Literary theory has become a parody of science, generating its own arcane jargon. In the process, tragically, it discourages love of literature for its own sake.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I dislike literary jargon and never use it. Criticism has only one function and that is to help readers read and understand literature. It is not a science, it is an aid to art.
The function of literature, through all its mutations, has been to make us aware of the particularity of selves, and the high authority of the self in its quarrel with its society and its culture. Literature is in that sense subversive.
I used to be more of a purist about literature. I thought, 'If it's a really propulsive story, then maybe there's something unliterary about it.'
Don't get me wrong, I love literary fiction. It's faux literary fiction I can't stand.
I think literary theory has not been terribly good for English studies in a while. It's not that theory isn't interesting, but it isn't about books, or the idiosyncrasies and complexities of putting language together.
The point of literary criticism in anthropology is not to replace research, but to find out how it is that we are persuasive.
First literature came to refer only to itself, the literary theory.
I'm not that well-versed in literary theory - I don't know what it is.
Literature invents its own rules.
I strongly believe that literature can do something that nothing else can do, and that is embody the human spirit.
No opposing quotes found.