinically practicing followers serving as (generally inadequate) critics on the other, archetypal literary theory and criticism flourished in two independent streams in the 1960s and 1970s. From the theorists, dissertations, articles, and books, often traditionally academic in orientation, appeared; the productions of the practitioners are chronicled and critiqued in van Meurs’s bibliography. And the 1980s saw a new, suggestive, and controversial direction in archetypal studies of literature: the feminist. With some of its advocates supported through early publication of their work in the journal Spring , feminist archetypal theory and criticism of literature and the arts emerged fullblown in three texts: Annis Pratt’s Archetypal Patterns in Women’s Fiction (1981), which self-consciously evoked and critiqued Maud Bodkin’s 1934 text; Estella Lauter’s Women as Mythmakers: Poetry and Visual Art by Twentieth Century Women (1984); and Estella Lauter and Carol Schreier Rupprecht’s Feminist Archetypal Theory: Interdisciplinary Re-Visions of Jungian Thought (1985). This last text explicitly named the movement and demonstrated its appropriation of archetypal theory for feminist ends in aesthetics, analysis, art, and religion, as well as in literature.

Feminist archetypal theory, proceeding inductively, restored Jung’s original emphasis on the fluid, dynamic nature of the archetype, drawing on earlier feminist theory as well as the work of Jungian Erich Neumann to reject absolutist, ahistorical, essentialist, and transcendentalist misinterpretations. Thus “archetype” is recognized as the “tendency to form and reform images in relation to certain kinds of repeated experience,” which may vary in individual cultures, authors, and readers (Lauter and Rupprecht 13-14). Considered according to this definition, the concept becomes a useful tool for literary analysis that explores the synthesis of the universal and the particular, seeks to define the parameters of social construction of gender, and attempts to construct theories of language, of the imaginal, and of meaning that take gender into account.

Ironically, as in the feminist revisioning of explicitly male-biased Jungian theory, the rise in the 1980s of Reader-response theory and criticism and the impetus for canon revision have begun to contribute to a revaluation of Jung as a source of literary study. New theoretical approaches appear to legitimize orthodox Jungian ways of reading, sanction Jung’s range of literary preferences from She to Faust , and support his highly affective reaction to Ulysses , which he himself identified (positively) as a “subjective confession” (i5:io9n). And new theories increasingly give credence to the requirement, historically asserted by Jungian readers, that each text elicit a personal, affective, and not “merely intellectual” response. Even French feminist Julia Kristeva has been brought to praise a Jungian contribution to feminist discourse on the maternal: recognition that the Catholic church’s change of signification in the assumption of the Virgin Mary to include her human body represented a major shift in attitude toward female corporaiity (113). In addition, many powerfully heuristic Jungian concepts, such as “synchronicity,” have yet to be tested in literary contexts.

Archetypal criticism, then, construed as that derived from Jung’s theory and practice of archetypal (analytical) psychology, is a fledgling and much misconstrued field of inquiry with significant but still unrealized potential for the study of literature and of aesthetics in general. Two publishing events at the beginning of the 1990s in the United States may signal the coming of age of this kind of archetypal criticism through its convergence with postmodern critical thought, along with a commensurate insistence on its roots in the depth psychology of Jung: the reissue of Morris Philipson’s 1963 Outline of a Jungian Aesthetic and the appearance of Karin Barnaby and Pellegrino D’Acerino’s multidisciplinary, multicultural collection of essays, C. G. Jung and the Humanities: Toward a Hermeneutics of Culture.

Myth Criticism of Northrop Frye

Bibliography James Hillman, Archetypal Psychology: A Brief Account (1983), Re-Visioning Psychology (1975); C. G. Jung, Collected Works (ed. Herbert Read, Michael Fordham, and Gerhard Adler, 20 vois., 1953-79), Letters (trans. R. F. C. Hull, 2 vois., 1973-75). James Baird, “Jungian Psychology in Criticism: Theoretical Problems,” Literary Criticism and Psychology (ed. Joseph P. Strelka, 1976); Karin Barnaby and Pellegrino D’Acerino, eds., C. G. Jung and the Humanities: Toward a Hermeneutics of Culture (1990); Martin Bickman, The Unsounded Centre: Jungian Studies in American Romanticism (1980); Maud Bodkin, Archetypal Patterns in Poetry: Psychological Studies in Imagination (1934); Northrop Frye, Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays (1957); Albert Gelpi, The Tenth Muse: The Psyche of the American Poet (1975); Naomi Goldenberg, “Archetypal Theory after Jung,” Spring (1975); Julia Kristeva, “Stabat Mater” (1977, The Kristeva Reader, ed. Toril Moi, trans. Léon S. Roudiez, 1986); Estella Lauter and Carol Schreier Rupprecht, Feminist Archetypal Theory: Interdisciplinary Re-Visions of Jungian Thought (1985); Erich Neumann, Art and the Creative Unconscious: Four Essays (trans. Ralph Manheim, 1974); Morris Philipson, Outline of a Jungian Aesthetic (1963, reprint, 1991); Annis Pratt et al., Archetypal Patterns in Women’s Fiction (1981); Jos van Meurs and John Kidd, Jungian Literary Criticism, 1920-1980: An Annotated Critical Bibliography of Works in English (with a Selection of Titles after 1980) (1988); William K. Wimsatt, Jr., and Cleanth Brooks, Literary Criticism: A Short History (1957). Source: Groden, Michael, and Martin Kreiswirth. The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994.

Module 10: Working with Literature

Approaches to literary criticism, learning objectives.

Describe key methodological approaches in the field of literary criticism

One useful way to think about the different approaches or schools of literary criticism is to regard them as different methodologies. An earlier chapter in this textbook (Section 1.3: Fields of Inquiry) talked about the different methodologies employed by different academic disciplines. We defined a methodology there as a “a system of methods that an academic discipline uses to carry out its research and pursue the answers to its questions, combined with an overarching philosophical attitude and interpretive framework for applying those methods.” That’s a good guide to understanding the nature of the different literary critical theories/methodologies. There’s a whole host of different interpretive methodologies for approaching works of literature. You’ll learn more about these in the next section. Collectively, these individual methodologies or theories add up, more or less, to the larger realm of literary theory as a whole.

Schools of Literary Criticism

To put meat on these bones, here are brief descriptions of some of the most prominent schools of literary criticism. (Bear in mind that this is hardly a comprehensive list!) When you research the available scholarly writings on a given work of literature, you may come across essays and articles that use one or more of these approaches. We’ve grouped them into four categories—author-focused, text-focused, reader-focused, and context-focused—each with its own central approach and central question about literary works and effective ways to understand them.

Author-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding their authors?

What aspects of the author’s life are relevant to understanding the work?
How are the author’s personal beliefs encoded into the work?
Does the work reflect the writer’s personal experiences and concerns? How or how not?

Psychological criticism applies psychological theories, especially Freudian psychoanalysis and Jungian archetypal depth psychology, to works of literature to explore the psychological issues embedded in them. It may analyze a story’s characters or plot, a poet’s use of language and imagery, the author’s motivations for writing, or any other aspect of a literary work from a psychological perspective. It can be classified as an author-focused approach because its emphasis is on reading the work as an expression of the author’s unconscious processes, such that one can analyze and interpret the work in the same way a psychoanalyst would do with a patient’s dream. Typical questions involved in this approach include the following:

What psychological forces and factors are involved in the words, behaviors, thoughts, and motivations of the characters in a story?
Do dreams or psychological disorders play a part in the work?
How did the author’s life experiences affect his or her intellectual and emotional formation? How is this psychological impact evident in the text and/or the author’s act of writing it?
What unintended meanings might the author have embedded or encoded in the work?

Text-Focused: How can we understand literary works in terms of themselves?

