EPOUND-L Archives

- Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine

EPOUND-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Ezra Pound discussion list of the University of Maine <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Tanya Adele Koehnke <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 6 Aug 1998 22:57:58 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Dear List Members:
 
I apologize if you receive this message twice, but my server bounced it
back to me due to a technical error.  I am thus trying again...
 
Throughout university, I learned that TRADITIONAL LITERARY CRITICISM
emphasizes authorial biography and intention while CONTEMPORARY
LITERARY CRITICISM (a.k.a. "The New Criticism") disregards the author's
background and instead emphasizes textual meaning, per se.
 
After reading Craig Hamilton's response to Arwin van Arum (see below),
I am wondering if what I learned in university is indeed correct!
Could someone please outline the precise differences between
traditional literary criticism and contemporary literary criticism?
Thanks!
 
Craig Hamilton wrote:  "This sort of thinking has not been fashionable
for decades in the American Academy. Secondary lit has become as
important primary lit in English Departments here, if not more so.
Welcome to the world of fin de siecle criticism."
 
Sincerely,
 
Tanya Adele Koehnke <[log in to unmask]>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2