René Wellek and Austin Warren’s "Theory of Literature"

 

René Wellek and Austin Warren’s Theory of Literature is a seminal work in literary criticism that systematically addresses the nature, function, and study of literature. Written in the mid-twentieth century, it sought to bridge the gap between various schools of criticism, providing a comprehensive framework for the academic study of literature. The authors begin by defining literature not as a mere reflection of reality but as an autonomous form of art, possessing its own structures, conventions, and aesthetic values. They stress that literature should be studied as literature, emphasizing the importance of its formal, imaginative, and expressive qualities over purely historical or biographical interpretations. This approach distances itself from purely utilitarian or moralistic views of literature, situating the literary work in its own right as a creative act of language.

The book outlines the interdisciplinary nature of literary studies, acknowledging that literature is influenced by psychology, sociology, history, and philosophy, yet insisting that these disciplines should serve as auxiliary tools rather than dominate literary analysis. Wellek and Warren critique extreme historicism and biographism for reducing literature to the circumstances of its production, while also resisting purely impressionistic criticism that neglects scholarly rigor. They argue for an integrated approach that respects the specificity of literary art while also drawing from contextual studies to deepen understanding. In their view, the critic’s task is to balance close attention to the text with awareness of its cultural and intellectual background.

Central to their argument is the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic approaches to literature. The intrinsic approach focuses on the text itself—its structure, imagery, symbols, language, and form—while the extrinsic approach examines the author’s biography, historical setting, social influences, and intellectual currents. Wellek and Warren argue that a sound literary theory requires both, but with a primary emphasis on intrinsic analysis. They champion close reading and structural study, aligning with the principles later associated with New Criticism, while also allowing for historical scholarship when it illuminates the work’s meaning. For them, literary study is an act of interpretation grounded in textual analysis but enriched by informed contextual understanding.

They also address genre theory, tracing the historical evolution of epic, drama, and lyric, and arguing that genres are not rigid categories but dynamic conventions that evolve over time. By exploring how genres adapt to shifting cultural and artistic demands, they underscore literature’s fluidity and resistance to static classification. The authors advocate for a comparative approach to literature, encouraging critics to cross national and linguistic boundaries in order to grasp the universal and particular aspects of literary expression. This comparative perspective reflects Wellek’s own background as a scholar trained in multiple literary traditions and languages.

On the subject of literary history, Wellek and Warren challenge purely chronological or national frameworks, proposing instead a synthesis of historical and critical methods that examine movements, styles, and periods in relation to broader intellectual and cultural developments. They are cautious about overemphasizing causal explanations, preferring to see literary change as the result of complex interactions among artistic innovation, cultural shifts, and individual creativity. They also acknowledge the importance of the reader’s role, recognizing that literature is not static but acquires new meanings through successive acts of interpretation.

Northrop Frye's "Anatomy of Criticism"

 

Northrop Frye's "Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays," was  first published in 1957. Frye's approach to literary criticism is indeed radical in its rejection of traditional evaluative methods and its focus on systematic study and classification of literature. Frye's rejection of interpreting and evaluating individual works as the primary aim of criticism aligns with his belief that such evaluations are subjective and fleeting, reflecting changes in taste rather than contributing to a coherent understanding of literature. Central to Frye's theory is the idea of literature forming an "ideal order" among itself, an idea influenced by T.S. Eliot. Frye attempts to describe this order throughout his book, seeing each work as a part of a larger whole rather than as isolated entities. He envisions this order as relatively fixed, with new works serving to manifest it in different ways.

Polemical introduction

 

The introduction to Northrop Frye's work serves as a polemic defending the necessity of literary criticism while distinguishing it from other forms of critique and highlighting the difference between personal taste and genuine criticism.

 

Frye opposes the notion that "natural taste" is superior to scholarly learning, countering arguments put forth by Tolstoy and Romantic thought. He criticizes various methods of criticism, such as Marxist, Freudian, Jungian, and Neo-classical, for embodying the deterministic fallacy and subjecting literature to external ideologies rather than genuine critical analysis.

