22402 Paper no.109 Literary Theory & Criticism
Smt.S.B.Gardi Department of English
M.K.Bhavanagar University
Vachchhalata Joshi
Vachchhalatajoshi.14@gmail.com
Roll no.20
Topic: I.A.Richards and Criticism
“A book is a machine to think with, but
it need not, therefore, usurp the functions either of the bellows or the
locomotive.”
“It is not surprising that the detailed analysis of metaphors, if we attempt it with such slippery terms as these, sometimes feels like extracting cube roots in the head.
Ivor Armstrong Richards
26 February 1893 – 7 September 1979,
Known as I. A.
Richards, was an English educator, literary critic,
and rhetorician. His work contributed to the foundations of the New
Criticism, a formalist movement in literary theory that
emphasized the close reading of a literary text,
especially poetry, in an effort to discover how a work of literature
functions as a self-contained and self-referential æsthetic object.
Richards' intellectual contributions to the establishment
of the literary methodology of the New Criticism are presented in the books:
The Meaning of Meaning: (1923)
Principles of Literary Criticism (1924)
Practical Criticism (1929)
The Philosophy of Rhetoric (1936).
Richards was born in Sandbach. He was educated
at Clifton College and Magdalene College, Cambridge, where his
intellectual talents were developed by the scholar Charles Hickson 'Cabby'
Spence. He began his career without formal training in literature; he studied
philosophy and the "moral sciences" at Cambridge University, from
which derived his assertions that, in the 20th century, the literary study cannot
and should not be undertaken as a specialization, in and of itself, but studied
alongside a cognate field, such as philosophy, psychology or rhetoric.
His early teaching appointments were as adjunct faculty: at Cambridge
University, Magdalene College would not pay a salary for Richards to
teach the new, and untested, academic field of English literature.
Instead, like an old-style instructor, he collected weekly tuition directly
from the students, as they entered the classroom.
In 1926, Richards married Dorothy Pilley whom he had
met on a mountain climbing holiday in Wales.
In the 1929–30 biennium, as a visiting professor, Richards
taught Basic English and Poetry at Tsinghua University,
Beijing. In the 1936–38 triennium, Richards was the director of the
Ornithological Institute of China. He died in Cambridge.
The life and intellectual influence of I. A. Richards
approximately correspond to his intellectual interests; many endeavors
were in collaboration with the linguist, philosopher, and writer Charles
Kay Ogden notably in four books:
I.
Foundations of Aesthetics (1922)
Presents the principles of aesthetic reception, the bases of the literary theory of
“harmony”; aesthetic understanding derives from the balance of competing for psychological impulses. The structure of the Foundations of Aesthetics—a survey of the competing definitions
of the term æsthetic—prefigures
the multiple-definitions work in the books Basic Rules of Reason (1933), Mencius on the Mind: Experiments in Multiple
Definition (1932), and Coleridge
on Imagination (1934)
II.
The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of
Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism (1923)
Presents the triadic
theory of semiotics that depends upon psychological theory, and so
anticipates the importance of psychology in the exercise of literary criticism.
Semioticians, such as Umberto Eco, acknowledged that the methodology of
the triadic theory of semiotics improved upon the methodology of the dyadic
theory of semiotics presented by Ferdinand de Saussure.
III. Basic
English: A General Introduction with Rules and Grammar (1930)
describes a simplified English based upon a vocabulary of 850 words,
IV. The Times of
India Guide to Basic English (1938) sought to develop Basic
English as an international auxiliary language, an interlanguage.
Richards' travels, especially in China, effectively situated him
as the advocate for an international program, such as Basic English. Moreover,
at Harvard University, to his international pedagogy, instructor I. A. Richards
began to integrate the available new media for mass communications,
especially television.
Theory
Richards elaborated an approach to literary criticism
in The Principles of Literary
Criticism (1924) and Practical
Criticism (1929) which embodied aspects of the scientific approach
from his study of psychology, particularly that of Charles Scott Sherrington.
In The
Principles of Literary Criticism, Richards discusses the subjects
of form, value, rhythm, anesthesia an
awareness of inhabiting one's body, caused by stimuli from various organs,
literary infectiousness, allusiveness, divergent readings, and belief.
He starts from the premise that "A book is a machine to think with, but it
need not, therefore, usurp the functions either of the
bellows or the locomotive."
Practical Criticism (1929), is an empirical study of inferior response to a literary
text. As an instructor in English literature at Cambridge University,
Richards tested the critical-thinking abilities of his pupils; he removed authorial and
contextual information from thirteen poems and asked undergraduates to write
interpretations, in order to ascertain the likely impediments to an adequate response to a literary
text. That experiment in pedagogical approach – critical reading
without contexts – demonstrated the variety and the depth of the possible
textual misreadings that might be committed, by university students and laymen
alike.
The critical method derived from that pedagogical approach
did not propose a new hermeneutics, a new methodology of interpretation,
but questioned the purposes and efficacy of the critical process of literary
interpretation, by analyzing the self-reported critical interpretations of
university students. To that end, effective critical work required a
closer aesthetic interpretation of the literary text as an object.
To substantiate interpretive criticism, Richards provided
theories of metaphor, value, tone, stock response, incipient action, pseudo-statement;
and ambiguity. This last subject, the theory of ambiguity, was developed in Seven
Types of Ambiguity (1930), by William
Empson, a former student of Richards';
moreover, added to The
Principles of Literary Criticism and Practical Criticism, Empson's book on ambiguity became the third
foundational document for the methodology of the New
Criticism.