Formalism , along with one of its more conspicuous modern iterations, New Criticism , focuses on a literary text itself, aside from questions about its author or the historical and cultural contexts of its creation. Formalism takes a story, poem, or play “on its own terms,” so to speak, viewing it as a self-contained unit of meaning. The formalist critic therefore tries to understand that meaning by paying attention to the specific form of the text. New Criticism was a particular kind of Formalism that arose in the mid-twentieth century and enjoyed great influence for a time. Typical questions involved in this approach include the following:

How does the structure of the work reveal its meaning?
How do the form and content of the work illuminate each other? What recurring patterns are there in the form, and what is their effect?
How does use of imagery, language, and various literary devices establish the work’s meaning?
How do the characters (if any) evolve over the course of the narrative, and how does this interact with the other literary elements?

Reader-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding the subjective experience of reading them?

Reader-response criticism emphasizes the reader as much as the text. It seeks to understand how a given reader comes together with a given literary work to produce a unique reading. This school of criticism rests on the assumption that literary works don’t contain or embody a stable, fixed meaning but can have many meanings—in fact, as many meanings as there are readers, since each reader will engage with the text differently. In the words of literature scholar Lois Tyson, “reader-response theorists share two beliefs: (1) that the role of the reader cannot be omitted from our understanding of literature and (2) that readers do not passively consume the meaning presented to them by an objective literary text; rather they actively make the meaning they find in literature.” Typical questions involved in this approach include the following:

Who is the reader? Also, who is the implied reader (the one “posited” by the text)?
What kinds of memories, knowledge, and thoughts does the text evoke from the reader?
How exactly does the interaction between the reader and the text create meaning on both the text side and the reader side? How does this meaning change from person to person, or if the same person rereads it?

Context-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding the contextual circumstances—historical, societal, cultural, political, economic—out of which they emerged?

How (and how accurately) does the work reflect the historical period in which it was written?
What specific historical events influenced the author?
How important is the work’s historical context to understanding it?
How does the work represent an interpretation of its time and culture? (New Historicism)

Feminist criticism focuses on prevailing societal beliefs about women in an attempt to expose the oppression of women on various levels by patriarchal systems both contemporary and historical. It also explores the marginalization of women in the realm of literature itself. Typical questions involved in this approach include the following:

How does the work portray the lives of women?
How are female characters portrayed? How are the relationships between men and women portrayed? Does this reinforce sexual and gender stereotypes or challenge them?
How does the specific language of a literary work reflect gender or sexual stereotypes?

Post-colonial criticism focuses on the impact of European colonial powers on literature. It seeks to understand how European hegemonic political, economic, religious, and other types of power have shaped the portrayals of the relationship and status differentials between Europeans and colonized peoples in literature written both by the colonizers and the colonized. Typical questions involved in this approach include the following:

How does the text’s worldview, as evinced in plot, language, characterization, and so on, grow out of assumptions based on colonial oppression?
Which groups of people are portrayed as strangers, outsiders, foreign, exotic, “others”? How are they treated in the narrative?
How does the work portray the psychology and interiority of both colonizers and colonized?
How does the text affirm (either actively or by silence) or challenge colonialist ideology?

Critical race theory focuses on systemic racism and interrogates the dynamics of race and race relationships. In origin, it is a specifically American school of critical theory that sees White racism as an everyday fact of life in America, visible throughout all aspects of culture and society. As such, it encompasses all aspects of life, including literature. Its purpose is to expose and overturn the factors that enable systemic racism to exist. As a literary critical approach, its typical questions include the following:

What is the significance of race, either explicit or implicit, in the literary work being examined?
Does the work include or exclude the voices and experiences of racism’s victims?
How does the work either affirm/reinforce (whether actively or by silence) or challenge/subvert systemic racism?

The following video presents a helpful introduction to the different schools of literary theory and criticism as methodologies:

Useful Metaphors: Literary Critical Methods as Toolboxes and Lenses

Two useful metaphors for understanding what literary critical theories do and how they’re intended to work are the metaphor of the toolbox and the metaphor of the lens .

Beginning roughly around the turn of the century, the lens began to supplant the toolbox as the preferred metaphor. Tyson explains it well: “Think of each theory as a new pair of eyeglasses through which certain elements of our world are brought into focus while others . . . fade into the background.” In other words, the lens metaphor characterizes each critical/theoretical approach as a different way of seeing the text, with the different lenses rendering different aspects of the text more prominent or less prominent, more visible or less visible, resulting in the possibility of substantially and even fundamentally different overall readings of the same text depending on which lens is used.

For example, consider the case of Homer’s Iliad as it might appear through several of the different lenses described above.

Biographical criticism would highlight the influence of Homer himself—his biographical facts and major life experiences—on the text.
Psychological criticism would highlight the inner psychological lives of the characters and the psychological meanings and significance of the Iliad’s language, settings, gods, heroes, themes, and so on, reading Homer’s epic poem in psychoanalytic terms as a kind of symbolic dreamworld.
Reader-response criticism would consider the relationship between the individual reader and the text. Since the Iliad is more than two thousand years old, one possible reader-response approach (but only one among any) might be to consider how the modern reader’s experience and understanding of this work harmonizes or clashes with the implied/intended reader of a poem that was written down in vastly different cultural circumstances some 2,800 years ago, and that was composed even earlier than that.
Historical criticism would try to understand the Iliad by understanding the historical, cultural, and literary contexts out of which it emerged in ancient Greece, and of which it is at least partly a reflection.
Feminist criticism would highlight the roles and portrayals of women in a work largely dominated by men—such as Brisies, the Trojan priestess of Apollo, who becomes a contested “possession” in a conflict between Achilles and Agamemnon—and perhaps seek to recover these feminine perspectives from beneath their subjugation under the overriding masculine one.

Tyson, Lois. Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide. 2nd ed., Routledge, 2006, p. 170.

Greenwood, Emily. Postcolonial Perceptions of Homeric Epic. The Cambridge Guide to Homer, edited by Corinne Ondine Pache, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020, pp. 532-535.

Methodology: An Introduction to Literary Theory. Authored by : The Nature of Writing. Provided by : The Nature of Writing. Located at : https://youtu.be/hXLm3zZYhc0 . License : All Rights Reserved
Approaches to Literary Criticism. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution

The Writing Center • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Writing Critiques

Writing a critique involves more than pointing out mistakes. It involves conducting a systematic analysis of a scholarly article or book and then writing a fair and reasonable description of its strengths and weaknesses. Several scholarly journals have published guides for critiquing other people’s work in their academic area. Search for a “manuscript reviewer guide” in your own discipline to guide your analysis of the content. Use this handout as an orientation to the audience and purpose of different types of critiques and to the linguistic strategies appropriate to all of them.

Types of critique

Article or book review assignment in an academic class.

Text: Article or book that has already been published Audience: Professors Purpose:

to demonstrate your skills for close reading and analysis
to show that you understand key concepts in your field
to learn how to review a manuscript for your future professional work

Published book review

Text: Book that has already been published Audience: Disciplinary colleagues Purpose:

to describe the book’s contents
to summarize the book’s strengths and weaknesses
to provide a reliable recommendation to read (or not read) the book

Manuscript review

Text: Manuscript that has been submitted but has not been published yet Audience: Journal editor and manuscript authors Purpose:

to provide the editor with an evaluation of the manuscript
to recommend to the editor that the article be published, revised, or rejected
to provide the authors with constructive feedback and reasonable suggestions for revision

Language strategies for critiquing

For each type of critique, it’s important to state your praise, criticism, and suggestions politely, but with the appropriate level of strength. The following language structures should help you achieve this challenging task.

Offering Praise and Criticism

A strategy called “hedging” will help you express praise or criticism with varying levels of strength. It will also help you express varying levels of certainty in your own assertions. Grammatical structures used for hedging include:

Modal verbs Using modal verbs (could, can, may, might, etc.) allows you to soften an absolute statement. Compare:

This text is inappropriate for graduate students who are new to the field. This text may be inappropriate for graduate students who are new to the field.

Qualifying adjectives and adverbs Using qualifying adjectives and adverbs (possible, likely, possibly, somewhat, etc.) allows you to introduce a level of probability into your comments. Compare:

Readers will find the theoretical model difficult to understand. Some readers will find the theoretical model difficult to understand. Some readers will probably find the theoretical model somewhat difficult to understand completely.