 

A key distinction Frye makes is between personal taste, which is influenced by societal norms and values, and genuine criticism, which draws its method from the body of literature itself. He argues that value judgments contribute little to meaningful criticism and proposes that criticism should be a systematic study of literature, akin to physics and history.

 

Frye acknowledges the limitations of his argument, recognizing that his views are individual and that the systematic study of literature is still in its infancy. He admits to making sweeping generalizations that may prove false in specific cases and emphasizes that schematization should be viewed as an aspect of criticism rather than a replacement for the personal experience of literature.

2

Historical Criticism: Theory of Modes"

 

Frye's systemization of literature begins by drawing from Aristotle's Poetics, which identifies three aspects of poetry: mythos (plot), ethos (characterization/setting), and dianoia (theme/idea). Frye sees literature as lying on a continuum between being plot-driven, as in most fiction, and idea-driven, as in essays and lyrical poetry.

 

He divides his study into five modes—mythic, romantic, high mimetic, low mimetic, and ironic—each corresponding to a specific literary epoch and representing different aspects of ethos, or characterization. Frye suggests that civilizations, both classical and Western, have historically progressed through the development of these modes, with contemporary fiction potentially returning to myth, completing a historical cycle.

 

In tragedy, the hero's separation from society is central:

 

·         Mythic tragedy deals with the death of gods.

·         Romantic tragedy features elegies mourning the death of heroes.

·         High mimetic tragedy presents the death of noble humans.

·         Low mimetic tragedy shows the death or sacrifice of ordinary humans, evoking pathos.

·         Ironic tragedy often portrays the suffering of a weak protagonist or one persecuted by society.

Comedy, on the other hand, focuses on the integration of society:

 

·         Mythic comedy deals with acceptance into the society of gods or salvation.

·         Romantic comedy involves an idyllic setting and the integration of the hero with nature.

·         High mimetic comedy features a strong central protagonist who constructs their own society.

·         Low mimetic comedy often ends in social elevation or marriage.

·         Ironic comedy ranges from savage humor to biting satire, often depicting rejection by society.

Frye also explores t0hematic literature in each mode, where intellectual content is paramount:

 

·         In the mythical mode, scripture and divine inspiration dominate.

·         In the romantic mode, chroniclers preserve traditions in a nomadic society.

·         In the high mimetic mode, society revolves around a capital city, with national epics prevalent.

·         In the low mimetic mode, individualism and romanticism take center stage.

·         In the ironic mode, the poet becomes a mere observer, producing work emphasizing discontinuity and anti-epiphany.

3

"Ethical Criticism: Theory of Symbols

 

Frye further elaborates on his theory by proposing five phases of symbolism, each possessing its own mythos, ethos, and dianoia, based on medieval allegory and the ages of man outlined in his earlier essay. These phases are:

 

·         Literal/descriptive (motifs and signs)

·         Formal (image)

·         Mythical (archetype)

·         Anagogic (monad)

In the descriptive phase, symbols exhibit an outward property, acting as signs that point to external meanings beyond the literary context. The motif, on the other hand, represents the inward direction of meaning, showcasing the symbol's contextual significance within the text.

 

The formal phase, embodied by imagery, results from the interplay of signs and motifs, with frequently repeated imagery setting the tone of the work. This phase aligns with literary formalism, emphasizing inherent meaning within the text.

 

The mythical phase treats symbols as archetypes, exploring their interconnectedness with similar symbolism throughout literature. Frye argues that convention is crucial in understanding archetypes and criticizes copyright laws for hindering literary creation.

 

Finally, the anagogic phase views symbols as monads, expressing the highest spiritual meaning within the text. Frye suggests a transcendent unity within literature, where symbols reflect infinite social action and human thought.

 

 

Archetype

In his exploration of myth as the foundation of all literature, Frye aligns various elements of storytelling, including paintings and music, with similar underlying structures and patterns, each possessing a unique style. He draws upon the Great Chain of Being, as described by Aristotle, to elucidate the associations between mythical imagery and the tragic and comic visions.

