(i) poems

(ii) novels
(iii) stories
(iv) plays
(v) television dramas
(vi) films
(vii) cartoons
(viii) paintings
(ix) sculptures
(x) posters
(xi) advertisements
(xii) buildings
(xiii) photo-stories
(xiv) music
(xv) dance
(xvi) murals
(xvii) fashion
All the examples given are studied by theory of literature.
Only some are what is generally accepted as literary forms
of art. You may think that ``literary theory'', as the
name suggests, is exclusively concerned with literature. In
other words, you may think literary forms such as poetry,
stories, novels and plays are all that literary theory studies.
This is correct. Literature is indeed the primary area of study of
literary theory. It is also the focus of other modules offered in
this discipline.
The methods developed by literary theory, and many of its proposals for understanding
literary works have come to be applied to a far wider area of
study. They have been used in the study of non-literary forms of
artistic activity (such as the visual arts, architecture, music and
even sport and fashion), as well as things that are not normally
considered to be art at all (such as photo-stories and
advertisements). Literary theory, therefore, is applicable to a
much wider field than just literature. The area of study of
literary theory encompasses literature, the arts and a wide
range of other cultural objects.
Artistic objects do not just
happen to exist, they are
The practices included in the area of brought into existence by
human practices or activities
study of literary theory may be divided into three categories:
production, distribution and reception.

PRODUCTION DISTRIBUTION RECEPTION

Writing, translating, filming, Publishing, exhibiting, Reading, viewing, reviewing

directing, acting, drawing, performing in theatres, in publication, teaching
painting, sculpting, designing, marketing, etc. interpreting, evaluating, etc.
etc.

Cultural Environment
The examples presented in the preceding section, and the practices connected with them,
form part of the cultural environment.

* It is important for us to know how the cultural environment is constituted.

*In this module, objects studied by literary theory will be referred to as cultural objects. The activities
studied will be referred to as cultural practices.
Culture is a sphere of human activity and behaviour.
A natural object would exist if there were no human beings, whereas a cultural object is the product of
human actions. Natural objects are part of a physical or natural world which is not the creation of
human beings.
The existence of cultural objects is entirely dependent on human beings. They come into existence
through human beings making them. There are three consequences of cultural objects' dependence
for existence on human activity:
1. HUMAN SOCIETIES: None of these objects is made by isolated individuals- but by people
within communities and societies. Therefore, objects such as plates, chairs, knives, money,
government are examples of cultural objects. We focus on buildings, paintings, sculptures,
etc.
2. PURPOSES: Because cultural objects are the result of human action or behaviour, their
features or properties are directly related to the purposes and concerns of human beings.
E.G. chairs have the form they do because humans designed them for sitting on.
 3. MEANING: Usually for forms of art such as writing, painting. This is perhaps the most
important consequence for literary theory.

Physical objects are

often used to describe
natural and cultural
objects, as they both
possess physical
properties.

The type of cultural objects which literary theory is mostly concerned with are meaningful
objects. One of the purposes they are designed to fulfil is the purpose of communication. And
while it is true that language is regarded as the most important means of communication in
human society, various non-linguistic means are also used for communication. The traffic
system (traffic lights, road markings, traffic signs and so on) is a system of communication, in that
it is designed to convey messages to motorists. It does so mainly by visual means.

ELEMENTS OF COMMUNICATION

SENDER MESSAGE RECEIVER

At a basic level, 3 elements are required for communication to occur

1. Sender: The person/persons who sends, expresses or addressed the message.
2. Message: The words or images used for communicating and their meaning.
3. Receiver: The person/persons who receives the message or to whom the message is
addressed.
context n. (1) the parts of a piece of writing, speech, etc. that precede and follow a word or
passage and contribute to its full meaning. (2) the conditions and circumstances that are relevant
to an event, fact, etc.
Context is another important aspect of communication. It varies in scope, we usually can
distinguish 4 contexts.- NEED TO GO OVER THIS AGAIN
*All communicative acts, by their very nature, aim to get the receiver to respond in a certain way.
In each case, the response is connected to the meaning of the message.

APPROACHES TO CULTURAL OBJECTS

What we know: ALL cultural objects aim to evoke certain responses from its receiver.
 While this is true, the object may succeed or fail. For example, we may ignore an advertisement,
or it may send us rushing out to buy the product advertised. Reading a photo-story or a novel, or
watching a TV drama or play, we may sympathise with the protagonist, or we may remain
untouched. Driving past a mural painted on a city wall, we may be cheered by the images, or we
may think that a by-law should be passed preventing such a thing.
All of these responses are spontaneous. A study of cultural objects requires a more systematic
reaction and approach to them i.e. not spontaneous. Various approaches can be and are used to
study cultural objects. The type of approach used depends on the context we are in and on our
purpose. Reading literature in the context of a teaching situation and reading literature in the
context of the privacy of your own bedroom result in very different relations to the literary work,
and in very different approaches. For purpose, we may for example, aim to arrive at a thorough
understanding of the work, or we may aim simply to be entertained.
Contexts and purposes play a very important role in defining which responses and approaches are
appropriate.

Purposes are the aims

and objectives with Context consists of
which we approach the conditions and
literary works and circumstances in
other cultural objects. which we
communicate.

2 MAIN WAYS IN WHICH CULTURAL OBJECTS CAN BE APPROACHED:

A. NON-THEORETICALLY
B. THEORETICALLY

A. NON-THEORETICAL
Cultural objects, often containing complex messages, require interpretation to fully comprehend
their meanings. This process, often involving training and assumptions, is particularly crucial in
literary works and other art forms, where the interpretation is complex and multifaceted.
An assumption is a belief which has not been tested by the person who holds the belief. It is
something which is taken for granted.
Typical assumptions had when reading literary work:
1) Generally, an assumption is made that an artwork is a ‘special’ sort of object which cannot be
approached in the same way as say tables and chairs or knives and forks. That is, we assume or
presuppose that an artwork requires a different type of approach to other cultural objects and
forms of communication.
(2) We sometimes view artworks such as literary works as objects that contain ‘hidden’ meanings,
which interpretation must then ‘uncover’ or ‘discover’.
(3) We often assume there is a close relation between artworks and all “aesthetic'' works. That is,
we assume that once we have attached the label ‘art’ to a work, we have also accorded a high
value to the work, or we have judged it as being a ‘good' work.
(4) We often feel the work is an expression of the artist's or author's intentions, beliefs, emotions
and feelings and so on. A corollary of this is that generally (although not always) we assume that a
correct interpretation is one that will reflect what the author or artist ‘had in mind’ when writing
or creating the work.
(5) At other times we assume that the work is a reflection of the society or the historical times in
which the author or artist lived.
(6) An assumption that is frequently found in responses to literary and other works is that there is
no single correct interpretation, but that the way in which a work is interpreted depends on the
subjective response of the reader, listener or viewer.
None of these assumptions or presuppositions is necessarily incorrect.
A. Aspects of non-theoretical approaches
* Interpretation of literature requires a sophisticated knowledge of the language and literary
conventions, including terms like "imagery," "metaphor," "character," and "plot." Learning to
interpret literary works involves paying close attention to the language, including word usage,
punctuation, and sentence arrangement. This approach exposes us to the flexibility and richness of
a language, making it a crucial component in literary and cultural studies.
* Appreciation is a process that recognizes the value of cultural objects, either as a whole or as a
particular object. It is often a result of training, as cultural objects, particularly high art, are often
inaccessible to the layperson. Literature, art, and artistic products are considered among the finest
achievements of humankind. Learning to appreciate them involves acknowledging and
acknowledging the values of a culture and tradition.
*Teaching someone to appreciate literature involves the transmission of values, which are a
contentious social and political issue.
* Criticism involves interpretation and appraisal, evaluating a work's quality based on its type,
genre, or period. It requires a moderate to high degree of specialisation, such as in a genre or
period. Criticism is based on knowledge of the historical development of the art form and relevant
conventions.
*Scholarship studies historical, social, political, and ideological developments that influence the
production or reception of cultural objects, providing a comprehensive understanding of the
subject matter (SCHOLARSHIP IS DEFINED AS A SERIOUS AND DETAILED STUDY)

This is by no means an exhaustive account of the various non-theoretical approaches to cultural

objects. It is meant simply to give you a general idea of the domain of non-theoretical cultural
studies.
None of these activities and approaches is isolated from the others. As we shall see, neither are
they isolated from theoretical approaches. Rather, in order to gain a thorough understanding of
 culture in any of its forms, we need to have some exposure to and expertise in all of these
approaches.
THEORETICAL TESTS THEORIES WHILE NON-THEORETICAL DOESN’T TEST
ASSUMPTIONS