Note: You can see from the last example that too many qualifiers makes the idea sound undesirably weak.

Tentative verbs Using tentative verbs (seems, indicates, suggests, etc.) also allows you to soften an absolute statement. Compare:

This omission shows that the authors are not aware of the current literature. This omission indicates that the authors are not aware of the current literature. This omission seems to suggest that the authors are not aware of the current literature.

Offering suggestions

Whether you are critiquing a published or unpublished text, you are expected to point out problems and suggest solutions. If you are critiquing an unpublished manuscript, the author can use your suggestions to revise. Your suggestions have the potential to become real actions. If you are critiquing a published text, the author cannot revise, so your suggestions are purely hypothetical. These two situations require slightly different grammar.

Unpublished manuscripts: “would be X if they did Y” Reviewers commonly point out weakness by pointing toward improvement. For instance, if the problem is “unclear methodology,” reviewers may write that “the methodology would be more clear if …” plus a suggestion. If the author can use the suggestions to revise, the grammar is “X would be better if the authors did Y” (would be + simple past suggestion).

The tables would be clearer if the authors highlighted the key results. The discussion would be more persuasive if the authors accounted for the discrepancies in the data.

Published manuscripts: “would have been X if they had done Y” If the authors cannot revise based on your suggestions, use the past unreal conditional form “X would have been better if the authors had done Y” (would have been + past perfect suggestion).

The tables would have been clearer if the authors had highlighted key results. The discussion would have been more persuasive if the authors had accounted for discrepancies in the data.

Note: For more information on conditional structures, see our Conditionals handout .

Make a Gift

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

6 What Is New Criticism?

When most college students think about analyzing a literary text, terms like symbol, imagery, meter, rhyme, alliteration, and metaphor may come to mind. These are all critical terms that became important for literary analysis with the advent of New Criticism.

New Criticism is a literary theory that emerged in the United States in the early 20th century, primarily in the 1930s and 1940s, as part of an attempt to help readers understand the “right” way to interpret a literary text. Unlike biographical criticism, New Criticism focuses on close reading and analysis of the text itself, rather than taking into account the author’s background or historical context.

New Critics believe that a work of literature should be viewed as a self-contained and self-referential entity—”a poem should not mean but be”—and that the meaning of the text can be discovered through careful examination of its language, structure, and imagery in the text. These scholars emphasize the ambiguity and complexity of language, believing that when multiple meanings can be found in a text, this complexity contributes to the work’s aesthetic value. According to Stephen Matterson, “Rather than calling it a critical movement, New Criticism may be better described as an empirical methodology that was, at its most basic and influential, a reading practice” (166).

The New Critics also emphasize the importance of irony and paradox, arguing that like ambiguity and complexity, these elements contribute to the depth and richness of a text. As noted above, they reject the use of information that is outside the text as a means to understand the text. This means that the author’s biography or historical context do not matter when we are interpreting a work of literature.

Prominent New Critics include Cleanth Brooks , John Crowe Ransom, and Robert Penn Warren. While New Criticism declined in popularity in the 1960s, its influence can still be seen in literary criticism today.

Learning Objectives

Using a literary theory, choose appropriate elements of literature (formal, content, or context) to focus on in support of an interpretation (CLO 2.3)
Emphasize what the work does and how it does it with respect to form, content, and context (CLO 2.4)
Understand how to perform close readings of texts (CLO 4.2)
Provide a thoughtful, thorough, and convincing interpretation of a text in support of a well-crafted thesis statement (CLO 5.1)

An Excerpt from New Criticism Scholarship

Read the following excerpt from the article “Criticism, Inc.” by John Crowe Ransom before proceeding with this chapter:

Criticism must become more scientific, or precise and systematic, and this means that it must be developed by the collective and sustained effort of learned persons—which means that its proper seat is in the universities. Scientific: but I do not think we need be afraid that criticism, trying to be a sort of science, will inevitably fail and give up in despair, or else fail without realizing it and enjoy some hollow and pretentious career. It will never be a very exact science, or even a nearly exact one. But neither will psychology, if that term continues to refer to psychic rather than physical phenomena; nor will sociology, as Pareto, quite contrary to his intention, appears to have furnished us with evidence for believing; nor even will economics. It does not matter whether we call them sciences or just systematic studies; the total effort of each to be effective must be consolidated and kept going. The studies which I have mentioned have immeasurably improved in understanding since they were taken over by the universities, and the same career looks possible for criticism. Rather than occasional criticism by amateurs, I should think the whole enterprise might be seriously taken in hand by professionals. Perhaps I use a distasteful figure, but I have the idea that what we need is Criticism, Inc., or Criticism, Ltd.

What Ransom proposes here is a new approach to literary criticism, one founded on the idea that there are universal things about literature that can be observed and measured, just as we can observe and measure things in science. This approach to literature does not require us to know anything at all about the author in order to undertake literary analysis of a text. It does, however, require training and mastery of literary analysis techniques, starting with the close reading. Conveniently, this training can only be undertaken in universities, led by qualified English professors.

Close Reading: An Important Tool for All Kinds of Criticism

Close reading is an important tool developed by the New Critics that we will use in all our approaches to literature going forward. Close reading is a method of literary analysis that involves careful and detailed examination of a text in order to uncover its meaning and significance. Elaine Showalter describes close reading as “slow reading, a deliberate attempt to detach ourselves from the magical power of story-telling and pay attention to language, imagery, allusion, intertextuality, syntax and form.” She compares close reading to “a form of defamiliarisation we use in order to break through our habitual and casual reading practices” (Teaching Literature, 98).

Scholars typically engage in close reading by following a systematic process that involves the following steps:

Selecting a text: Scholars choose a text to analyze, often one that is particularly complex or has multiple layers of meaning.
Reading the text: The scholar reads the text carefully and attentively, paying close attention to the language, form, and structure of the work. When working with poetry, scholars number the lines if this has not already been done.
Analyzing literary devices: The scholar identifies and analyzes literary devices such as metaphor, simile, imagery, and symbolism, as well as elements of form and structure such as meter, rhyme, and stanza.
Identifying patterns: The scholar looks for patterns and repetitions within the text, such as repeated words or images, and considers their significance.
Making connections: The scholar considers how different parts of the text relate to one another, and how the text as a whole relates to larger themes or ideas.
Formulating interpretations: The scholar develops interpretations of the text based on their close reading, drawing on evidence from the text to support their claims.

Overall, close reading is a rigorous and systematic process that requires careful attention to detail and a deep understanding of the literary devices and elements of form and structure that contribute to a text’s meaning and significance. The idea is that scholars will find unity in the complexity of a literary text. Texts that lack complexity are not considered to be literature (and we can infer that they are not worth our study).

Applying New Criticism Techniques to Literature

As I mentioned previously, literary criticism develops in conversation with literature, and perhaps one of the best examples of this concept with respect to New Criticism is the 1926 poem “Ars Poetica” by Archibald MacLeish.

This poem positions itself in the shadow of the Latin poet Horace’s “Ars Poetica.” But it does something very different. Instead of telling us how to write poetry, the poem shows us how to write poetry. Its deceptively simple structure, with couplets and slant rhymes, uses imagery and metaphor to demonstrate how to read and write a poem—how to practice the art of poetry. As Steven Lynn, author of Texts and Contexts , notes: “Only the poem can tell us how to read the poem” (51).

The complexity, irony, metaphors, oppositions, and tensions in this poem all predict the types of textual elements that will become important to the New Critics and their attempts to make a scientific practice of literary criticism.

Do a close reading of the poem below (we’ll do this together in class or as part of the recorded lecture for this chapter). After you complete your close reading of the poem and find evidence from the text, ask yourself, “So what? Who cares?” The answer to this question may help you to formulate a thesis statement that makes an argument about the text, using New Criticism as your critical method.

