Who Can Be a Critic?
"The fact that the term 'criticism' has now come to designate all commentary on textual meaning reflects a general acceptance of the doctrine that description and evaluation are inseparable in literary study.”
-From E.D. Hirsch Jr.’s “Objective Interpretation” in Donald Keesey’s Contexts for Criticism, page 18
I thought it was really interesting that Hirsch did not include any reference to “academic,” etc., literature. I think that anyone can provide criticism, yet Hirsch does not make that distinction here. Is anyone’s criticism valuable, and can any critic’s work be used in literary study? Perhaps he is thinking of the various schools of criticism that we are going to discuss within this course; however what about the average person who critiques a work?
I believe that all criticism is important, especially that of the common reader. In the only writing of fiction course I have taken, the non-English major student was the one gave the most important and helpful feedback that allowed me to be a better creative writer, rather than those students who were experienced writers. Perhaps this is just it: this student was an experienced reader while the others were experienced writers.
I think that often a focus is put on interpretation or simple criticism. When we read a work in high school or lower level college courses, we identify the literary devices and then say whether we liked the work or not, forgetting to really look deeply at the work for what could be improved or what true meaning it there. I agree with Hirsch’s statement, but, like the good critic, believe that he should add that the “description and evaluation” should come from all circles of readers, not just those who are studying literature as trained critics.
3 Comments
Leave a comment
Recent Comments
Greta Carroll on Who Can Be a Critic?: I definitely agree with your E
Bethany Merryman on Who Can Be a Critic?: I agree Erica, sometimes some
I agree Erica, sometimes some of the best and most interesting views of literature are of those thinking outside of the literary box. For those of us who are so used to close reading and evaluating literature we may overlook some of the most important points of the story.
I definitely agree with your Erica. You make an extremely good point. Authors don’t write their works just for the select few who work as literary critics. They write for the general public and therefore, in a lot of ways, their responses are the most important ones. When we disregard them, we are disregarding the author’s intended audience. So it is rather ironic that Hirsch does not clarify, after all if the author’s intent is so important (which Hirsch adamantly believes) then doesn’t their audience play a part in their intentions?
I remember that in Writing of Fiction! The non-majors had really profound things to say, and they wrote just as well as the majors. As writers who also read, we often forget to take into account the perspective of the average readers.