"So, as readers see each theory applied to works they know well, they will be able to understand more fully what that approach can accomplish. Equally, to the point, as they see the different approaches applied to the same works, they will be able to estimate more accurately their relative strengths and possible uses" (Keesey 6).
I chose this passage from Keesey, because this is the overall point of this course. This is something that should be placed in the course syllabus, mainly because this is a key component to what young literary critics-in-training should be trying to achieve to make themselves become better literary readers; not to mention, the overall idea some of us being future educators helps us have an advantage to view a piece of literature, in order to have our students grasp important points to the specific writing. This introduction provided a chart, or more of a spectrum, that focuses on different types of criticisms, including historical vs. reader response, mimetic vs. intertextual criticism, but I feel that formalism should not be in the middle of this spectrum. It should be placed as its own spectrum, one on end, across from a platonic criticism. Formalism is the study of the words in an artistic poetic fashion, and platonic (which I prefer) finds the morality and ethical issues behind the piece of literature. Overall, Keesey has been very helpful in providing a balance and a pathway to the different types of literary criticisms.Posted by The Gentle Giant at January 29, 2007 7:57 PM