Example: “Ars Poetica” by Archibald MacLeish (1926)

Here are some questions to consider as you analyze the poem:

Form and Structure: Examine the form and structure of “Ars Poetica.” Is it written in a specific form? Comment on the poem’s overall structure, noting features of its overall organization (stanzas, breaks, etc.). Analyze the impact of the chosen form on the poem’s meaning and effectiveness. How does the form contribute to the poem’s meaning?
Meter and Rhythm: Investigate the poem’s meter and rhythm. Does the poem follow a specific metrical pattern, such as iambic pentameter? Or is it free verse? Analyze the impact of the poem’s rhythm on its tone and mood.
Genre and Intertextuality: Explore the genre of “Ars Poetica.” Discuss any intertextual references or allusions within the poem that enrich its meaning or create interplay with other literary works.
Rhyme and Sound Devices: Analyze the poem’s rhyme scheme. Identify any patterns or variations in rhyme, and examine their impact on the poem’s overall structure and tone. Discuss the effective use of sound devices, such as alliteration, assonance, or onomatopoeia, and their contribution to the poem’s auditory experience.
Imagery and Figurative Language: Examine the use of imagery in “Ars Poetica.” Identify specific examples of vivid or striking imagery and discuss their significance in conveying the poem’s central ideas. Identify and a nalyze figurative language, such as metaphors, similes, or personification, and consider their role in creating layers of meaning.
Themes and Philosophical Exploration: Identify and explore the major themes present in “Ars Poetica.” Discuss how the poem delves into the essence and purpose of poetry, touching upon topics such as brevity, timelessness, emotional truth, and the transformative power of art.

Note: Make sure to support your analysis with specific textual evidence from the poem. Use line numbers to refer to specific parts of the text.

After completing a close reading of the text, you’ll want to come up with a thesis statement that you can support with the evidence you’ve found.

Example of New Criticism thesis statement: The extensive use of metaphor in “Ars Poetica” shows what poetry is instead of telling us, leading to the inevitable conclusion that poems exist outside of any attempt to understand their meaning,

As mentioned in the questions above, MacLeish’s poem alludes to the Latin poet Horace’s treatise, Ars Poetica , an early work of literary criticism. Of poetry, Horace writes this:

“In the choice of his words, too, the author of the projected poem must be delicate and cautious, he must embrace one and reject another: you will express yourself eminently well, if a dexterous combination should give an air of novelty to a well-known word….

It is not enough that poems be beautiful; let them be tender and affecting, and bear away the soul of the auditor whithersoever they please….

As is painting, so is poetry: some pieces will strike you more if you stand near, and some, if you are at a greater distance: one loves the dark; another, which is not afraid of the critic’s subtle judgment, chooses to be seen in the light;”

How does MacLeish’s poem compare to Horace’s description of poetry? If you’ve been paying attention, you may object that this question would not be appropriate to a New Criticism analysis of the poem because we don’t consider the context, but in this case, Horace is definitely fair game because the title of the poem is an allusion to the well-known Classical text. When citing works in New Criticism scholarship, you may want to research any allusions you find.

New Criticism’s Critics: The Limitations of New Criticism

While New Criticism was an important development in literary criticism, this approach also has its limitations. According to Gerald Graff, “The New Critics’ attempt to emulate the empirical scientists by employing an objective, analytic method for literary texts was judged as one more symptom of the university’s capitulation to the capitalist-military industrial- technological complex” (72-73). But Graff also argues that New Criticism was much more than just objective close reading of a text–that the critic’s search for unity in the text was also a search for unity with the text. In other words, while New Critics sought to separate reader from text, this is an impossible task.

While New Criticism is certainly an important step in development of modern critical theories, there are also several limitations to this approach. First, this type of criticism assumes that the text is universal—that it has one universal meaning. For example, maybe you had to read The Great Gatsby in high school. I love this book. And I still remember the multiple choice test I took on it where there was one right answer to the question about what the green light at the end of the dock symbolized. If you’ve ever taken a multiple choice test on a poem or a book, chances are your teacher took a New Criticism approach. Remember again that the goal is to find empirical and scientific ways to evaluate literature. That means we have to be able to find the “right” answer.

A second rather obvious limitation is something that we all know intuitively: how the text affects you, the individual reader, does matter! With New Criticism, because the text is all we need to understand the text, we don’t take individual readers or their different experiences into account.

But we never read the same text the same way twice. Think about a book you’ve read more than once over the course of your life. Because you are not the same person when you reread the book, your experience of reading it will inevitably be different. Consider your response to Natasha Tretheway’s poem “Theories of Time and Space.” Many readers think this poem is hopeful, and you can certainly support that reading with evidence from the text. Other readers, myself included, think the poem is melancholy—that it’s basically about death. That reading is also supported by the text. How you read this—or any—text will depend on your individual experiences.

Ultimately, both of these concerns reveal a flaw in this empirical, scientific approach to literature. In the homogenous literary culture that existed in the 1920s-1950s, the same people were writing literature, reading literature, teaching literature, and evaluating literature. In Western societies, those people happened to be white men. This does not mean that the literature produced during this period isn’t amazing. It is! I love T.S. Eliot and Archibald MacLeish. But you can see how it’s much easier to find universal meaning when you’re in a closed circle of people who all were educated in the same way, read the same types of books, and are now teaching others the things they learned.

When we talk about exploding the canon , this is what we mean. By allowing new voices to enter these literary spaces, it’s no longer quite so easy to find a universal meaning in every text. These limitations of New Criticism ultimately led to the development of several other critical theories we will learn about in this course.

New Criticism Scholars

These are some influential practitioners of New Criticism.

John Crowe Ransom The New Criticism
I.A. Richards Practical Criticism
T.S. Eliot “Hamlet and His Problems” and “Tradition and Individual Talent”
Cleanth Brooks and Robert Penn Warren’s Understanding Fiction and Understanding Poetry
Rene Wellek and Robert Penn Warren’s Theory of Literature
Richard Ohmann, “Teaching and Studying Literature at the End of Ideology.”

Share This Book

Essay on Criticism for Students and Children

500+ words essay on criticism .

It is tough for anyone to criticism well. For some, criticism is a good thing while others disagree. Criticism in itself is one of those words that looks like negative. Thus, it gives a feeling of unwilling to accept or making a massive disagreement or being pessimistic. But to everyone’s surprise, it is not the case. Criticism is often different than what people perceive. The essay on criticism gives you an insight into the pros and cons of the criticism.

Criticism is expressing the disagreement for something or someone that is generally based on perceived faults, beliefs, and mistakes. So, the main point here is whether to consider criticism as good or bad. Also, if we go by the meaning of the word criticism then criticizing someone is bad. Also, simultaneously this might lead to improving the person who is being criticized. So, he/she is becoming a better person and does not repeat the mistakes is considered as providing criticism to be good. Thus, this depends entirely on the perceived value that is hidden behind the criticism.

A Good Part of the Criticism

Scope for improvements .

Constructive criticism will lead to locating the fault or mistakes that are made by the people. So, the people can work upon it and thereby improve their activities so a heedful and better life can be lived. Criticism calls for improvement on one plane and thereby avoiding the issues unwanted on the other side.

Expert and Credible Status

When the criticism is constructive it always makes the criticizer a central figure among the people. Thus, more honors and credibility is given and so criticism would rather be considered as expert advice. Thus, it will add to the status quo of the person that is criticizing.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

The Bad Side of Criticism

Leads to a feeling of demotivation.

A person that is being constantly criticized may feel at tines demotivated. So, this is because of the fact that his/her efforts have not been justifiably and rightfully appreciated. Thus, it may further lead to increase in hesitation in moving forward.

The Danger of Creating a Destructive and False Image

There are many times that it can occur that the people that criticize are seen as the villain of the society. Thus his/her image gets automatically shattered as well as abruptly changed. So, doing criticism may lead adversely to the criticizer as well.

So, we can understand that if the criticism is done in a constructive and positive way that this may lead to a good and fair outcome. Also, if it is done destructively than it may lead to adverse effects on both society as well as personal level.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

Travelling Essay
Picnic Essay
Our Country Essay
My Parents Essay
Essay on Favourite Personality
Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
Essay on Knowledge is Power
Essay on Gurpurab
Essay on My Favourite Season
Essay on Types of Sports

Download the App

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

Knowledge Base
The four main types of essay | Quick guide with examples

The Four Main Types of Essay | Quick Guide with Examples

Published on September 4, 2020 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on July 23, 2023.

