The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism

Rating:
Summary: A darn good anthology
Review: As I set out to perform the presumptuous task of reviewing what I consider the bible of criticism, I want to make something quite clear: I am reviewing the book not as a literary critic, which I am not, but as a consumer, which I am, since I did pay the hefty price for this massive tome. I am no expert on this subject of Literature, but I would like to become one some day and I thought this a good place to start. I have not quite completed Leviathan (that is the name I gave my Norton Anthology in question here) but I have been reading this in between novels for coming on two years now and I feel I am able to give it the old thumbs up or thumbs down (note: there is no essay in the book covering the critical theory behind thumb pointing). My verdict is thumbs UP, with 5 stars (they don't get into star ratings either). Let it be stated that many of the worlds all-time great minds are represented here and the essays selected are historic and far beyond my reproach. The physical quality of the book is marvelous and the type is flawless; I have found no typos in the 1800 (out of 2500) finely printed pages I have read. The selection headings are invaluable, in-depth analyses of the essays that follow, and they all seem as if written by the same anonymous, deft hand.

The first order of business in the way of criticism for me is the nature of some of the selections, which are undeniably political with little or no relevance to literary theory. I can understand including Marx for laying the foundation for further essays about Marxist literary theory, but do I really learn about literature from Franz Fanon's essay on how a country can best recover from the end of colonialism? Or what about the irrelevant social criticisms of Theodore Adorno? Perhaps the most pessimistic, depressing, and idiotic things I have ever read. This is the only essayist whom I wish did not make the cut. In one essay he goes so far to offend as to outright assert that human laughter is a sign of moral and intellectual decay, among many other absurdities. Aside from Adorno, the non-relevant essays are very good and worth reading anyway, so I was not too bothered by it, but be forewarned there is a big chunk of political, social and linguistic theory here, much of which has only a tenuous (at best) relationship to what most people consider to be Literature.

My second criticism may perhaps have to do more with my own mistaken expectations and therefore unfair, but I would not be surprised if there are other like-minded consumers out there. I was expecting to learn more about literary history, style, modes, technique, devices, genres, and the like. I was also hoping to read classic criticism of classic works. There is none of that here except obliquely. You will not, for examples, learn anywhere in this book what the Romantic period of literature was all about, or how writers use plot and dialogue to convey meaning. You will not find a lot on the why verse and meter were once dominant modes of literary focus whereas prose is now. And lastly, you will not read a great exposition on Hamlet or Job. I think it would be more appropriate to call this an "Anthology of Theories OF Criticism", or better yet just "Anthology of Literary Theory", not "...Theory AND Criticism." The essays are mostly about the philosophical nature of literature and how to study, interpret, and teach it. My silly notion was that an anthology of both theory and criticism would have examples of the great critical writings, not just the theory behind them.

Rating:
Summary: Thought Provoking
Review: Being an English major I've had my share of anthologies. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism stands out to me because it offers direct access to the writers and their essays rather than filtered, explained, and dissected discussions of them. It allows for the opportunity to explore what the author had to say in their own voice. Unfortunately that means some selections are more difficult to read than others. The trade-off is knowing that what you are reading is the source of the idea rather than a reflection of it. While I bought this book as a class requirement, reading it (and I am nowhere near done) has offered me new perspectives to not only view literature, but the world in general. That is probably the best thing I can say about this book. The worst? It's not a light read -- literally! Having to tote this brick around campus for a semester was not a pleasant experience regardless of how interesting the essays are.

Rating:
Summary: The Library of Babel
Review: Few, if any, English teachers can afford to be without this text. Whether one teaches literature or the history of criticism, the selections in this anthology offer stimuli for inquiry, contentious interventions, exemplary valuations. It offers half again as many selections as its nearest competitor in the field of anthologies of literary criticism. Moreover, the editors have done a fine job of culling chapters from key texts either published in the last thirty years, or those with rising value stemming from recent concerns. This anthology offers a good selection from the classics going back to Aristotle and Plato, but also Gorgias and Longinus (Boethius is one of the few ancients often anthologized who didn't make the cut). Most of the usual suspects are in the line up, whether one is tracking the deeds of Pope or Johnson, Kant or Schiller, Coleridge or Peacock, Poe or Baudelaire, Marx and Engels or Arnold. In addition, critics that never should have been excluded are given their rightful place in this anthology: Du Bois, Trotsky, Lukács, Gramsci, Lacan, Lévi-Strauss, Fanon, Achebe, Hall, Vizenor, Wittig, Cixous, and many others.

Not only does this text offer a superb selection, but the critical apparatus is excellent. The headnotes to each selection locate the given writer historically and critically. There are both author/title and subject indices. The bibliographies in the back offer both a chronological listing and an essay organized by schools and movements. Then, the table of contents shows both the sequential arrangement (by birth of author) and an alternate table that lists schools and movements. Hence, a teacher looking for theories of "the Modern" can be directed quickly to Baudelaire, Benjamin, Bellay, Eliot, Habermas, and so on.

A scholar or teacher lacking access to, or that needs quick sifting of an amply supplied personal or institutional library not only will be able to find many of the critical texts in this volume, but may find these texts more readily.

