Critical Essay on Frank Lentricchia’s After the New Criticism
Introduction
Frank Lentricchia’s After the New Criticism
(1980) marks a pivotal moment in the intellectual shift within literary theory
during the late 20th century. As a critical examination of the New Criticism
movement, Lentricchia’s work offers both a critique and a reflection on the
evolving landscape of literary studies in the wake of New Criticism’s dominance.
The essay provides a nuanced exploration of the theoretical and ideological
assumptions behind New Criticism while advocating for a broader and more
diverse approach to literary analysis. This essay will critically engage with
Lentricchia’s arguments, evaluating their contributions to the field of
literary criticism and their relevance in the context of the ongoing
transformation in literary theory.
The Rise and Fall of New Criticism
New Criticism, which flourished in the mid-20th
century, was founded on the belief that literary works should be analyzed
independently of historical, biographical, and social contexts. It emphasized
close reading of the text itself—its language, structure, and form—as the
primary means of generating meaning. Figures like Cleanth Brooks, W. K.
Wimsatt, and Robert Penn Warren were at the forefront of this
movement, which sought to isolate the literary text from external factors.
In After the New Criticism, Lentricchia
addresses the dominance of New Criticism in the post-war period, offering an
intellectual critique of its limitations. He argues that New Criticism, with
its emphasis on objectivity and formalism, ignored the political, historical,
and ideological forces that shape both the production and reception of
literature. By the late 20th century, many critics and theorists were beginning
to question the assumptions of New Criticism, and Lentricchia’s essay emerges
as part of this shift.
Lentricchia’s Critique of New Criticism
Lentricchia’s critique of New Criticism is multifaceted,
focusing on its intellectual assumptions and the broader implications of its
theoretical framework.
1.The Isolation of
the Text:
A central tenet of New Criticism is the idea that a literary work should be
studied in isolation from its author and historical context. Lentricchia argues
that this approach, while useful in some respects, limits the scope of literary
analysis by treating the text as a self-contained object. He criticizes New
Criticism for its neglect of the historical, social, and political contexts
that shape both the production and interpretation of literature. According to
Lentricchia, understanding the social and historical circumstances of a text’s
creation is essential for a full understanding of its meaning.
2.The Myth of
Objectivity:
New Criticism’s insistence on objective, formal analysis is another target of
Lentricchia’s critique. He suggests that the New Critics’ claim to objectivity
overlooks the ideological and subjective elements that inevitably shape all
forms of interpretation. The idea that critics can produce “value-neutral”
interpretations of texts ignores the ways in which individual perspectives,
political ideologies, and cultural assumptions influence readings of
literature. Lentricchia’s critique calls attention to the ideological biases
that are often hidden under the veneer of objective analysis.
3.The Rejection of
Authorial Intent:
New Criticism’s rejection of authorial intention is also problematic for
Lentricchia. While New Critics contended that the author’s personal beliefs and
motivations should not influence the interpretation of the text, Lentricchia
argues that the author’s context is an important factor in understanding a
work. By disregarding the author’s intentions, New Criticism misses out on a
deeper engagement with the motivations, historical context, and social forces
that shape the text. For Lentricchia, understanding the author’s role in the
creation of the text is crucial for understanding its deeper layers of meaning.
A Call for Broader Approaches: Marxist,
Feminist, and Psychoanalytic Criticism
In After the New Criticism, Lentricchia
advocates for the incorporation of broader, more diverse theoretical approaches
into literary criticism. He urges critics to look beyond the formal qualities
of the text and engage with the socio-political dimensions of literature.
1.Marxist Criticism: Lentricchia
encourages the use of Marxist theory as a means of exploring the ways in which
literature is shaped by class relations, economic forces, and political
ideologies. Marxist criticism, which examines how power and economics influence
both the creation and consumption of literary works, provides a means of
contextualizing literature within the broader social and political landscape.