An essay is a focused piece of writing designed to inform or persuade. There are many different types of essay, but they are often defined in four categories: argumentative, expository, narrative, and descriptive essays.

Argumentative and expository essays are focused on conveying information and making clear points, while narrative and descriptive essays are about exercising creativity and writing in an interesting way. At university level, argumentative essays are the most common type.

In high school and college, you will also often have to write textual analysis essays, which test your skills in close reading and interpretation.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Argumentative essays, expository essays, narrative essays, descriptive essays, textual analysis essays, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about types of essays.

An argumentative essay presents an extended, evidence-based argument. It requires a strong thesis statement —a clearly defined stance on your topic. Your aim is to convince the reader of your thesis using evidence (such as quotations ) and analysis.

Argumentative essays test your ability to research and present your own position on a topic. This is the most common type of essay at college level—most papers you write will involve some kind of argumentation.

The essay is divided into an introduction, body, and conclusion:

The introduction provides your topic and thesis statement
The body presents your evidence and arguments
The conclusion summarizes your argument and emphasizes its importance

The example below is a paragraph from the body of an argumentative essay about the effects of the internet on education. Mouse over it to learn more.

A common frustration for teachers is students’ use of Wikipedia as a source in their writing. Its prevalence among students is not exaggerated; a survey found that the vast majority of the students surveyed used Wikipedia (Head & Eisenberg, 2010). An article in The Guardian stresses a common objection to its use: “a reliance on Wikipedia can discourage students from engaging with genuine academic writing” (Coomer, 2013). Teachers are clearly not mistaken in viewing Wikipedia usage as ubiquitous among their students; but the claim that it discourages engagement with academic sources requires further investigation. This point is treated as self-evident by many teachers, but Wikipedia itself explicitly encourages students to look into other sources. Its articles often provide references to academic publications and include warning notes where citations are missing; the site’s own guidelines for research make clear that it should be used as a starting point, emphasizing that users should always “read the references and check whether they really do support what the article says” (“Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia,” 2020). Indeed, for many students, Wikipedia is their first encounter with the concepts of citation and referencing. The use of Wikipedia therefore has a positive side that merits deeper consideration than it often receives.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

Academic style
Vague sentences
Style consistency

See an example

An expository essay provides a clear, focused explanation of a topic. It doesn’t require an original argument, just a balanced and well-organized view of the topic.

Expository essays test your familiarity with a topic and your ability to organize and convey information. They are commonly assigned at high school or in exam questions at college level.

The introduction of an expository essay states your topic and provides some general background, the body presents the details, and the conclusion summarizes the information presented.

A typical body paragraph from an expository essay about the invention of the printing press is shown below. Mouse over it to learn more.

The invention of the printing press in 1440 changed this situation dramatically. Johannes Gutenberg, who had worked as a goldsmith, used his knowledge of metals in the design of the press. He made his type from an alloy of lead, tin, and antimony, whose durability allowed for the reliable production of high-quality books. This new technology allowed texts to be reproduced and disseminated on a much larger scale than was previously possible. The Gutenberg Bible appeared in the 1450s, and a large number of printing presses sprang up across the continent in the following decades. Gutenberg’s invention rapidly transformed cultural production in Europe; among other things, it would lead to the Protestant Reformation.

A narrative essay is one that tells a story. This is usually a story about a personal experience you had, but it may also be an imaginative exploration of something you have not experienced.

Narrative essays test your ability to build up a narrative in an engaging, well-structured way. They are much more personal and creative than other kinds of academic writing . Writing a personal statement for an application requires the same skills as a narrative essay.

A narrative essay isn’t strictly divided into introduction, body, and conclusion, but it should still begin by setting up the narrative and finish by expressing the point of the story—what you learned from your experience, or why it made an impression on you.

Mouse over the example below, a short narrative essay responding to the prompt “Write about an experience where you learned something about yourself,” to explore its structure.

Since elementary school, I have always favored subjects like science and math over the humanities. My instinct was always to think of these subjects as more solid and serious than classes like English. If there was no right answer, I thought, why bother? But recently I had an experience that taught me my academic interests are more flexible than I had thought: I took my first philosophy class.

Before I entered the classroom, I was skeptical. I waited outside with the other students and wondered what exactly philosophy would involve—I really had no idea. I imagined something pretty abstract: long, stilted conversations pondering the meaning of life. But what I got was something quite different.

A young man in jeans, Mr. Jones—“but you can call me Rob”—was far from the white-haired, buttoned-up old man I had half-expected. And rather than pulling us into pedantic arguments about obscure philosophical points, Rob engaged us on our level. To talk free will, we looked at our own choices. To talk ethics, we looked at dilemmas we had faced ourselves. By the end of class, I’d discovered that questions with no right answer can turn out to be the most interesting ones.

The experience has taught me to look at things a little more “philosophically”—and not just because it was a philosophy class! I learned that if I let go of my preconceptions, I can actually get a lot out of subjects I was previously dismissive of. The class taught me—in more ways than one—to look at things with an open mind.

A descriptive essay provides a detailed sensory description of something. Like narrative essays, they allow you to be more creative than most academic writing, but they are more tightly focused than narrative essays. You might describe a specific place or object, rather than telling a whole story.

Descriptive essays test your ability to use language creatively, making striking word choices to convey a memorable picture of what you’re describing.

A descriptive essay can be quite loosely structured, though it should usually begin by introducing the object of your description and end by drawing an overall picture of it. The important thing is to use careful word choices and figurative language to create an original description of your object.

Mouse over the example below, a response to the prompt “Describe a place you love to spend time in,” to learn more about descriptive essays.

On Sunday afternoons I like to spend my time in the garden behind my house. The garden is narrow but long, a corridor of green extending from the back of the house, and I sit on a lawn chair at the far end to read and relax. I am in my small peaceful paradise: the shade of the tree, the feel of the grass on my feet, the gentle activity of the fish in the pond beside me.

My cat crosses the garden nimbly and leaps onto the fence to survey it from above. From his perch he can watch over his little kingdom and keep an eye on the neighbours. He does this until the barking of next door’s dog scares him from his post and he bolts for the cat flap to govern from the safety of the kitchen.

With that, I am left alone with the fish, whose whole world is the pond by my feet. The fish explore the pond every day as if for the first time, prodding and inspecting every stone. I sometimes feel the same about sitting here in the garden; I know the place better than anyone, but whenever I return I still feel compelled to pay attention to all its details and novelties—a new bird perched in the tree, the growth of the grass, and the movement of the insects it shelters…

Sitting out in the garden, I feel serene. I feel at home. And yet I always feel there is more to discover. The bounds of my garden may be small, but there is a whole world contained within it, and it is one I will never get tired of inhabiting.

Though every essay type tests your writing skills, some essays also test your ability to read carefully and critically. In a textual analysis essay, you don’t just present information on a topic, but closely analyze a text to explain how it achieves certain effects.

Rhetorical analysis

A rhetorical analysis looks at a persuasive text (e.g. a speech, an essay, a political cartoon) in terms of the rhetorical devices it uses, and evaluates their effectiveness.

The goal is not to state whether you agree with the author’s argument but to look at how they have constructed it.

The introduction of a rhetorical analysis presents the text, some background information, and your thesis statement; the body comprises the analysis itself; and the conclusion wraps up your analysis of the text, emphasizing its relevance to broader concerns.

The example below is from a rhetorical analysis of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech . Mouse over it to learn more.

King’s speech is infused with prophetic language throughout. Even before the famous “dream” part of the speech, King’s language consistently strikes a prophetic tone. He refers to the Lincoln Memorial as a “hallowed spot” and speaks of rising “from the dark and desolate valley of segregation” to “make justice a reality for all of God’s children.” The assumption of this prophetic voice constitutes the text’s strongest ethical appeal; after linking himself with political figures like Lincoln and the Founding Fathers, King’s ethos adopts a distinctly religious tone, recalling Biblical prophets and preachers of change from across history. This adds significant force to his words; standing before an audience of hundreds of thousands, he states not just what the future should be, but what it will be: “The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.” This warning is almost apocalyptic in tone, though it concludes with the positive image of the “bright day of justice.” The power of King’s rhetoric thus stems not only from the pathos of his vision of a brighter future, but from the ethos of the prophetic voice he adopts in expressing this vision.