B. THEORETICAL
Theoretical and non-theoretical approaches are fundamentally different in their focus on making
assumptions explicit and testing them. Literary theory, on the other hand, is concerned with
justifying our beliefs about the object of study. All disciplines, including literary and cultural
studies, are governed by principles laid down in a theory. To engage in a discussion of literary
theory, it is essential to understand what all theories have in common.
Theories are attempts to understand something. A theory defines, describes and explains
objects, events or phenomena.
B. Aspects of theoretical approaches
*Theories are proposed within the sciences. Natural sciences, including physics, chemistry, and
biology, study the physical world, while human sciences, including psychology, sociology,
political science, and economics, study human behaviour. Literary and cultural studies are also
part of the human or social sciences, forming a distinct division of sciences.
We assume the view that the natural and human or social sciences have much in common. Where
there are important differences between the two, this will be indicated.
We can distinguish eight aspects which all theories have in
common. These are:
. the distinction between theory and object
. the distinction between theory and practice
. definition
. description
. explanation
. theoretical terms
. normativity
. criteria of acceptability of a theory
LOOK AT TEXTBOOK FOR NOTES NOT TRANSCRIBED ABOUT COUNTER CLAIMS
AND EXAMPLES

EXPLANATION
*Involved in theoretical understanding.
*Involves the forming or testing of hypotheses about the reasons for or causes of particular
occurrences.
*They take the form of appeals to general principles.
E.G. of GP- ‘Whenever ice is heated, it turns into water.’
General principles (GP) express regular
connections between conditions and
events.
GP= Whenever type x conditions occur,
type y events occur as well

*Invoking a general principle establishes the causal connection between a condition and an event,
such as a car's starter motor malfunction. While general principles can be used to explain specific
phenomena, they require further explanation. In this example for instance, understanding the
reasons behind faulty starter motors is crucial for theoretical explanation, as it helps explain the
underlying causes of specific phenomena.
*This is the field of THEORETICAL EXPLANATION. Theoretical explanation cannot rely on only
one general principle, it uses several interconnected ones. For example, the theory of motor
mechanics consists of many principles pertaining to the electrical circuits of cars, the way in which
fuel is converted to energy, and so on.
Motifs- are recurrent themes in stories.
Structuralist theory- the details of various structural rules are given in this theory.

Theoretical Terms
*The terms which are introduced by a theory in order to define, describe or explain the object or area
of study.
* Theoretical terms are crucial in capturing the most salient (noticeable or important) features of
an object of study. They are designed to capture the most salient features, and their precise
definition is essential for testing hypotheses. For instance, a motor mechanic may struggle to
determine the cause of a problem if they don't know the definition of a faulty starter motor. In
example 3, the term "motif" was too vague (i.e. not well defined) leading to the failure of the theory.

Normativity
* In theoretical language, normative principles are those that specify how things ’ought to be’ and
serve as a guide for human behaviour. Since they set a norm for behaviour and deeds, these
principles—such as moral precepts like the Ten Commandments—are crucial to human sciences as
well as literary and cultural studies.
* The discussion of normative principles in the theory/practice distinction highlights that human
sciences often serve as forms of practice, as they influence human behaviour. Normativity can be
introduced into human sciences through descriptions of objects or areas of study, often implying a
value judgement. For example, popular art and literature are often described as less valuable than high
art and literature.
* Normativity involves values and evaluation; it also involves prescribing to people what they ought
to do in view of a particular set of values. The following are the two most important cases of
normativity in literary theory:
 (1) when a theory puts forward an account of which literary works have the highest aesthetic or moral
value
(2) when a theory puts forward a suggestion on how literary works ought to be approached, studied or
interpreted

Criteria for the acceptability of a theory

We have already come across two of the criteria for accepting a theory. These are hypotheses that
can be tested and well- defined terms. Only two others will be mentioned here.
1. Coherence- Derived from the fact that theories, as we have seen, are sets of systematically
interconnected principles. The phrase ``systematically interconnected'' means that the
principles must be coherent. The coherence of a theory is a matter of two things: the theory
must contain no contradictions and the principles of the theory must display a certain
unity in that they must all belong to a unified view of the object of study.
2. Informativeness- The theory must be genuinely informative. That is, it must cast new light on
the object of study, and not simply repeat descriptions and explanations that are already
available in other theories.

SUMMARY-

. Theories define, describe or explain a group of objects, events or phenomena.

. They do so by forming hypotheses about the general principles that apply to this group of
objects, events or phenomena, and by testing these hypotheses.
. Theoretical hypotheses are couched in theoretical terms that are designed for a specific area of
study and that describe the salient features of the object, events or phenomena in that area of
study.
. Theories are sometimes forms of practice.
. Theories are sometimes normative.

Literary theory seeks to understand various aspects of cultural objects and to give accounts of
their nature and meaning. Its primary aim is to understand literary works and cultural
objects in general. Literary theory studies individual literary texts as examples of general aspects
pertaining to cultural objects. Its concern is not to interpret and evaluate particular literary works
or cultural objects as an end in itself. It seeks to extrapolate from specific objects, general insights
and principles applicable to all cultural objects of a similar or related kind.
Literary theory is concerned with studying the general characteristics and features of cultural
objects, to arrive at hypotheses concerning the general principles that apply to these objects. The
hypothesis of these general principles occurs within the framework of a systematic set of
principles postulated by the theory. The general principles apply to particular objects. They are
sometimes used to define the cultural objects in question, and are always used to describe these
objects. The general principles are explained by the set of principles postulated by the theory.
The hypotheses of literary theories, like those of other theories, are couched in theoretical terms
that pick out those features of objects that are thought to be their characteristic features.
The sender
Focus on the sender of cultural objects shows:
*how the sender is related to the object and its meanings
The message
Focus on the message yields:
*theories that make proposals about the defining characteristics of:
– all cultural objects
– a particular class of cultural objects, for example literary texts; or a subclass of cultural events,
for example oral poetry
– different genres of particular class of cultural objects, for example narrative, poetry, drama
– different subgenres of a genre, for example Romantic poetry
-theories that attempt to arrive at a thorough description of cultural objects in order to explain why
they elicit the responses they do
-theories that describe the intrinsic or inherent properties by which cultural objects acquire their
status and meaning
The receiver
Focus on the receiver of cultural objects shows:
- how the receivers of cultural objects interact with the objects, for example how they respond to
them, or interpret them
-the way in which receivers are influenced and affected by cultural objects
-the assumptions with which receivers approach cultural objects
The context
Theories that focus on the context may have the following
objectives:
- to understand whether cultural objects are affected by the context and, if so, how they are
affected
- to understand whether cultural objects have a function within that context and, if so, what that
function is
- to understand whether that context influences sender's intentions and receiver's responses and, if
so, how it influences them
Practices
Some theories focus on the practices that are prevalent with respect to cultural objects. They
attempt to understand why those practices arise and to test the soundness of the principles or
assumptions on which they are based. For example:
- The theory may try to explain why certain evaluations have been made: Why are certain texts
considered worthy of the “high art'' canon and others not?
- The theory may try to make explicit the assumptions under-lying interpretation, criticism and
scholarship.
Normativity
We have seen that the human sciences generally have a normative aspect, and literary and cultural
theory is no different in this respect. Literary and cultural theories may be explicitly normative in
the following respects:
- They may attribute value to certain cultural objects and not to others, and attempt to give
reasons. These reasons may be aesthetic (ie concerning the intrinsic value or beauty or worth of
the object) or socio-political.
- They may be prescriptive in terms of how the objects should be approached. For example, they
may make recommendations on interpretation.
CONCLUSION
In this module you will be introduced to some of the aspects
outlined above. Equipped with knowledge on the nature of
theoretical approaches we will now in successive parts look at
how different theories define, evaluate and interpret cultural
objects. The questions which the different theories tackle are
central to literary and cultural studies.

