but i'm bugged by the emphasis on "criticism = symbolism" that then fails to say anything interesting about the work, if that makes sense? like, it's fun to read criticism that does take into account authorial intent, because then you can't stop seeing fascinating parallels between e.g. Mishima's final coup-suicide and the tragic-heroic characters he wrote. it can be fun to completely ignore authorial intent and point out how all the themes and symbols in Harry Potter enforce and promote a Calvinist worldview. i'm not upset some phd found symbolism in the number four in-and-of-itself, but i'm upset if the phd then failed to tell me why i should give a fuck. how does this make my reading the work more enjoyable, deeper, more interesting, etc...
and unfortunately, yeah, a lot of high schools only got "criticsm = symbols" and "pointing out three symbols makes a paper", when really, papers are more an art than a formula, and you know if you said something actually interesting about a piece of literature or if you just pointed at stuff. sigh sigh sigh
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2018-11-30 01:18 am (UTC)but i'm bugged by the emphasis on "criticism = symbolism" that then fails to say anything interesting about the work, if that makes sense? like, it's fun to read criticism that does take into account authorial intent, because then you can't stop seeing fascinating parallels between e.g. Mishima's final coup-suicide and the tragic-heroic characters he wrote. it can be fun to completely ignore authorial intent and point out how all the themes and symbols in Harry Potter enforce and promote a Calvinist worldview. i'm not upset some phd found symbolism in the number four in-and-of-itself, but i'm upset if the phd then failed to tell me why i should give a fuck. how does this make my reading the work more enjoyable, deeper, more interesting, etc...
and unfortunately, yeah, a lot of high schools only got "criticsm = symbols" and "pointing out three symbols makes a paper", when really, papers are more an art than a formula, and you know if you said something actually interesting about a piece of literature or if you just pointed at stuff. sigh sigh sigh