Literary analysis

A literary analysis essay presents a close reading of a work of literature—e.g. a poem or novel—to explore the choices made by the author and how they help to convey the text’s theme. It is not simply a book report or a review, but an in-depth interpretation of the text.

Literary analysis looks at things like setting, characters, themes, and figurative language. The goal is to closely analyze what the author conveys and how.

The introduction of a literary analysis essay presents the text and background, and provides your thesis statement; the body consists of close readings of the text with quotations and analysis in support of your argument; and the conclusion emphasizes what your approach tells us about the text.

Mouse over the example below, the introduction to a literary analysis essay on Frankenstein , to learn more.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is often read as a crude cautionary tale about the dangers of scientific advancement unrestrained by ethical considerations. In this reading, protagonist Victor Frankenstein is a stable representation of the callous ambition of modern science throughout the novel. This essay, however, argues that far from providing a stable image of the character, Shelley uses shifting narrative perspectives to portray Frankenstein in an increasingly negative light as the novel goes on. While he initially appears to be a naive but sympathetic idealist, after the creature’s narrative Frankenstein begins to resemble—even in his own telling—the thoughtlessly cruel figure the creature represents him as. This essay begins by exploring the positive portrayal of Frankenstein in the first volume, then moves on to the creature’s perception of him, and finally discusses the third volume’s narrative shift toward viewing Frankenstein as the creature views him.

If you want to know more about AI tools , college essays , or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

Ad hominem fallacy
Post hoc fallacy
Appeal to authority fallacy
False cause fallacy
Sunk cost fallacy

College essays

Choosing Essay Topic
Write a College Essay
Write a Diversity Essay
College Essay Format & Structure
Comparing and Contrasting in an Essay

(AI) Tools

Grammar Checker
Paraphrasing Tool
Text Summarizer
AI Detector
Plagiarism Checker
Citation Generator

At high school and in composition classes at university, you’ll often be told to write a specific type of essay , but you might also just be given prompts.

Look for keywords in these prompts that suggest a certain approach: The word “explain” suggests you should write an expository essay , while the word “describe” implies a descriptive essay . An argumentative essay might be prompted with the word “assess” or “argue.”

The vast majority of essays written at university are some sort of argumentative essay . Almost all academic writing involves building up an argument, though other types of essay might be assigned in composition classes.

Essays can present arguments about all kinds of different topics. For example:

In a literary analysis essay, you might make an argument for a specific interpretation of a text
In a history essay, you might present an argument for the importance of a particular event
In a politics essay, you might argue for the validity of a certain political theory

An argumentative essay tends to be a longer essay involving independent research, and aims to make an original argument about a topic. Its thesis statement makes a contentious claim that must be supported in an objective, evidence-based way.

An expository essay also aims to be objective, but it doesn’t have to make an original argument. Rather, it aims to explain something (e.g., a process or idea) in a clear, concise way. Expository essays are often shorter assignments and rely less on research.

The key difference is that a narrative essay is designed to tell a complete story, while a descriptive essay is meant to convey an intense description of a particular place, object, or concept.

Narrative and descriptive essays both allow you to write more personally and creatively than other kinds of essays , and similar writing skills can apply to both.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2023, July 23). The Four Main Types of Essay | Quick Guide with Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved March 21, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/essay-types/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, how to write an argumentative essay | examples & tips, how to write an expository essay, how to write an essay outline | guidelines & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Lauren Oyler's favorite collection of essays that will leave you deep in thought

When you make a purchase using links on our site, The Week may earn a commission. All reviews are written independently by our editorial team.

Lauren Oyler is the author of the novel " Fake Accounts " and a critic whose essays and reviews have appeared in The New Yorker, Harper's, and the London Review of Books. Her first essay collection, " No Judgment ," will be published March 19.

'The Professor and Other Writings' by Terry Castle (2010)

This collection of memoiristic critical essays is by far my most successful book recommendation. It includes a hilarious portrait of Susan Sontag — "Ours was on-again, off-again, semi-friendship, constricted by role-playing and shot through in the end with mutual irritation," Castle writes — that is widely beloved. But the title essay, about a "near-ruinous" affair Castle had as a graduate student, is where her comedic timing, digressive brilliance, and skill at crafting absurd scenes truly come together. Buy it here .

'The Earth Dies Streaming' by A.S. Hamrah (2018)

Reading Hamrah's film reviews has taught me a lot about how to outsmart mass market demands. Early in his career, he found his words quoted on the back of a video release; this was so disturbing that he decided to not include anything in his work that could be used for publicity. As a result, everything he writes is surprising, and confounding to any search engine that tries to reduce his opinions to a simple "take." Buy it here .

'The Possessed' by Elif Batuman (2010)

All experiences are "real," yet the experience of reading is often seen as once removed. Inspired by her dissatisfaction with both graduate school and the possibilities of a typical "literary" career, Batuman wrote a collection of unclassifiable travel essays on Russian literature, offering a vision of literary criticism that is as transporting as the novels it takes as its subject. Buy it here .

'The Essential Ellen Willis' by Ellen Willis (2014)

The feminist critic Ellen Willis hasn't enjoyed quite the same revival that several of her peers writing in the '60s, '70s, and '80s have, so although I regret this volume doesn't include her famous 1973 review-essay on "Deep Throat," it will have to do. She untangles the knotty perversities of sex, desire, feminism, and culture with a light touch, and she's pretty much always right. Buy it here .

'Seven Types of Ambiguity' by William Empson (1930)

Given that "in a sufficiently extended sense any prose statement could be called ambiguous," it's amazing he got it down to seven. While not for the faint of heart or weary of English poetry, this book introduced New Criticism to the U.S., and reveals the extent of the work any close-reading literary critic takes on. Buy it here .

'Against Everything' by Mark Greif (2016)

He's not really against everything. Buy it here .

This article was first published in the latest issue of The Week magazine. If you want to read more like it, you can try six risk-free issues of the magazine here .

Lauren Oyler is the author of "Fake Accounts" and "No Judgement"

The Cowardice of Guernica

The literary magazine Guernica ’s decision to retract an essay about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict reveals much about how the war is hardening human sentiment.

Listen to this article

Produced by ElevenLabs and News Over Audio (NOA) using AI narration.

In the days after October 7, the writer and translator Joanna Chen spoke with a neighbor in Israel whose children were frightened by the constant sound of warplanes. “I tell them these are good booms,” the neighbor said to Chen with a grimace. “I understood the subtext,” Chen wrote later in an essay published in Guernica magazine on March 4, titled “From the Edges of a Broken World.” The booms were, of course, the Israeli army bombing Gaza, part of a campaign that has left at least 30,000 civilians and combatants dead so far.

The moment is just one observation in a much longer meditative piece of writing in which Chen weighs her principles—for years she has volunteered at a charity providing transportation for Palestinian children needing medical care, and works on Arabic and Hebrew translations to bridge cultural divides—against the more turbulent feelings of fear, inadequacy, and split allegiances that have cropped up for her after October 7, when 1,200 people were killed and 250 taken hostage in Hamas’s assault on Israel. But the conversation with the neighbor is a sharp, novelistic, and telling moment. The mother, aware of the perversity of recasting bombs killing children mere miles away as “good booms,” does so anyway because she is a mother, and her children are frightened. The act, at once callous and caring, will stay with me.