When you have worked through this next part, you should be able to:
. identify the problems associated with the definition of the aesthetic
. specify the criteria or conditions for the acceptability of any definition of the aesthetic
. compare how sender-centred, message-centred and context-centred approaches define the
aesthetic object
. assess the advantages and shortcomings of each the various theoretical approaches
. assess the definitions of the aesthetic proposed in the study guide

The term cultural object designates the sorts of objects normally designated by the term aesthetic
object': literary works, artworks, musical works, film, drama and so on.
Why not simply use the term ``aesthetic object'' then?
A evaluative term. The term aesthetic'' is an implicitly evaluative term. Normally it is used to refer
to the best or most highly valued examples of the various types of artistic activity.
The overlap between cultural and aesthetic objects is a serious problem when it comes to the
definition of the aesthetic, for two important reasons:
(1) A fundamental requirement of any theory is that it has a
clearly defined object of area of study. This object must be
addressed by terminology and methods specific to the
object.- AS WE KNOW AESTHETIC OBJECTS ARE SUBJECTIVE AND CANNOT BE CLEARLY
DEFINED
(2) The study of aesthetic objects is central to literary theory
and the aesthetic must, therefore, be defined as a point of
departure.

The dictionary definition of the word aesthetic leads us to understand that we should use the word
when we deal with considerations pertaining to pure beauty, to art or to good taste. The problem is
that there are no clear criteria for defining beauty, art and good taste.
Section I deals with the problem of beauty. It argues that we use the words beautiful and ugly
confidently, but we don't know how to justify our belief that something is beautiful or ugly. So
the fundamental problem is one of justification.
Judgments about beauty are different from other sorts of judgments because:
. the very same reasons that justify our belief that something is beautiful can be used to justify the
opposite belief.
. the sorts of objects that can be described as beautiful are very different, and require very
different sorts of reasons to support or justify the description.
even if we have a concept of beauty (for example “that which delights the senses and pleases the
mind”), the concept gives no clear criteria for when it applies to an object or when the word may
justifiably be used. As Eaton says: “No definition has seemed universally acceptable.”
This may lead us to adopt a subjectivist view of the aesthetic, by saying: ‘Beauty is in the eye of
the beholder.’ But this is to miss what the real question is. Communication depends on a
community of language users being in agreement about the meanings of words. If we can't agree
about when the word ‘beautiful’ can justifiably be used to describe something, then how can we
use the word at all for the purposes of communication? In particular, how can we begin to
understand aesthetic objects and our responses to them?
. A necessary condition is a condition that must be met for the concept to be applied. For
example, a necessary condition for something to be a horse is that it is an animal. REQUIRED
FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN- ESSENTIAL FOR THE STATEMENT TO HOLD- THE
THING THAT HAS TO OCCUR FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN
. A sufficient condition is a condition which, if met, alone suffices for the concept to be applied.
For example, a sufficient condition for something to be an animal is that it is an animal. IS
ENOUGH FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN- IT IS ENOUGH TO ENSURE THE STATEMENT
IS TRUE- ALL THAT HAS TO OCCUR FOR SOMETHING TO HAPPEN
. Some conditions are necessary and sufficient for a concept to be applied. For example, a
necessary and sufficient condition for a mare is to be a female horse.
. Some conditions are necessary but not sufficient conditions for a concept to be applied. For
example, being an animal is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for something to be a horse.
. Some conditions are sufficient but not necessary. For example, being a horse is a sufficient
condition for being an animal, but it is not a necessary condition.
To give the definition of a concept is to give its meaning. To give its meaning tells us what
conditions particular things must meet or satisfy for the concept to be applied to it. These
conditions are necessary and/or sufficient.
SOMETIMES, NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT CONDITIONS ARE THE SAME- E.G.
BEING A MALE SIBLING IS NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT FOR BEING A BROTHER

SENDER-CENTERED PROPOSALS
*Sender- poet, artist, dramatist
*This is a theoretical approach that will define aesthetic objects from the perspective of the
sender.
*Proposals that focus primarily on the needs and interests of the sender rather than the
recipient. These proposals tend to prioritize the goals and objectives of the sender without
considering the perspective or needs of the audience.
*An example: A company proposing a new marketing campaign solely based on increasing their
own profits, without considering the impact on the target audience and their needs.
*Emphasis falls on the creators of aesthetic objects i.e. writers and other artists
*We examine two types of sender-centred proposals: one that focuses on the nature of the work
involved in creating aesthetic products, and another that focuses on the intentions of the sender.
*Up until the middle of the 20th century, the dominant understanding of aesthetic objects was
primarily derived from Romanticism from the 19th century, and it held that the artist is not just a
skilled person but a creative genius. The activity of creativity will be highlighted as being relevant
to the creation of aesthetic objects.
*Originality and imagination are two other ideas that are related to creativity. According to the
Romantics, poets and artists possess creative imaginations in the truest sense of the word, as they
use their imaginations to create new things that are not only greater than those of mere mortals but
also original and creative.
*This idea is in contrast to another earlier theory that claims the imagination is limited to working
with pre-existing impressions to create original or inventive connections rather than creating
something so original that it can be considered to have never existed.
*The Romantics believed that the poetic imagination could create something entirely new, or ex
nihilo, rather than modifying existent raw material. Since the poet constructs their own "world,"
this compares the poet's act of creation to God's creation of the universe.
*The myth of the creative genius became rejected because it seemed to also support the notion
that the artist was the ultimate authority on the meaning of their work.
*The idea that artists are 'special' individuals has had a significant impact on and still does on
20th-century cultural theory. But the real question is whether the attributes of the artist and the
work that follows define the aesthetic- when faced with an aesthetic object, we are primarily
interested in the end product for this activity. IT IS BECAUSE WE FIND THESE OBJECTS
INTERSTING THAT WE ARE INTERESTED IN WHAT GOES INTO MAKING THEM.
*One counter-example (we use these to test ideas) of the creative imagination hypothesis is the
ease with which we can envision scenarios in which someone occurs to scribble down some
words that, happily for them, wind up being a poem. Alternatively, they could set out to write a
brilliant poetry and create one by chance. Since such a person would not be regarded as a poet in
the Romantic sense, his poem would not be a poetry.
*Poets, being human, are limited by circumstances and human factors. Poetry requires literacy in
language and poetry, requiring analysis of word meanings and responses to poems, implying
external stimulation.
SO FAR, WE HAVE 3 REASONS TO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE SPECIAL CREATIVE
ACTIVITY GOING INTO THE PRODUCTION OF CREATIVE OBJECTS IS WHAT DEFINES
THEM AS AESTHETIC:
1) Literary theory is interested only in the end product of the activity
2) Aesthetic objects are not always the end result of the creative imagination
3) The idea of creative imagination by the Romantics is not tenable

INTENTIONS OF THE SENDER

It is unlikely that a piece of driftwood in the shape of a heart will be classified in the same way as
a sculpture is classified as an aesthetic object. Because it is naturally occurring.
The diff. between the sculpture and the driftwood is that the first is made by a human agent, and
the second is not.
Some disagree with this. They believe that by displaying the driftwood, it becomes an aesthetic
object-i.e it is what you do with an object that defines it as an aesthetic object.
Both views show that aesthetic features are the result of purposive or goal oriented behaviour on
the part of humans or agents.- there is still human action involved in displaying the driftwood .
Whether or not something is an aesthetic object does have something to do with the actions and
behaviour of the sender. If we remove the sender from the situation, we are no longer dealing with
an aesthetic object- this shows that the connection between the sender and the aesthetic object is
crucial for defining aesthetic objects.
I.E SENDER-LESS OBJECTS ARE NOT AESTHETIC OBJECTS SO ONE OF THE
NECESSARY CONDITIONS FOR AN OBJECT TO BE DEFINED AS AESTHETIC IS THAT
IS HAS TO BE PRODUCED BY A HUMAN AGENT.
The type of activity by which aesthetic objects are produced is deliberate and intentional.
Deliberate- idle scrawling’s on a piece of paper does not make an aesthetic object.
Intentional- the intention to engage in an activity that will result in an aesthetic object.
DEFINITION 1 OF AN AESTHETIC OBJECT- Object x is an aesthetic
object if it’s made with the intention of the sender to produce an
aesthetic object.
The sender’s intention is necessary but not sufficient condition of defining an aesthetic object.
A further problem is that aesthetic is used in definition 1- threatening it with circularity.
*A statement is circular when it relies on itself to prove its own truth- this creates a fallacy of
logic where the conclusion is assumed in the premise
*A viciously circular statement is a statement that not only relies on itself to prove its own truth,
but also leads to a harmful or damaging outcome.