Rating:
Summary: Welcome to the Big League
Review: It strikes me as dangerously presumptuous to "review" such a book without a Ph.D. in literature and thirty years' teaching experience, but after spending a semester as a course assistant for just such a person, I can say this is an ambitious, comprehensive and therefore weighty (in all senses) volume. Beginning a hair's breadth before Plato and bringing us all the way into the 1990s and issues of "hypertext," this first giant Norton effort in the theory and criticism line seems to do all it sets out to do. The excellent introduction nips so-called antitheorists in the bud, remarking, "there is no position free of theory, not even the one called 'common sense.'" It also welcomes the student intent on discovering the many and varied ways to examine literature for both enjoyment and edification, terms that we sometimes forget are not mutually exclusive.

Fully half the book is given over to theorists and critics of the twentieth century, which makes sense since far more than half of what we would call literary criticism was written during it. My personal hope is that this new century gives birth to an understanding of theory that realizes, as do the Norton editors, that from the point of view of the student, each theory is essentially a lens through which to view a given work of art, literature, or the world in general. As for the point of view of some professionals who may tend towards the territorial, let's be charitable and remember that they have to work for a living, too. In any event, which lenses work the best on which student's eyes can truly be discovered only when a few different pairs have been tried on.

My professor friend notes that the selections from many key writers are longer than those found in the Hazard Adams' texts she used in the past. This density makes even a two-semester survey difficult to plan, syllabus-wise, mostly because there are so many wonderful and important critics to cover and ideas to absorb. My semi-professional advice would be to bring your love of literature and all your intellectual curiosity to "The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism," but also remember to take deep breaths once in a while and never forget your sense of humor!

Rating:
Summary: comprehensive
Review: The norton anthology picks up the modern interest in critical theory with an edition that is rigorously comprehensive, cross disciplinary and contemporary. The problem with 'theory studies' is that lately theory has evolved quicker than critics can categorize forms. (Rather like pop music: hard house, house, hip hop, trip hop, downtempo...more genres than performers) The editors have made a valiant effort to find and catagorize everyone. Invaluable. Ranks with the John Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory.

Rating:
Summary: READ the text
Review: The text will sit forever in my bookcase next to Faulkner, the Bible and other enigmatic treasures of philosophy and literacy.

I would echo the sentiments (below) of "geiar." The book does offer "direct access to the writers and their essays rather than filtered, explained, and dissected discussions," which unfortunately does require the student to THINK. After reading an entry in this anthology, I struggled to comprehend it. In my attempts to understand Foucault, I consulted a 180-page "Intro to Literary Theory" (by Michael somebody) paperback that another class had used only to find scant contradictory opinions on the theorist himself--not the actual text I sought to understand. Further research of the philosopher's writings brought me more dismay. I found that I could not easily discern good from evil when it came to reading the opinions of sundry "scholarly" opinions that pervade and invade the lives of English students everywhere!

Yes, this anthology was the most difficult reading ventures I'd ever experienced, yet it was also the most rewarding because of that "trade off"-the one that caused me to think for myself. My final answer, Regis: READ the text written by the author(s). Prepare to study it like Cleanth Brooks would study poetry. Then make an assessment for yourself!


Rating:
Summary: Cranky Swishteeka
Review: This book, was remindful of the various ways, to speak of the subparts is to speak of the hole that you fall into, for this is the best manner in which to explicate texts that at once become larger than flung outward, becoming at once too difficult to obtain and too simple to master. As my friend, the brilliant robot scientist once put it: "STATION!"

Rating:
Summary: Excellent but Incomplete
Review: This criticism anthology is well put together but is lacking in certain authors. While many of the selections are used give a wide range of a particular author's work, some of the authors used in the work are not fully represented.

Sir Philip Sidney, Giambattista Vico, Alexander Pope, William Wordsworth, Gyorgy Lukacs, Langston Hughes, Laura Mulvey and several others only have one work each in the book. Granted, you can't put all the works these authors have to offer, but some of them are heavy hitters in the criticism world and I find it hard to believe that they are poorly represented in a work such as this. Hopefully, in future editions these authors will better represented.

Rating:
Summary: Complex, but complete
Review: This tome is complete, historically and culturally. Some of the reading is a bit jarring because of all the psychoanalytical jargon, but this anthology is a very thorough canon of articles about literary theory and criticism. If you're looking for a light read, this isn't for you. If you want depth and analysis, then you've found your anthology.

Word_Ninja

Rating:
Summary: Best Available Twentieth Century Anthology
Review: While this is undoubtedly the best anthology of its kind I am aware of and, as other reviewers note, the selection of twentieth century theorists is extremely rich, I do find that that it isn't as strong as I had hoped on earlier periods. Inevitably, no anthology could ever be all-inclusive, but it is surprising when someone like Carlyle, for instance, who is mentioned in a number of the introductory prefaces, doesn't warrant an entry in his own right. Nor is there any Ruskin, which is a *huge* hole. I was also surprised that the Romantic Theory section did not have a selection of Keats' theorising- a very strange omission indeed.

If you are predominantly interested in pre-twentieth century theory, this is not your oracle. From a glance at the index, it's obvious that more than half the anthology is twentieth century material. Perhaps, given the profusion of criticism in the twentieth century, two volumes would have achieved a more effective historical survey. That said, as a twentieth century anthology, this is exemplary. The indexes, bibliographies, tables of content,etc render the material much easier to negotiate than one would have expected and the introductory prefaces which appear before each author's selection are concise, insightful and would be especially useful for students struggling with some of this material for the first time. These prefaces open up further trails of enquiry both within and beyond the anthology, allowing readers to easily pinpoint the relevant theorists for their areas of interest.