To Richards, literary criticism was impressionistic, too abstract to be readily grasped and understood, by most
readers; and he proposed that literary criticism could be precise in
communicating meanings, by way of denotation and connotation. To establish
critical precision, Richards examined the psychological
processes of writing and of the reading of poetry. That in reading poetry and making sense of
it "in the degree in which we can order ourselves, we need nothing
more"; the reader need not believe the poetry, because the literary
importance of poetry is in provoking emotions in the reader.
New
rhetoric
As a rhetorician, Richards said that the old form of
studying rhetoric the
art of discourse
was too concerned with the mechanics of formulating arguments and with conflict; instead, he proposed the New
Rhetoric to study the meaning of the parts of discourse, as "a study of
misunderstanding and its remedies" to determine how language works.
That ambiguity is
expected, and that meanings denotation, and connotation are not inherent to
words, but are inherent to the perception of the reader, the listener, and the
viewer. By their usages, compiled from experience, people decide and determine
meaning by "how words are used in a sentence", in spoken and written
language.
The semantic triangle
Richards
and Ogden created the semantic triangle to deliver improved
understanding to how words come to mean. The semantic triangle has three
parts, the symbol or word, the referent, and the thought or reference. In the
bottom, right corner is the Referent, the thing, in reality. Placed at the left
corner is the symbol or word. At the top point, the convergence of the literal
word and the object in reality; it is our intangible idea about the object.
Ultimately, the English meaning of the words is determined by an individual's unique
experience.
Feedforward
When the Saturday Review asked Richards to
write a piece for their "What I Have Learned" series, Richards took
the opportunity to expound upon his cybernetic concept of
"feedforward". The Oxford
English Dictionary records that Richards coined the term feedforward in
1951 at the Eighth Macy Conferences on cybernetics. In the
event, the term extended the intellectual and critical influence of Richards to
cybernetics which applied the term in a variety of contexts. Moreover, among
Richards' students was Marshall McLuhan, who also applied and developed
the term and the concept of feedforward.
According
to Richards, feedforward is the concept of anticipating the effect of one's
words by acting as our own critic. It is thought to work in the opposite
direction of feedback, though it works essentially towards the same goal: to
clarify unclear concepts. Existing in all forms of communication, feedforward acts as a pretest
that any writer can use to anticipate the impact of their words on their
audience. According to Richards, feedforward allows the writer to then engage
with their text to make necessary changes to create a better effect. He
believes that communicators who do not use feedforward will seem dogmatic.
Richards wrote more in depth about the idea and importance of feedforward in
communication in his book Speculative
Instruments and has said that feedforward was his most important
learned concept.
Influence
Richards
served as mentor and teacher to other prominent critics, most notably William
Empson and F. R. Leavis, although Leavis was contemporary with
Richards, and Empson much younger. Other critics primarily influenced by his
writings also included Cleanth Brooks and Allen Tate. Later
critics who refined the formalist approach to New Criticism by actively
rejecting his psychological emphasis included, besides Brooks and Tate, John
Crowe Ransom, W. K. Wimsatt, R. P. Blackmur, and Murray Krieger. R.
S. Crane of the Chicago school was both indebted to Richards's theory and
critical of its psychological assumptions. They all admitted the value of his
seminal ideas but sought to salvage what they considered his most useful
assumptions from the theoretical excesses they felt he brought to bear in his
criticism. Like Empson, Richards proved a difficult model for the New Critics,
but his model of close reading provided the basis for their
interpretive methodology.
Ivor Armstrong Richards, together with Eliot, is the most
influential critic in the twentieth century Anglo-American criticism. Among the
moderns he is the only critic who has formulated a systematic and complete
theory of the literary art. In the words of George Watson, “Richards’
claim to have pioneered Anglo-American New Criticism of the thirties and
forties is unassailable. He
provided the theoretical foundations on which the technique of verbal analysis
was built.
As a critic, I. A. Richards is not only learned and abstract but
also iconoclastic and original. He is a staunch advocate of close textual and
verbal study and analysis of a work of art without reference to its author and
the age. His approach is pragmatic and empirical. He is the father of psychological criticism as well as New Criticism. Such new critics as John
Crowe Ransom, Kenneth Burke, Cleanth Brooks, R. P. Blackmur, Robert Penn
Warren, and William Empson, despite differences in their theory and practice, have
repeatedly acknowledged their indebtedness to him. He has made literary criticism factual,
scientific and complete. It no longer remains a matter of the application of
set rules or mere intuition or impressions. He developed the unhistorical
method of criticism.
He holds that adequate
knowledge of psychology is essential for a literary critic to enter into the
author’s mind. He also gives paramount importance to the art of communication
and brings out a distinction between the scientific and the motivational uses of the
language. Before coming to the value of imaginative literature he first formulates
a general psychological theory of value and then applies it to literature.
This is a scientific or psychological approach to literature. Poetry, according
to him, represents a certain systematization in the poet, and the critic, for a
proper understanding of the poem, must enter and grasp this systematization and
experience of the poet. He should also be able to judge the value of different
experiences, i.e., he should be able to distinguish between experiences of
greater and lesser value.
“The qualities of a good critic are three,” says I. A:. Richards. “He must be adept at experiencing, without eccentricities, the state of mind relevant to
the work of art he is judging. Secondly, he must be able to distinguish
experiences from one another as regards their less superficial features.
Thirdly, he must be a sound judge of values.” Richards himself possesses these
qualities.
No comments:
Post a Comment