Message-Centred Proposals
*We are looking at how they define the aesthetic object
*Proposals that focus on the object itself. i.e the poem, the painting, etc
*Intrinsic features are features that are internal or inherent to the object. E.G, the colours and
shapes in a painting, the rhythms in a poem, the substance of a sculpture, etc. An object's
inherent qualities can be identified just by looking at it, or reading it in the case of a literary
work.
*Intrinsic approaches are methods of approaching aesthetic objects that emphasise these
characteristics.
*Extrinsic features are features that an object possesses because of its relationship with external
factors, like the writer or painter and the society in which it is created, are known as extrinsic
features. E.g. One of the extrinsic features of the work is the authorship of Pride and Prejudice,
for instance, by Jane Austen. Another external aspect of the object is the sender's activity in
producing the object. An object's extrinsic characteristics cannot be identified just by looking
at or reading about it.
*Extrinsic approaches are methods of approaching aesthetic things that emphasise these
characteristics.
*Message-centred proposals are intrinsic, sender-centred, receiver-centred, and context-centred
proposals are extrinsic.
* The intention of the sender is necessary for something to be an aesthetic object and is a crucial
extrinsic feature of an aesthetic object, which is reflected in the intrinsic features of the object.
E.G. the colours or type of paint an artist uses will be used with a specific intention, and these two
also create the intrinsic features of the painting.
* Both intrinsic and extrinsic features are interconnected and must be considered equally when
defining aesthetic objects.

Form and Content

*Any sentence that we use has a formal and a semantic (meaning) aspect.
*The arrangement of words (subject-verb-object) is a formal aspect of sentences and it has an
effect on the sentences meaning- e.g. in questions, the verb and subject are inverted i.e. verb-
subject-object- this would change the meaning of the sentence to a question.
*The meaning of the words in a particular arrangement is the semantic aspect of the sentence. i.e.
as the arrangement changes, the sentence’s meaning changes. The semantic content of the
sentence is a matter of the meaning of the words used AND their formal arrangement.
*The meaning of the sentence is a matter of the correct arrangement of words used and logic and
the word’s meaning.
*All communication involves form and content- they cannot be separated or function
independently. Since all messages have a formal and semantic aspect, all aesthetic objects, as
messages, have them as well.
* Efforts to characterise aesthetic objects by emphasising their message form aim to demonstrate
that aesthetic objects differ from other types of communication in some way, either in their form
or in the structure-content relationship present in them. Since they emphasise the inherent
qualities of the thing, they are intrinsic methods. These are the strategies that we shall examine
next.
LOOK AT ACTIVITY AND ANSWERS
FORMALIST THEORIES: RUSSIAN FORMALISM AND NEW CRITICISM
* Theories that emphasise the form of aesthetic objects are known as formalist theories.
Additionally, they offer interpretations that help clarify the precise form/content relationship that
these things contain. The best example of a theory that concentrates nearly solely on form is
Russian formalism. Instead, the focus of New Criticism is on the form/content contained in
literary works.

Russian formalism: developed by Russian literary theorists between 1915 and 1920. At the time,
many believed in positivism- Art and literature were held to be important because if what they
told us about society or the ‘’life and times’’ of the author. The positivism theory is based on the
causality principle i.e. the idea that once the cause of the phenomenon is understood, the
phenomenon is also understood. The Russian theorists were against this, as well as the
Romanticism emphasis on the ‘creative genius’ of the writer as an explanation of literary work,
countering it by saying ‘Literature is distinguished by intrinsic features, not extrinsic i.e. the
author’ and ‘The aim of literary study is to create a science of literature, the study of and
specialisation of literature’.
They wanted to make literary science an autonomous discipline i.e it wouldn’t depend on any
other disciplines like sociology and psychology- this reason makes the Russian Formalists be
regarded as the founders of modern literary theory.

The Russian Formalists used the term "literariness" to describe the distinctively literary
characteristics that set literary works apart from other types of literature. Literariness is the
subject of research for Russian Formalism. Their main hypothesis is that poetic or literary
language is distinguished or differs from ordinary language in the fact of its deviation from the
latter.
 The usage of formal devices highlights this difference in language. In poetry, devices include
elements like rhyme, rhythm, metre, and metaphor. The several methods used to convey a tale,
such as manipulating the story's time, are called narrative devices.
Deviation leads to the defamiliarization of ordinary or standard language, as defined by the
Russian Formalists. The Russian Formalists define "defamiliarization" as "language made
strange." Because it is utilised differently from how we are used to, the language we know
becomes foreign to us. At times, it gets challenging, requiring us to focus more intently on the
words we use and how they are arranged and combined. Poetic language draws attention to the
language itself since it differs from and defamiliarizes everyday language. We don't draw
emphasis to the formality of the phrases we employ in casual discourse.
Instead, this element either fades into the background or is subordinate to its meaning or
substance. But the formal element is paramount in poetic language. It is emphasised in terms of
the Russian Formalists.
A consequence of language's defamiliarization and foregrounding is a defamiliarization of our
senses. Certain aspects of reality that we take for granted are "made strange" by poetic language,
causing us to view them from a different angle. For instance, we might expect the word "dead" to
be used instead of "defunct," and we might expect "silver" or even "grey" instead of
"watersmooth-silver." We relive things in a fresh way thanks to the poetic tactics employed in
language.
The Russian Formalists immediately realised that not all deviations result in defamiliarization.
This is due to the fact that anything that was previously innovative or a departure from
expectations later becomes ingrained in poetic language and becomes part of our expectations.
For instance, with repeated usage, some metaphors gradually lose their impact and cease to amaze
us. They start to operate automatically. poetry language, then, differs from both established poetry
language and plain language. This is one of the ways that literary styles change: at first a new
style is seen as innovative, but it gradually gains traction and is replaced by another. As a result,
deviation occurs within the context of both acceptable poetry and common language usage. We
refer to this as an external deviation.
Moreover, variation might even occur within a single poem. The poems themselves create
expectations that are later not met. We refer to this as internal deviance.
Thus a poem is a complex whole, containing various types of deviation as shown in the
following diagram:
Let's examine a poem's internal deviations in more detail: The repeating of sentences or lines having a
similar structure or content is known as parallelism. A poem's pattern of deviations causes some
devices to be emphasised while others are automated. Parallelism is the main literary device in "The
Clod and the Pebble" (lines 1 & 9, 4 & 12). While the poem's rhythm is mostly automatized (it does
not stray from the accepted poetic language rhythmical rules or take the stage), this device serves as
the poem's organising concept. Because a literary work is viewed as a system, one may discern
between automatized nondominant elements and foregrounded dominant elements.
The Russian Formalists claimed that there is an interaction between unequal parts in this system. The
Russian Formalists believed that literature students should focus on the interplay and coherence
between these factors.
Problems and shortcomings
The ideas of the Russian Formalists have two primary issues:
(1) Poetic writings are not the only texts that employ devices in a variety of circumstances. In the
telling of jokes and stories, for instance, they are employed; in speeches by politicians, they
are known as rhetorical devices; in ads, chants, and slogans, to mention a few, they are also
employed. This suggests that the notion of poetic language does not depend solely on the
employment of techniques. This issue was, of course, known to the Russian Formalists. Refer
to the form/content difference to learn how they handled it. A message is composed of form as
well as content, or meaning, as was discussed in the section addressing that distinction.
According to the Russian Formalists, we are dealing with a literary or poetic work when the
focus is largely on the form of any language usage, or when the language itself is
foregrounded. On the other hand, an advertising could make extremely creative use of formal
elements. However, in the context of an advertising, attention is not attracted to the form for
its own sake in the context of an advertisement, but rather for its efficacy in making the
product attractive.
Still, it doesn't seem like a totally implausible proposal. Can form and substance be kept
apart? We observed the different formal methods employed in William Blake's "The Clod and
the Pebble" and in "Portrait" by e. cummings, as well as how they relate to the message of the
poems. Though it is a formal device, can we tell the difference between the meanings of the
phrases that are ran together in line 6 of "Portrait"?
It is impossible to read "onetwothreefourfive" and ignore the fact that the digits 1 through 5
are being ran together. Russian Formalism, as a philosophy, reflects this preoccupation with
form, having emerged during a period of increased formal experimentation in the arts.
However, it falls short of capturing our fascination with literary works as beautiful objects.
Are we not primarily concerned in their form, after all? Are we not sometimes interested in
what they convey to us through that form?

