Critical Terms for Literary Study

Rating:
Summary: excellent introduction to basic critical concepts
Review: The book provides a very useful guide to terms ranging from Lacanian desire to narrative. Each author discusses the history of the term and its current use and then goes on to use the term to inform their own critical reading of a specific text or texts, providing a very useful illustration of the term's implications.

Rating:
Summary: Not worth the trouble
Review: This book is an anthology of essays describing some important aspects of literature and criticism. It's a really good idea, but badly done here. The book identifies itself as 'a landmark introduction to the work of literary theory' and claims to be suitable for 'the reader beginning to learn about critical theory.' A more accurate description might be, 'written by stuffy, self-important old people for same to enjoy.'

The editors seem to have taken great pains to select works written by people who feel a need to choose the longest word they can find to represent an idea; if a suitably long word does not exist, they combine a word with prefixes and suffixes until they are satisfied. There is no reason to write like this, especially if you're trying to teach someone something. The chapters of the book can be translated into speaking man's English to good effect, and every one of the 28 critical terms really is simple enough to explain without the comically frequent fallback on Latin phrases and words.

I don't know why so many people think this is a great book. Maybe because it's filled with words like 'prosopopoeia,' which is, I'll admit, a valid English word, but a little bit limited in its general use among readers beginning to learn about critical theory. The flow of the essays becomes stinted by the necessity of referring to a dictionary at every fourth word and then translating the resulting mess into a sentence that normal people understand.

In short, this is a bad textbook. The authors have hidden very simple concepts behind such a thick wall of confusing use of language and terminology that the reader becomes a gold miner, chipping away at the useless mountain of words before him to extract what little vein of content he can find.

Rating:
Summary: this book is the devil!
Review: this book is the devil! i am using it in a lit studies course and loathe every second i waste reading these essays. they seem to be written mostly by stuffy university professors who are attempting to sound like they know what they are talking about. It is not a dictionary, nor does it help the reader properly understand a term. If you are curious about a word that is discussed in the book, i suggest looking it up in the dictionary. it's easier. and you'll actually learn what the word means without having to search through thick sentences that really make no sense and large words that you know the author just pulled out of a thesauraus.

Rating:
Summary: Not worth the trouble
Review: This book offers a very interesting, concise look into many of the terms employed by contemporary literary/critical theory. I would suggest anyone read this book if they want a short introduction to some of the thoughts employed by contemporary critics when analyzing a piece of literature. It is not, however, sufficient as an introduction to that theory. I would suggest supplementing this text with several primary sources--people who want to speak intelligently about Foucault or Derrida or Lacan or Saussure should read their primary readings. If one decides not to, one comes out with the impression that these literary critics could give the last, or at least the most authoritative, word on their topic. This is, of course, not necessarily so. Use this book, it is an exemplary secondary source on literary theory, but supplement it with primary readings to get a more nuanced impression of contemporary thoughts about literature.

Many times I found myself arguing against the assertions made about literature and theory in this book. I think, perhaps, that sometimes particular "American" critics fail to capture the fullness of the arguments by French theorists. This is not to say that "American" theorists "do not get it"; however, it should make you weary about simply accepting the presentation of the topics in this book. The ideas presented by literary theory are inordinately complex, and sometimes it takes actually grappling with the confusing language of the French, or of the translated French (though this introduces yet another problem) to actually understand what critics actually say about literature.

By all means, buy this book for a concise rendering of the issues. However, do not think for a moment that this book accurately portrays contemporary literary study in its fullness. There is so much more than this book initially communicates.

Rating:
Summary: Useful, but not Sufficient for Understanding Critical Theory
Review: This book offers a very interesting, concise look into many of the terms employed by contemporary literary/critical theory. I would suggest anyone read this book if they want a short introduction to some of the thoughts employed by contemporary critics when analyzing a piece of literature. It is not, however, sufficient as an introduction to that theory. I would suggest supplementing this text with several primary sources--people who want to speak intelligently about Foucault or Derrida or Lacan or Saussure should read their primary readings. If one decides not to, one comes out with the impression that these literary critics could give the last, or at least the most authoritative, word on their topic. This is, of course, not necessarily so. Use this book, it is an exemplary secondary source on literary theory, but supplement it with primary readings to get a more nuanced impression of contemporary thoughts about literature.

Many times I found myself arguing against the assertions made about literature and theory in this book. I think, perhaps, that sometimes particular "American" critics fail to capture the fullness of the arguments by French theorists. This is not to say that "American" theorists "do not get it"; however, it should make you weary about simply accepting the presentation of the topics in this book. The ideas presented by literary theory are inordinately complex, and sometimes it takes actually grappling with the confusing language of the French, or of the translated French (though this introduces yet another problem) to actually understand what critics actually say about literature.

By all means, buy this book for a concise rendering of the issues. However, do not think for a moment that this book accurately portrays contemporary literary study in its fullness. There is so much more than this book initially communicates.