2.Feminist Criticism: Feminist
criticism, which emerged in the 1970s as a response to patriarchal structures
in both society and literature, is another critical framework that Lentricchia
champions. He suggests that feminist theory can help illuminate how gender
ideologies influence literary production and interpretation, addressing the
systemic marginalization of women in both literature and literary criticism.
3.Psychoanalytic
Criticism:
Lentricchia also highlights the importance of psychoanalytic criticism, which
draws on the theories of Freud and Lacan to explore unconscious desires,
repressed meanings, and the psychological motivations of both authors and
characters. By examining the psychoanalytic dimensions of literature, critics
can uncover the hidden, often repressed meanings that shape a text’s structure
and significance.
By
advocating for the inclusion of these critical approaches, Lentricchia
challenges the narrow focus of New Criticism and calls for a more nuanced and
multifaceted understanding of literature.
Strengths of After the New Criticism
1.Broadening the
Scope of Literary Criticism: One of Lentricchia’s greatest contributions is his
call for a broader, more inclusive approach to literary criticism. By urging
critics to engage with the historical, political, and ideological dimensions of
literature, Lentricchia expands the scope of analysis and encourages more
complex, multifaceted interpretations of texts. His advocacy for Marxist,
feminist, and psychoanalytic criticism promotes a more socially engaged and
politically conscious form of literary study.
2.Intellectual Rigor: Lentricchia’s
critique is thoughtful and intellectually rigorous. He challenges the New
Critics on fundamental theoretical grounds, asking them to reconsider their
assumptions about objectivity, text isolation, and the rejection of authorial
intent. His work is a detailed and careful examination of the limitations of
New Criticism, offering valuable insights into the evolution of literary
theory.
3.Historical
Contextualization:
Lentricchia’s critique is not only theoretical but also historical. He situates
the decline of New Criticism within the larger intellectual and cultural
context of the 1960s and 1970s, when social movements such as civil rights,
feminism, and anti-colonialism challenged dominant cultural and political
norms. His essay reflects the shifting intellectual landscape of the time and
suggests that literary criticism must evolve to address these broader social
changes.
Critiques and Limitations
1.Overemphasis on
Ideological Criticism:
While Lentricchia’s call for the inclusion of Marxist, feminist, and
psychoanalytic criticism is important, some critics argue that he places too
much emphasis on ideology at the expense of the aesthetic qualities of
literature. By focusing on the socio-political dimensions of literature,
Lentricchia risks diminishing the role of formal analysis and aesthetic
experience in literary criticism.
2.Neglect of Other
Theoretical Approaches: While Lentricchia highlights Marxist, feminist, and
psychoanalytic criticism, some critics feel that he overlooks other significant
theoretical approaches, such as poststructuralism, postcolonialism, and
deconstruction. These approaches, which emerged in the wake of New Criticism,
also challenge the formalist assumptions of New Criticism and offer valuable
insights into the nature of language, identity, and power.
3.Idealization of
Post-New Critical Approaches: Lentricchia’s advocacy for post-New
Critical approaches can sometimes appear idealized. While Marxist, feminist,
and psychoanalytic criticisms offer valuable perspectives, these theories
themselves are not without their own ideological biases and limitations. The
idea that these approaches offer an unproblematic alternative to New Criticism
may overlook the complexities and internal contradictions within these schools
of thought.
Conclusion
Frank Lentricchia’s After the New Criticism
provides a critical examination of the intellectual landscape following the
decline of New Criticism. His essay challenges the formalist and objectivist
assumptions of New Criticism, advocating for a more socially engaged and
contextually aware approach to literary analysis. By incorporating Marxist,
feminist, and psychoanalytic criticism, Lentricchia expands the boundaries of
literary study and encourages critics to examine the political and ideological
dimensions of literature.
While his critique of New Criticism is compelling,
Lentricchia’s call for ideological criticism as a comprehensive alternative
raises important questions about the role of form and aesthetics in literary
analysis. Nonetheless, After the New Criticism remains a crucial
text in the evolution of literary theory, offering valuable insights into the
shifting terrain of literary criticism and its relationship to broader cultural
and political movements.