[2] The Russian Formalists sought to demonstrate how literature's intrinsic characteristics
might set it apart from other kinds of writing and language. You will recall that intrinsic
qualities are those that we may learn about only by reading a poem or by observing beautiful
things. It turns out, nevertheless, that poetry includes both internal and external deviance. The
poem's true distinction as a poem, or the way we know we are reading a poem and not a court
case or a bus schedule, comes from its external deviation, or the ways in which its language
deviates from standard and accepted poetic language. However, we are unable to infer
extrinsic deviance from the poetry itself. We approach the poem with a plethora of
information about both poetry and everyday language, and we use this knowledge to identify
deviations. So, a poem's intrinsic characteristics do not set it apart from other types of
language.

We must not dismiss all facets of the notion out of hand, as we did when examining the
sender's relationship with aesthetic products. It is preferable for us to extract its value. The
problems with formal theories of aesthetic objects only serve to emphasise how inadequately
these objects may be described by their innate formal qualities. To put it another way, a thing
does not automatically qualify as an aesthetic object just because it has inherent formal
qualities.

Is it a necessary condition though? Stated differently, can an object qualify as artistic if its
inherent formal qualities are overlooked? The argument here is that aesthetic things display a
kind of attention to these traits lacking from other objects and modes of communication, even
if they might not be mainly bringing attention to their inherent, formal aspects.

The fact that attention is not always directed primarily to intrinsic formal qualities is
demonstrated by realist art, cinema, and literature. A genre known as realism makes the claim
to impartially and objectively represent the outside world. It has a tendency to draw the
recipient's focus away from its shape. As such, it seems to be an opposition to the Russian
Formalist ideas. However, is realism a valid counter-example of the formalist assertion under
consideration?
Similarly in realist novels, realistic plot and characterisation are achieved by means of formal
techniques. Thus, even if aesthetic objects actually divert the receiver's attention from the
intrinsic formal features, attention is paid to them in the production of the object. That is, at
least the sender of the object must attend to these features.

At this point, we can make the following statement concerning the definition of an aesthetic
object:
Formal- relating to form

We have already seen, however, that at least in literature it is very difficult to separate form
and meaning, and that, in addition, the attention to form manifested in the objects has a
central role in how the content is conveyed. This brings us to the other important intrinsic
features of aesthetic objects: their content or meaning.

As we have seen in the poems ``Portrait'' and ``The clod and the pebble'', the form of an
aesthetic object seldom stands alone. It is interesting to us at least in part, because what the
object means is intimately related to its form. Thus a distinguishing feature of aesthetic
objects may be their form-content relation, or the relation between their intrinsic formal
and semantic features.

New Criticism, which we will discuss in the next section, proposes that this relation is what
distinguishes literary language. We have not yet dealt with the second problem- the difficulty
of distinguishing between intrinsic features and extrinsic or external features. We will come
back to this in our discussion of New Criticism, where this difficulty crops up again..

Russian Formalism does contribute to a better understanding of poetry as an aesthetic object.

It focuses on the form and structure of literary works rather than the content or the author’s
intention. THIS APPROACH HELPS READERS APPRECIATE POETRY FOR ITS
INTRINSIC QUALITIES AND ARTISTIC TECHNIQUES.
The ideas of Russian Formalism can be applied to other art forms beyond poetry. Its focus on
the formal elements of a work of art, such as structure, style, and technique, can be used to
analyse and appreciate various art forms like literature, painting, film, and music. By
examining the inherent qualities and artistic devices within different art forms, one can gain a
deeper understanding of their aesthetic value and the ways in which they communicate
meaning to the audience.

NEW CRITICISM
New Criticism is a movement in 20th-century literary criticism that arose in reaction to those
traditional “extrinsic” approaches that saw a text as making a moral or philosophical
statement or as an outcome of social, economic, political, historical, or biographical
phenomena. New Criticism holds that a text must be evaluated apart from its context; failure
to do so causes the Affective Fallacy, which confuses a text with the emotional or
psychological response of its readers, or the Intentional Fallacy, which conflates (combines
two ideas together) textual impact and the objectives of the author.
 New Criticism assumes that a text is an isolated entity that can be understood through the
tools and techniques of close reading, maintains that each text has unique texture, and asserts
that what a text says and how it says it are inseparable. The task of the New Critic is to show
the way a reader can take the myriad and apparently discordant elements of a text and
reconcile or resolve them into a harmonious, thematic whole. In sum, the objective is to unify
the text or rather to recognize the inherent but obscured unity therein. The reader’s awareness
of and attention to elements of the form of the work mean that a text eventually will yield to
the analytical scrutiny and interpretive pressure that close reading provides. Simply put, close
reading is the hallmark of New Criticism.
The genesis of New Criticism can be found in the early years of the 20th century in the work of the
British philosopher I. A. Richards and his student William Empson. Another important fi gure in the
beginnings of New Criticism was the American writer and critic T. S. Eliot. Later practitioners and
proponents include John Crowe Ransom, Cleanth Brooks, Allen Tate, Robert Penn Warren, Reni
Wellek, and William Wimsatt. In many ways New Criticism runs in temporal parallel to the American
modern period.
From the 1930s to the 1960s in the United States, New Criticism was the accepted approach to literary
study and criticism in scholarly journals and in college and university English departments. Among
the lasting legacies of New Criticism is the conviction that surface reading of literature is insufficient;
a critic, to arrive at and make sense of the latent potency of a text, must explore very carefully its
inner sanctum by noting the presence and the patterns of literary devices within the text. Only this,
New Criticism asserts, enables one to decode completely.

New Criticism gave discipline and depth to literary scholarship through emphasis on the text and a
close reading thereof. However, the analytic and interpretive moves made in the practice of New
Criticism tend to be most effective in lyric and complex intellectual poetry. The inability to deal
adequately with other kinds of texts proved to be a significant liability in this approach. Furthermore,
the exclusion of writer, reader, and context from scholarly inquiry has made New Criticism vulnerable
to serious objections.
Despite its radical origins, New Criticism was fundamentally a conservative enterprise. By the 1960s,
its dominance began to erode, and eventually it ceded primacy to critical approaches that demanded
examination of the realities of production and reception. Today, although New Criticism has few
champions, in many respects it remains an approach to literature from which other critical modes
depart or against which they militate.
New Criticism, a formalist movement in literary theory, held sway over American literary criticism
during the mid-20th century. Its central tenet was close reading, particularly of poetry, to discern how
a work of literature functioned as a self-contained, self-referential aesthetic object1. Let’s delve into
its key aspects:

Formalist Approach: New Criticism emerged as a reaction against older philological and literary
history schools in the United States. These older approaches focused on individual word meanings,
historical contexts, and biographical details of authors. However, New Critics believed that such
external factors distracted from the text’s intrinsic meaning and aesthetic qualities. They aimed for a
systematic and objective method of analysis, emphasizing the structure and meaning of the text
itself1.
Three Fallacies Addressed by New Criticism:
Intentional Fallacy: This fallacy assumes that the author’s intended meaning is the only valid
interpretation of a literary work. New Critics rejected this notion, emphasizing that a text’s meaning
should be derived from the text itself, independent of the author’s intentions.
Affective Fallacy: The affective fallacy involves interpreting a work based on the emotional responses
it evokes in readers. New Critics argued that a text’s aesthetic value should not be determined solely
by emotional reactions but rather by its inherent qualities.
Historical Fallacy: This fallacy involves relying too heavily on historical context or biographical
details to interpret a work. New Criticism advocated for analyzing the text on its own terms, without
undue influence from external factors1.
In summary, New Criticism championed the idea that a literary work’s true essence lies within its own
words and structure, free from external distractions or fallacies.
In many ways, Russian Formalism and New Criticism are extremely similar. Its supporters rejected
literary text analyses that were sociological, psychological, or biographical, and they aimed to make
literary analysis a stand-alone, independent field of study. New Criticism differs from Russian
Formalism because its main concern is with the practice and methods of criticism, and thus with the
interpretation of particular texts, and also because it is inclined towards humanism and empiricism.
The link between form and content in literary texts is the focus of New Criticism study. The literary
text is an organic unity of form and substance that cannot be reduced to common language, according
to the New Critics.
The main hypothesis of the New Critics is that literature expresses and embodies timeless, universal
human truths and is both independent and unique among forms of knowledge. The humanism that
underpins New Criticism is based on the emphasis on humanism. The foundation of humanism is the
idea that everything is measured in relation to humans. The perspective is anthropocentric in that it
regards humans as the core of the universe.
Humanism holds that there is a significant difference between the natural sciences and the
humanities/social sciences. This is the belief that a model that is drastically different from the model
employed in the natural sciences is necessary for the study of human conduct and phenomena related
to human experience. Human experience is prioritised by humanism. Empiricism, a word derived
from the Greek word empeiria, which meaning "experience," is what this focus is. This means that,
for the New Critics, knowledge must come from actual, hands-on experience rather than from the
theoretical equations of the natural sciences. Thus, literature contributes to the human sciences by
imparting information about the human condition, according to the New Critics.
The literary trends of humanism and new criticism have diverse histories, emphases, and
metholodologies. Nonetheless, there are certain similarities and parallels between the two, especially
with regard to their emphasis on in-depth textual examination and rejection of unimportant details in
literary interpretation.