 

Frye categorizes the tragic and comic visions according to six worlds represented by different elements of the Great Chain of Being, each corresponding to divine, human, animal, vegetable, mineral, and water realms. These associations provide insight into the mythological underpinnings of tragic and comic narratives.

 

Moving forward, Frye's third essay synthesizes characterization and the five symbolic phases introduced earlier. He employs the metaphor of human desire and frustration, represented by the Great Chain of Being and the four seasons, to unify genres, life cycles, and associated myths.

 

The seasons serve as analogies to genres, life stages, and mythical narratives:

 

Spring represents comedy, birth, and the myth of birth.

Summer symbolizes romance, youth, growth, and the myth of triumph and harmony.

Autumn/fall embodies tragedy, old age, maturity, and the myth of fall, decay, and separation.

Winter signifies irony, death, and the myth of chaos, death, and darkness.

Frye further delineates imagery associated with apocalyptic, demonic, and analogical realms, illustrating the polarities of human desire and fulfillment. These realms encompass divine, human, animal, vegetable, mineral, and water elements, each conveying distinct symbolic meanings.

 

Lastly, Frye correlates the mythical mode with the apocalyptic, the ironic with the demonic, and the romantic and low mimetic with their respective analogies. The high mimetic occupies the central position, bridging the other modes. This circular structure reflects the cyclical nature of myth and archetypes, portraying the natural cycle of life and storytelling themes such as birth, growth, decline, death, resurrection, and rebirth.

 

Through this comprehensive analysis, Frye provides a framework for understanding the interconnectedness of literature, mythology, and human experience, revealing the enduring relevance of archetypal narratives across cultures and epochs.

 

4. Rhetorical Criticism: Theory of Genres

In the first three essays of his work, Frye delves into Aristotle's elements of poetry, focusing primarily on mythos, ethos, and dianoia. However, in the fourth essay, he shifts his attention to the remaining three elements:

 

·         Melos: This element concerns the tonal and musical aspects of literature.

·         Lexis: Referring to the written word, lying between the musical and visual aspects, it encompasses diction (ear) or imagery (eye) depending on the critical focus.

·         Oopsis: Dealing with the visual aspects of literature.

Frye identifies a connection between these elements and rhetoric, which encompasses both ornamental (opsis) speech and persuasive (melos) speech. Rhetorical criticism involves exploring literature in the context of melos, opsis, and their interplay as manifested in lexis.

 

Additionally, Frye introduces the concept of the radical of presentation—the relationship between author and audience—which influences the classification of genres. He proposes four distinct genres based on this radical of presentation:

 

·         Epos: The author speaks directly to the audience, such as in storytelling or formal speech.

·         Fiction: The author and audience are hidden from each other, as in most novels.

·         Drama: The author is hidden from the audience, who experiences the content directly.

·         Lyric: The audience is "hidden" from the author, who is overheard by the hearers.

These genres serve as the organizing principle of Frye's essay, with each genre characterized by a distinctive rhythm and the interplay of melos and opsis. Frye's concept of melos challenges the common understanding of music as stable harmony, instead emphasizing the series of dissonances resolving into stability.

 

The rhythm of epos, for example, revolves around recurrence, accent, meter, and sound patterns commonly associated with poetry. Fiction, in contrast, employs the rhythm of continuity of meaning, often conveyed through prose. Drama occupies a middle ground, with characters alternating between melos-oriented and opsis-oriented language based on the dramatic situation.

 

Classical lyrical poetry, typically featuring a shepherd speaking of his love, embodies an associative rhythm that reflects the stuff of dreams and the subconscious. This rhythm, closely related to chanting, is particularly apparent in certain types of literature.

 

Frye suggests a connection between the historical modes and the four genres, with the lyrical genre representing the ironic age, where the protagonist turns away from society and the poet makes utterances without regard to the audience. This lyrical rhythm is exemplified in Joyce's "Finnegans Wake," characterized by associative babble and dreamlike utterances.