Not with the readers of Guernica , though. The magazine , once a prominent publication for fiction, poetry, and literary nonfiction, with a focus on global art and politics, quickly found itself imploding as its all-volunteer staff revolted over the essay. One of the magazine’s nonfiction editors posted on social media that she was leaving over Chen’s publication. “Parts of the essay felt particularly harmful and disorienting to read, such as the line where a person is quoted saying ‘I tell them these are good booms.’” Soon a poetry editor resigned as well, calling Chen’s essay a “horrific settler normalization essay”— settler here seeming to refer to all Israelis, because Chen does not live in the occupied territories. More staff members followed, including the senior nonfiction editor and one of the co-publishers (who criticized the essay as “a hand-wringing apologia for Zionism”). Amid this flurry of cascading outrage, on March 10 Guernica pulled the essay from its website, with the note: “ Guernica regrets having published this piece, and has retracted it. A more fulsome explanation will follow.” As of today, this explanation is still pending, and my request for comment from the editor in chief, Jina Moore Ngarambe, has gone unanswered.

Read: Beware the language that erases reality

Blowups at literary journals are not the most pressing news of the day, but the incident at Guernica reveals the extent to which elite American literary outlets may now be beholden to the narrowest polemical and moralistic approaches to literature. After the publication of Chen’s essay, a parade of mutual incomprehension occurred across social media, with pro-Palestine writers announcing what they declared to be the self-evident awfulness of the essay (publishing the essay made Guernica “a pillar of eugenicist white colonialism masquerading as goodness,” wrote one of the now-former editors), while reader after reader who came to it because of the controversy—an archived version can still be accessed—commented that they didn’t understand what was objectionable. One reader seemed to have mistakenly assumed that Guernica had pulled the essay in response to pressure from pro-Israel critics. “Oh buddy you can’t have your civilian population empathizing with the people you’re ethnically cleansing,” he wrote, with obvious sarcasm. When another reader pointed out that he had it backwards, he responded, “This chain of events is bizarre.”

Some people saw anti-Semitism in the decision. James Palmer, a deputy editor of Foreign Policy , noted how absurd it was to suggest that the author approved of the “good bombs” sentiment, and wrote that the outcry was “one step toward trying to exclude Jews from discourse altogether.” And it is hard not to see some anti-Semitism at play. One of the resigning editors claimed that the essay “includes random untrue fantasies about Hamas and centers the suffering of oppressors” (Chen briefly mentions the well-documented atrocities of October 7; caring for an Israeli family that lost a daughter, son-in-law, and nephew; and her worries about the fate of Palestinians she knows who have links to Israel).

Madhuri Sastry, one of the co-publishers, notes in her resignation post that she’d earlier successfully insisted on barring a previous essay of Chen’s from the magazine’s Voices on Palestine compilation. In that same compilation, Guernica chose to include an interview with Alice Walker, the author of a poem that asks “Are Goyim (us) meant to be slaves of Jews,” and who once recommended to readers of The New York Times a book that claims that “a small Jewish clique” helped plan the Russian Revolution, World Wars I and II, and “coldly calculated” the Holocaust. No one at Guernica publicly resigned over the magazine’s association with Walker.

However, to merely dismiss all of the critics out of hand as insane or intolerant or anti-Semitic would ironically run counter to the spirit of Chen’s essay itself. She writes of her desire to reach out to those on the other side of the conflict, people she’s worked with or known and who would be angered or horrified by some of the other experiences she relates in the essay, such as the conversation about the “good booms.” Given the realities of the conflict, she knows this attempt to connect is just a first step, and an often-frustrating one. Writing to a Palestinian she’d once worked with as a reporter, she laments her failure to come up with something meaningful to say: “I also felt stupid—this was war, and whether I liked it or not, Nuha and I were standing at opposite ends of the very bridge I hoped to cross. I had been naive … I was inadequate.” In another scene, she notes how even before October 7, when groups of Palestinians and Israelis joined together to share their stories, their goodwill failed “to straddle the chasm that divided us.”

Read: Why activism leads to so much bad writing

After the publication of Chen’s essay, one writer after another pulled their work from the magazine. One wrote, “I will not allow my work to be curated alongside settler angst,” while another, the Texas-based Palestinian American poet Fady Joudah, wrote that Chen’s essay “is humiliating to Palestinians in any time let alone during a genocide. An essay as if a dispatch from a colonial century ago. Oh how good you are to the natives.” I find it hard to read the essay that way, but it would be a mistake, as Chen herself suggests, to ignore such sentiments. For those who more naturally sympathize with the Israeli mother than the Gazan hiding from the bombs, these responses exist across that chasm Chen describes, one that empathy alone is incapable of bridging.

That doesn’t mean empathy isn’t a start, though. Which is why the retraction of the article is more than an act of cowardice and a betrayal of a writer whose work the magazine shepherded to publication. It’s a betrayal of the task of literature, which cannot end wars but can help us see why people wage them, oppose them, or become complicit in them.

Empathy here does not justify or condemn. Empathy is just a tool. The writer needs it to accurately depict their subject; the peacemaker needs it to be able to trace the possibilities for negotiation; even the soldier needs it to understand his adversary. Before we act, we must see war’s human terrain in all its complexity, no matter how disorienting and painful that might be. Which means seeing Israelis as well as Palestinians—and not simply the mother comforting her children as the bombs fall and the essayist reaching out across the divide, but far harsher and more unsettling perspectives. Peace is not made between angels and demons but between human beings, and the real hell of life, as Jean Renoir once noted, is that everybody has their reasons. If your journal can’t publish work that deals with such messy realities, then your editors might as well resign, because you’ve turned your back on literature.

IMAGES

23 Constructive Criticism Examples (2024)
PPT
How to write a literature criticism essay in 2021
PPT
How to Write a Critique Paper: Format, Tips, & Critique Paper Example
PPT

VIDEO

How to write an essay Class 9,10,11 and 12
Essay Writing 1 Types of Essays
How to Write Conclusion in all Essay types || Writing band 8+
Types of Essay
Livestream: Composing an Argumentative Essay
Livestream: Argumentative Writing Techniques