1) Emphasis on Textual Analysis: As essential to literary interpretation, careful reading and

textual analysis are prioritised by both Humanism and NC. Humanism, which has its roots in
Renaissance literary research, places a strong emphasis on reading classical works and
realising how crucial textual criticism is to comprehending both ancient and Renaissance
literature. Similar to this, NC, which first appeared in the early to mid-20th century, places
emphasis on closely examining literary works and pays more attention to the text's formal
components than to outside variables like the author's aim or the historical setting.
 2) Text emphasis: The independence and self-sufficiency of the literary text are emphasised by
both groups. The "integrity" of the literary text is defended by New Criticism, which contends
that it should be analysed exclusively on its own terms without reference to extraneous
elements like the author's biography or historical context. Humanism sees literary works as
standalone creations deserving of study and appreciation in and of themselves.
3) Rejection of Extraneous elements: The use of extraneous elements in literary interpretation is
rejected by both New Criticism and humanism. Humanism aims to comprehend literary works
according to their own terms, free from subjective or out-of-date interpretations. In a same
vein, New Criticism promotes a "close reading" of the text, concentrating just on the words on
the page and shunning biographical, historical, or ideological considerations.
In spite of these parallels, humanism and NC diverge greatly from one another. Critics point to
humanism as a Renaissance literary movement for emphasising the study of old literature,
celebrating human potential, and reviving classical education.
Conversely, NC is a literary trend from the 20th century that arose in opposition to historical and
biographical literary methods. Its formalist approach, emphasis on in-depth textual examination,
and rejection of insignificant elements in literary interpretation are what define it.
Both are fundamentally independent movements with different beginnings, methodology, and
emphases, despite many parallels between them, especially in their rejection of extraneous
influences in literary interpretation and their emphasis on detailed textual study.
EXPLANATION OF HUMANISM: Imagine you have a big puzzle with lots of pieces. Each piece is
like a different part of a story, a poem, or something someone wrote. Humanism is like when you look
really closely at each piece of the puzzle to understand it better. You might notice the colours, shapes,
and how they fit together to make the picture. Humanism is all about studying old stories and writings
to learn about people, their idea, and how they saw the world a long time ago. It’s like being a
detective trying to solve a mystery, but instead of looking for clues, you’re looking for ideas and
understanding how people thought and felt a long time ago.
Empiricism is a way of understanding the world based on evidence and observation. Imagine you
have a big question, like “How does a plant grow?” Instead of just guessing or making up an answer,
an empiricist would look at real plants, observe how they grow, and collect data to find out the
answer. Empiricism believes that knowledge comes from our experiences and what we can see, touch,
hear, and smell. Instead of relying on just ideas or theories, empiricism relies on real-world evidence
and observations to figure things out.
Since empiricism and NC are two separate philosophical and literary traditions with different goals
and approaches, there is neither a clear nor direct link between them. Nonetheless, several similarities
and links may be found between the two:
1) Emphasis on textual evidence: In their respective fields, NC and empiricism both highlight
the significance of evidence and in-depth examination. Empiricism is a philosophical system
that bases its assertions about knowing on empirical data obtained by experimentation and
observation. Likewise, NC as a literary movement places a strong emphasis on reading
closely and analysing the text as a whole, seeing the words as the main source of value and
meaning.
2) Attention to detail: NC and empiricism both place a high importance on accuracy and
meticulousness in analysis. Empiricism highlights the value of rigorous data collecting and
attentive observation in scientific research. NC also supports in-depth textual analysis, which
involves rigorously and precisely analysing a literary text's language, structure, and imagery.
3) Objective Analysis: The goal of both movements is objectivity in analysis, aiming to unearth
facts that are supported by data and observation rather than by personal judgement or
 interpretation. The goal of empiricism is to create knowledge assertions that can be confirmed
and repeated using empirical techniques. Similar to this, NC aims to analyse literary works
objectively and methodically, putting the text itself first rather than extraneous elements like
the author's intention or the text's historical setting.
Although empiricism and NC have similarities in that they prioritise evidence-based analysis and
pay close attention to detail, it's crucial to remember that they work in separate fields—literary
criticism and philosophy—and have different goals and methods. While NC focuses on close
reading and textual analysis to interpret and analyse literary materials, empiricism is more
concerned with understanding the natural world via observation and experimentation.
The idea that literature is a sort of knowledge is linked to the idea that literature expresses
timeless, universal truths about the human experience. Truth and knowledge are conceptually
related; knowledge is typically defined as a validated true belief. Literature must thus be genuine
in order to qualify as a type of knowledge. The New Critics also gave a lot of weight to the idea
that literary works are universal and that they convey universal truths through the use of particular
imagery, or subject matter. The New Critics believe that the form of literary works has a direct
bearing on the attainment of universality. The New Critics claim that these characteristics make
up "great" writing.
On the other hand, truth and universality were often confused by the New Critics. It appears that
their belief was that a work of writing could only be considered authentic if it conveyed a
message about the human experience as a whole, irrespective of social or historical
circumstances. This gave rise to significant criticisms of New Criticism, which we shall address in
a moment. Prior to addressing those criticisms, it is important to clarify the differences between
truth and universality.
A statement is true if it represents a state of affairs as that state of affairs actually is.
The Russian Formalists' pursuit of creating a literary science marked the beginning of modern
literary theory. However, as the evolution of literary theory in the Anglo-American world was
initially mostly a violent backlash against the New Critics' suggestions, New Criticism bears at
least equal blame for this development. If New Criticism served as the literary theory's negative
model in many ways, Russian Formalism served as its positive model. In post-1970s philosophy,
the New Critical understanding of the worth of aesthetic objects has come under heavy criticism.
As previously shown, the New Criticism had a significant impact on the way literature was taught
in colleges and universities.
As a result, it was implied that the ability to perceive and understand "universal, eternal truths"
was the primary factor in the understanding and interpretation of literature.However, many
readers and literary students who have been taught using this manner have actually experienced a
sense of alienation and isolation. Because, for instance, the majority of the literature taught was
written by males, the question of how feminism could portray women's experiences arose with its
birth. It was asserted that female readers and students did not relate with the characters depicted
and felt left out of the universal humanity that was purportedly conveyed by "great" literature.
As a result, one became estranged from the literary establishment and its standards of appraisal.
Because women's experiences were seen as unique to a certain group and not to all of mankind,
they were excluded from the human experience. Male experience became inherently linked to
human experience. Critics of the New Criticism view it as the height of a male-dominated
conception of aesthetic value, depriving women's writing of the same status as male writing
because the standards for aesthetic value were biassed towards male experiences and concerns,
even though they pretended to be universal human concerns.
Similar alienation and exclusion from the ''universal and timeless'' truths purportedly revealed by
literature has occurred in other spheres of society. Postcolonialist theories illustrate the impact this
has had on Black people and the citizens of formerly colonised nations. The New Critical idea of
aesthetic worth excludes and marginalises particular social groups, which is a major problem of
contemporary literature and cultural criticism. It is thought that this notion is a component of the
phenomenon known as the Dead White Male, or DWM, condition. It has been broadened to
include Dead White Male Heterosexual in more recent times, or even Dead White Male Anglo-
Saxon Protestant Heterosexual. According to the New Critics, the supposed universal human
experience was supposedly only accessible to a select few people, and only they are the subject of
this title.
Is this critique all that accurate? Regretfully, the subject has grown quite delicate and heated. As a
result, certain parts of the issue have received more attention than others. Let's take a time to
review the New Critics' suggestions that the objections overlooked. First, it is asserted that
distinguishing aesthetic qualities are a function of both universality and concrete imagery. The
New Critics claim that the literary work uses concrete imagery to inform us about actual, tangible
human experiences (it depicts physical circumstances, for example). It conveys realities about
such experiences by portraying them in a certain way.
What kinds of experiences are appropriate for literary works is not mentioned in this. The events
in question might, in theory, pertain to individuals of any gender, colour, or socioeconomic
background. The main idea behind the New Critical approach is that literature can only be a kind
of knowledge if it is approached in a way that discloses truths about the subjects being discussed.
It is also asserted that the relationship between form and content determines what makes an
aesthetic trait special. Refer back to exercise 6.5 and e.e. Cummings's poetry "Portrait." We saw in
that poem that the formal elements—rhythm, grammar, and word arrangement on the page—are
some of the ways the poem expresses its content. The meaning of the poem is revealed by its
organic wholeness, or by the way all of its formal and semantic elements work together
cohesively.
New Criticism, as a literary movement, made several claims about the distinctiveness of literature.
Two key claims are:
1. Autonomy of the Text: New Criticism asserted the autonomy of the literary text,
arguing that a work of literature should be analyzed and evaluated based solely on its own
intrinsic qualities and formal elements, independent of external factors such as authorial intention,
historical context, or reader response. According to New Critics, the meaning of a literary text
resides within the text itself, and it should be interpreted through close reading and analysis of its
language, structure, imagery, symbolism, and other formal features. This claim emphasizes the
self-sufficiency of the literary work and rejects the idea that the author's biography, social
background, or historical context should determine its meaning.
2. Unity of the Text: New Criticism also emphasized the unity and coherence of the
literary text, arguing that each element of the work contributes to its overall meaning and
significance. According to New Critics, a literary text is a carefully crafted aesthetic object in
which every word, image, and detail is purposefully chosen and interconnected to create a unified
whole. This claim underscores the importance of close reading and attention to detail in literary
analysis, as well as the belief that the meaning of a text emerges from its internal structure and
organization rather than external influences.
These two claims about the distinctiveness of literature—autonomy of the text and unity of the
text—reflect the core principles of New Criticism and its emphasis on close textual analysis,
formalism, and the intrinsic value of literary works.
However, there is a flaw in the New Critical account of aesthetic value that affects the
differentiation between intrinsic and extrinsic value. This issue is identical to what Russian
Formalism ran into. Since we just need to read the poem to notice all of the aforementioned
features—including the form/content relation—it is argued that these elements are inherent to the
poem. Because they consider literary works and other aesthetic objects to be fully independent,
the New Critics follow this idea. In turn, the works' autonomy is maintained by their rejection of
the idea that literary creations are dependent on the culture from which they originate, the author's
personality, or other exogenous elements.
It is true that the poem's alliterations, consonances, contrasts, and strong rhythmical and
syntactical elements are all inherent to it. But hardly just any reader can identify them, much
alone identify them as consonances, alliterations, and so on; a reader who is ignorant of the poetic
rules is unlikely to do so. The sender's knowledge and comprehension of poetic conventions,
traditions, and other institutional and cultural elements—such as views of women in Anglo-Saxon
culture—is tied to the poem's characteristics.
Their recognition is contingent upon readers disseminating that knowledge and comprehension, as
well as, to some degree, that culture. Note the distinction: while the poem has certain inherent
qualities related to its structure and content, the reasons behind its existence and recognition are
attributed to a number of extrinsic factors concerning the poem's author, readers, and the
environment in which it was written and is read.
The notion that literary works and other art objects convey facts is contested by certain critics.
This objection's justifications are frequently quite technical. They have to do with how beautiful
things relate to the outside world or actuality. Essentially, it is the assertion that literary and
artistic objects exclusively refer to themselves as literary or artistic works and not to anything
outside of them. We go into great length about this in the literary theory module at the second
level. It is known as the self-referential aspect of creative and literary works. In other instances, it
is asserted that our reaction to beautiful items is unaffected by the truth.
Similar to the Russian Formalists, the New Critics focused on a narrow area of the arts,
specifically literary works, and poetry in particular. Linguistic aesthetic objects, or those that
employ language as a medium, highlight the intimate relationship between formal and semantic
qualities, or form and meaning. There are notable distinctions between auditory and visual
aesthetic items. In music or architecture, for instance, the relationship between form and meaning
is not as clear as it is in literary works. Our analysis of the New Critics' approach demonstrates
that the inherent qualities of artistic objects are formal-semantic aspects, or the intimate
relationship between form and content.
In the future, we will discuss the inherent qualities of beautiful objects for convenience's sake,
without denoting whether these qualities are formal or semantic. Regarding the conclusions drawn
from our investigation of beautiful objects thus far, two things need to be noted. Firstly, the
activity of producing aesthetic objects on the side of the sender entails the sender's goals and how
those objectives are actualized. The second portion of our claim demonstrates that this activity
involves paying attention to the object's inherent qualities to some extent.
The second is that we still don't have enough criteria to define what constitutes an artistic object.
This is due to the fact that even while we may have the best of intentions—that is, to create an
aesthetically pleasing thing while paying close attention to its inherent qualities—we may still be
unable to do so, for whatever reason, such as a lack of skill. It is necessary to have something that
demonstrates the function that evaluation plays, in addition to the sender's objectives and
attention.
(a) An "autonomous" object refers to something that exists or operates independently, without
being influenced or determined by external factors. In the context of literature and art, an
autonomous object is one that is considered self-contained and self-sufficient, with its meaning
and significance derived solely from its internal qualities rather than from external factors such as
the author's biography or historical context.