COMMENTS

Literary criticism
literary criticism, the reasoned consideration of literary works and issues. It applies, as a term, to any argumentation about literature, whether or not specific works are analyzed. Plato 's cautions against the risky consequences of poetic inspiration in general in his Republic are thus often taken as the earliest important example of ...
Literary Theory: Understanding 15 Types of Literary Criticism
Literary Theory: Understanding 15 Types of Literary Criticism. Written by MasterClass. Last updated: Jun 7, 2021 • 4 min read. Literary theory enables readers and critics a better understanding of literature through close readings and contextual insights.
Analysis of Alexander Pope's An Essay on Criticism
An Essay on Criticism (1711) was Pope's first independent work, published anonymously through an obscure bookseller [12-13]. Its implicit claim to authority is not based on a lifetime's creative work or a prestigious commission but, riskily, on the skill and argument of the poem alone. It offers a sort of master-class not only in doing….
Literary Criticism Explained: 11 Critical Approaches to Literature
Literary criticism is the practice of studying, evaluating, and interpreting works of literature. Similar to literary theory, which provides a broader philosophical framework for how to analyze literature, literary criticism offers readers new ways to understand an author's work. Examples of literary theories include new historicism, queer ...
Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays
Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays, work of literary criticism by Northrop Frye, published in 1957 and generally considered the author's most important work.In his introduction, Frye explains that his initial intention to examine the poetry of Edmund Spenser had given way in the process to a broader survey of the ordering principles of literary theory.
An Essay on Criticism by Alexander Pope
Pope wrote "An Essay on Criticism" when he was 23; he was influenced by Quintillian, Aristotle, Horace's Ars Poetica, and Nicolas Boileau's L'Art Poëtique. Written in heroic couplets, the tone is straight-forward and conversational. It is a discussion of what good critics should do; however, in reading it one gleans much wisdom on ...
Literary Criticism
Literary Criticism Writing Activity Compare/Contrast Essay. For this activity, you will choose two types of literary criticism that were mentioned in the lesson to compare and contrast.
Criticism: Literature, Film & Drama
Literary criticism is the comparison, analysis, interpretation, and/or evaluation of works of literature. Literary criticism is essentially an opinion, supported by evidence, relating to theme, style, setting or historical or political context. It usually includes discussion of the work's content and integrates your ideas with other insights ...
6.3: Literary Criticism
Literary criticism refers to a genre of writing whereby an author critiques a literary text, either a work of fiction, a play, or poetry. Alternatively, some works of literary criticism address how a particular theory of interpretation informs a reading of a work or refutes some other critics' reading of a work.
Essays in Criticism
This collection comprises a selection of high quality literary research from Essays in Criticism and our other literature journals exploring the concept of beauty. The articles in the collection investigate a broad range of literary works from the ancient classics through to the twentieth century, and use the latest in English studies to ...
What is Literary Criticism? (with Examples)
Criticism in literature is the study/evaluation of literary works, including but not limited to plays, poems, novels, and essays. Critics evaluate, interpret, and judge literary work according to various theories (often closely connected to literary movements like modernism ). Sometimes, critics are influenced by the work of literary theorists ...
Approaches to Literary Criticism
Approaches to Literary Criticism. One useful way to think about the different approaches or schools of literary criticism is to regard them as different methodologies. We defined a methodology as a "a system of methods that an academic discipline uses to carry out its research and pursue the answers to its questions, combined with an ...
An Essay on Criticism
An Essay on Criticism, didactic poem in heroic couplets by Alexander Pope, first published anonymously in 1711 when the author was 22 years old.Although inspired by Horace's Ars poetica, this work of literary criticism borrowed from the writers of the Augustan Age.In it Pope set out poetic rules, a Neoclassical compendium of maxims, with a combination of ambitious argument and great ...
New Criticism Lecture Notes and Presentation
New Criticism is a formalist approach to literary analysis that looks at literature for the sake of literature, similar to a phrase you may have heard, ars gratis artis, or art for the sake of art. The name New Criticism comes from John Crowe Ransom's 1941 book, The New Criticism. We will read a short excerpt from an essay Ransom wrote called ...
An Essay on Criticism Summary & Analysis
Alexander Pope's "An Essay on Criticism" seeks to lay down rules of good taste in poetry criticism, and in poetry itself. Structured as an essay in rhyming verse, it offers advice to the aspiring critic while satirizing amateurish criticism and poetry. The famous passage beginning "A little learning is a dangerous thing" advises would-be critics to learn their field in depth, warning that the ...
6.4: Literary Theory and Schools of Criticism
Please note that the schools of literary criticism and their explanations included here are by no means the only ways of distinguishing these separate areas of theory. Indeed, many critics use tools from two or more schools in their work. Some would define differently or greatly expand the (very) general statements given here. ... Article type ...
An Essay on Criticism
An Essay on Criticism is one of the first major poems written by the English writer Alexander Pope (1688-1744), published in 1711. It is the source of the famous quotations "To err is human; to forgive, divine", "A little learning is a dang'rous thing" (frequently misquoted as "A little knowledge is a dang'rous thing"), and "Fools rush in ...
Archetypal Criticism
Archetypal theory and criticism, although often used synonymously with Myth theory and crticism, has a distinct history and process. The term "archetype" can be traced to Plato (arche, "original"; typos, "form"), but the concept gained currency in twentieth-century literary theory and criticism through the work of the Swiss founder of analytical psychology, C. G. Jung…
What Is Psychological Criticism?
Psychological criticism is a critical approach to literature that employs psychological theories to examine aspects of a literary work as a way to better understand both the author's mind and the characters, themes, and other elements of the text. Thus, the mind is at the center of our target as we learn more about psychological criticism.
Approaches to Literary Criticism
Psychological criticism applies psychological theories, especially Freudian psychoanalysis and Jungian archetypal depth psychology, to works of literature to explore the psychological issues embedded in them. It may analyze a story's characters or plot, a poet's use of language and imagery, the author's motivations for writing, or any ...
Writing Critiques
Writing Critiques. Writing a critique involves more than pointing out mistakes. It involves conducting a systematic analysis of a scholarly article or book and then writing a fair and reasonable description of its strengths and weaknesses. Several scholarly journals have published guides for critiquing other people's work in their academic area.
What Is New Criticism?
New Criticism is a literary theory that emerged in the United States in the early 20th century, primarily in the 1930s and 1940s, as part of an attempt to help readers understand the "right" way to interpret a literary text. Unlike biographical criticism, New Criticism focuses on close reading and analysis of the text itself, rather than ...
Essay on Criticism for Students and Children
The essay on criticism gives you an insight into the pros and cons of the criticism. Criticism is expressing the disagreement for something or someone that is generally based on perceived faults, beliefs, and mistakes. So, the main point here is whether to consider criticism as good or bad. Also, if we go by the meaning of the word criticism ...
The Four Main Types of Essay
An essay is a focused piece of writing designed to inform or persuade. There are many different types of essay, but they are often defined in four categories: argumentative, expository, narrative, and descriptive essays. Argumentative and expository essays are focused on conveying information and making clear points, while narrative and ...
Lauren Oyler's favorite collection of essays that will leave you ...
Lauren Oyler is the author of the novel "Fake Accounts" and a critic whose essays and reviews have appeared in The New Yorker, Harper's, and the London Review of Books. Her first essay collection ...
The Cowardice of Guernica
Guernica. The literary magazine Guernica's decision to retract an essay about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict reveals much about how the war is hardening human sentiment. In the days after ...
Intermittent fasting: New research casts doubt on its effectiveness
Intermittent fasting is one of the many trendy ways people try to lose or maintain their weight. Also known as time-restricted eating, the practice is a method of weight loss that confines a ...

Waidner-Spahr Library

Ask a Librarian

Criticism: Literature, Film & Drama: Literature Criticism

Introduction

Literary Criticism Databases

Have the citation?

Book reviews Editor

About the journal

Latest articles

Beauty in Literature: A Collection of Works

Email Alerts

Recommend to your library

Related Titles

Affiliations

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Approaches to Literary Criticism

Schools of Literary Criticism

Author-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding their authors?

Reader-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding the subjective experience of reading them?

Context-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding the contextual circumstances—historical, societal, cultural, political, economic—out of which they emerged?

Useful Metaphors: Literary Critical Methods as Toolboxes and Lenses

Watch it: An Introduction to Literary Theory

Attribution & References

Share This Book

An Essay on Criticism Summary & Analysis by Alexander Pope

The Full Text of “From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing”

“From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing” Summary

Shallow Learning vs. Deep Understanding

Line-by-Line Explanation & Analysis of “From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing”

Lines 11-14

Lines 15-18

“From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing” Symbols

The Mountains/Alps

“From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing” Poetic Devices & Figurative Language

Extended Metaphor

Form, Meter, & Rhyme Scheme of “From An Essay on Criticism: A little learning is a dangerous thing”

LitCharts on Other Poems by Alexander Pope

Everything you need for every book you read.

6.4: Literary Theory and Schools of Criticism

Introduction

Timeline (most of these overlap)

Literary Theory and Criticism

Archetypal Criticism

Share this:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Module 10: Working with Literature

Schools of Literary Criticism

Author-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding their authors?

Text-Focused: How can we understand literary works in terms of themselves?

Reader-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding the subjective experience of reading them?

Context-Focused: How can we understand literary works by understanding the contextual circumstances—historical, societal, cultural, political, economic—out of which they emerged?

Useful Metaphors: Literary Critical Methods as Toolboxes and Lenses

Writing Critiques

Types of critique

Published book review

Manuscript review

Language strategies for critiquing

Offering Praise and Criticism

Offering suggestions

6 What Is New Criticism?

Learning Objectives

An Excerpt from New Criticism Scholarship

Close Reading: An Important Tool for All Kinds of Criticism

Applying New Criticism Techniques to Literature

Example: “Ars Poetica” by Archibald MacLeish (1926)

New Criticism’s Critics: The Limitations of New Criticism

New Criticism Scholars

Further Reading

Share This Book

Essay on Criticism for Students and Children

A Good Part of the Criticism

Expert and Credible Status

The Bad Side of Criticism

The Danger of Creating a Destructive and False Image

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Download the App

Have a language expert improve your writing

The Four Main Types of Essay | Quick Guide with Examples

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text