(b) According to the New Critics, literature and art are considered autonomous because they
possess a self-contained and self-sufficient quality that allows them to be interpreted and
appreciated on their own terms. New Critics argued that the meaning and significance of a literary
work are inherent within the text itself, independent of the author's intentions or the socio-
historical context in which it was produced. By focusing on the formal elements of literary texts—
such as language, imagery, structure, and symbolism—New Critics believed that literature could
be analyzed and understood as a distinct and autonomous form of expression.

(c) Despite their emphasis on autonomy, literary texts and other aesthetic objects are not entirely
autonomous in the sense that they can still be influenced by external factors. For example:
Interpretation: While New Critics emphasized the importance of close reading and analysis of the
text itself, the interpretation of literary works can be influenced by readers' subjective
experiences, cultural background, and historical context.
Authorial Intent: Although New Critics downplayed the significance of authorial intent in
interpreting literary texts, the intentions of the author can still provide valuable insights into the
meaning and context of a work.
Socio-Historical Context: While New Critics advocated for the autonomy of literary texts, the
socio-historical context in which a work is produced can still impact its reception and
interpretation. Issues such as cultural norms, political climate, and social movements can shape
the way a work is understood and valued over time.
Overall, while literary texts and other aesthetic objects possess a degree of autonomy, they are
also subject to various external influences that can shape their meaning and significance.
However, the New Critics had a tendency to mix up universality with truth. They seems to have
held the opinion that a work of writing can only be considered authentic if it conveys a truth about
the human condition as it is, independent of social or historical background. This gave rise to
valid criticisms of New Criticism, which we shall address in a moment. Prior to addressing such
issues, it is necessary to differentiate between the ideas of universality and truth.
The fact that a proposition is true for all people does not imply that it applies to every human
being or every human experience. It has to do with the fact that the statement is recognisable as
true by anybody who speaks or writes English.
The notion that literary works and other art objects convey facts is contested by certain critics.
This objection's justifications are frequently very technical. They deal with how aesthetically
pleasing items relate to the outside world or actuality. It basically comes down to the assertion
that literary and artistic items merely refer to themselves as literary or artistic works and do not
relate to anything in reality. This is the so-called self-referential aspect of creative and literary
works, which is covered in-depth in the literary theory module at the second level. In other
instances, the argument is made that our reaction to aesthetic items is unaffected by the truth.
The New Critics, like the Russian Formalists, focused on a narrow aesthetic domain: literary
works, specifically poetry.
Linguistic aesthetic objects, or those that employ language as a medium, highlight the tight
relationship between form and meaning, or formal and semantic qualities. There are notable
distinctions between auditory and visual aesthetic items. In music or architecture, for instance, the
relationship between form and meaning is not as clear as it is in literary works.
We examine the notion put out by the New Critics and find that the intrinsic qualities of aesthetic
objects are formal-semantic properties, or the intimate relationship between form and content.
We need to change definition II to include X is an aesthetic object if it is produced with the
intention of producing an aesthetic object, and if attention is paid to x's intrinsic formal AND
SEMANTIC (MEANING) features.
b) New Criticism contributes to a better understanding of literature as an aesthetic object by
emphasizing the importance of close reading and analysis of the text itself. By focusing on
the intrinsic features of literary works, such as language, imagery, symbolism, and
structure, New Criticism encourages readers to engage deeply with the artistic qualities and
formal elements of literature. This approach can lead to a richer appreciation of the complexities
and nuances of literary texts, enhancing our understanding of literature as a form of artistic
expression.
(c) Some ideas of New Criticism can be applied to art forms other than literature, particularly
those that involve textual or symbolic elements. For example, the emphasis on close reading and
analysis of formal elements can be applied to the study of visual arts, such as painting, sculpture,
or photography. Just as New Criticism encourages readers to examine the language, imagery, and
symbolism in literary texts, it can also encourage viewers to analyze the composition, use of
color, and symbolic motifs in visual artworks. However, it's important to recognize that not all
aspects of New Criticism may be directly applicable to non-textual art forms, in music or
architecture, for instance, the relationship between form and meaning is not as clear as it is
in literary works.

CONTEXT-CENTRED PROPOSALS
Proposals that are context-centred, like those that are sender-centred, emphasise extrinsic factors
of aesthetic goods. Thus, they are interested in providing an explanation for the unique qualities
of aesthetic things and how they came to be.
Main hypothesis: According to theories that emphasise context, there is a connection between the
context and the aesthetic object. The particular assertion or hypothesis is that the inherent
qualities of aesthetic items and their extrinsic elements are causally related.
Stated differently, the context-centred solutions offered in this study guide do not destroy the
aesthetic object in the sense that classic positivist does, in contrast to positivism which ignored
the unique characteristics of the aesthetic object that Russian Formalism attempted to account for.
Instead, they attempt to elucidate the unique intrinsic characteristics of the aesthetic item through
extrinsic factors.

a) The object of study of context-centered approaches is primarily the external factors

surrounding a literary work, such as the author's biography, historical context, cultural
background, and social milieu. These approaches aim to analyze how these external factors
influence the creation, reception, and interpretation of the work.
(b) The main hypothesis of context-centered proposals is that understanding the socio-historical
context in which a literary work is produced is essential for interpreting its meaning and
significance. These proposals suggest that the meaning of a literary work is not solely contained
within the text itself but is also shaped by the external conditions and influences surrounding its
production.
(c) The similarity between positivism and the claim of context-centered proposals lies in their
emphasis on empirical evidence and objective analysis. Both positivism and context-centered
approaches prioritize the examination of external factors and context to derive meaning and
understanding. They both reject purely subjective or speculative interpretations in favor of a more
systematic and evidence-based approach to literary analysis.
(d) The difference between positivism and the approach to context-centered proposals lies in their
focus and methodology. While positivism is a philosophical stance that emphasizes empirical
observation and scientific methods for understanding the natural and social world, context-
centered proposals are specific to literary analysis and focus on the examination of external
factors such as authorial intent, historical context, and cultural background to interpret literary
works. Context-centered approaches are more concerned with understanding the social and
historical conditions that shape the production and reception of literature, whereas positivism has
a broader application across various disciplines and domains of inquiry.

Context-centered proposals are ways of looking at literature that focus a lot on the world around
the text, rather than just the words in the text itself. Here's what that means:

Author's Life: It's like looking at who wrote the book or story and what their life was like.
Understanding things about the author, like where they lived, when they lived, and what was
happening in the world when they wrote the book, can give us clues about why they wrote it and
what they were trying to say.
Historical Time: It's also about what was happening in the world when the book was written.
Knowing the time period helps us understand why certain ideas or themes might be important in
the book and how people at that time might have reacted to it.
Cultural Background: This is about the customs, beliefs, and values of the society where the book
was written. These things can influence what the author writes about and how they write it.
Social Environment: It's about the society where the book is set or where the author lived.
Understanding things like social classes, politics, or social issues can help us understand why
certain events or characters are important in the story.
So, instead of just focusing on the words and sentences in a book, context-centered proposals ask
us to think about the bigger picture - the world outside the book - to better understand what the
book is trying to tell us.

There is currently no theory that adequately captures the incredibly complicated context in which
aesthetic items develop. Among the elements that are taken into account are:
 A. Institution: The institution is the component of the setting that directly relates to aesthetic
things. The institution's scope changes based on our areas of specialisation. Certain
institutional elements (such as those related to literature or fine art) have an impact on all
aesthetic items, whereas others are limited to a specific category of aesthetic objects. Funding,
or the amount of money a government chooses to devote to the advancement of the aesthetic
domain, is an institutional component that impacts all aesthetic items. It goes without saying
that there are links between this facet of institutions and issues related to culture, society, and
politics. The intrinsic characteristics of aesthetic products may not seem to be affected by
funding, yet they are. The inherent qualities of the aesthetic objects created will be
significantly impacted if a political choice is taken to support aesthetic products of a
particular kind or style.
Conventions, traditions, and standards specific to literature, painting, theatre, and other forms of
artistic expression are examples of institutional factors that solely impact certain categories of
aesthetic goods. For instance, the rules of poetry govern rhythm and rhyme, whereas the conventions
of the visual arts govern line and colour.
Refer to the above picture. The methods used by the various organisations to make aesthetic objects
available to the public include publications for literature, exhibitions of fine art in galleries, and other
venues, as well as avenues for public comment on the items (reviews, critique, and so forth). Every
aspect of the institution is intricately linked to all the others. The sort of literature that is created, for
instance, is determined by financing and publishing methods; publication choices are influenced by
customs and conventions that are prevalent at a given period, and so forth. Furthermore, the literary
institution is not isolated from other artistic mediums like theatre, cinema, or fine arts.
In turn, aesthetic institutions engage in interactions with social and political contexts, as well as
cultural behaviours and beliefs. The most crucial things to remember about institutions are:
(1) They are not permanent since they change throughout time.
(2) They are not universal since they vary throughout cultures and communities.
(3) Given the aforementioned considerations, it is stated that the components of institutions
are contingent upon or relevant to history, culture and society.

INTRINSIC FEATURES AND INSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Here, our attention is on the ways that institutions impact an aesthetic object's inherent qualities.
Literary works and other aesthetic objects are not autonomous, separate entities, as we have
previously noted. Their history of external considerations influences their inherent characteristics.

As we've already seen, the poem "Helen meditates before her portrait as a woman" has unique
formal and semantic characteristics due to its connection to the institution. The poem has to be
positioned against the backdrop of poetry norms as well as other poems and literary works that
have been written about Helen of Troy, starting with Homer's Illiad. This specific poem deviates
from the tradition formed by the latter.

We came to the conclusion that aesthetic things require attention to their intrinsic properties in the
previous section. These properties have certain formal aspects. In the field of aesthetics, formal
arrangements come in an endless variety. First, there are the arrangements unique to the many
categories of beautiful goods. Secondly, there are more options about the many genres and
subgenres (abstract, conceptual, realist, and pop art; pop, rock, and symphonic music; theatre,
poetry, and story, etc.). Thirdly, there are the many forms or styles that originate and fade at
different historical eras, in different civilizations and traditions—this is what we will be briefly
discussing.
For instance, realism became increasingly prevalent in literature and art during the 19th century.
The prevalent genre in popular literature and movies today is realism. Realism as a form aims to
present a cohesive and consistent picture of reality, or the way things "really" are. Its shape is a
reflection of this. For instance, realist books often feature a cohesive and comprehensive story
framework. But in the early decades of the 20th century, a new kind of book started to appear.
These were novels with purposefully broken and imperfect narrative structures and other
characteristics.
Novels by Franz Kafka and James Joyce are two instances of this.
First of all, this was not the usual course of events.
Secondly, it might have been an attempt to address the sense of alienation, uncertainty, and lack of
a cohesive worldview that were prevalent in Europe throughout the early 1900s and beyond. Once
more, the novels' message was communicated in part through their form. For the sake of this
discussion, it matters that a novel kind of form-content relationship developed, entered the canon
of aesthetics, and was eventually supplanted by others.
Secondly, it might have been an attempt to address the sense of alienation, uncertainty, and loss of
a cohesive worldview that were prevalent in Europe throughout the early 1900s and beyond. Once
more, the form had a role in how the meaning of the novels was conveyed. What is important for
our present purpose is that a new type of form-content relation emerged, and became part of the
aesthetic norm, later to be superseded by others.
Something which changes according to society, culture, or history is to be contextualized in
society, culture, or history.

To contextualize something means to consider it in relation to its surrounding circumstances,

environment, or context. In other words, it involves understanding something within the broader
framework of its social, cultural, historical, or situational context. This process helps to provide a
deeper understanding of the subject by taking into account the factors that influence its meaning,
significance, or interpretation.

Because of this, the unique characteristics inherent in aesthetic norms are contingent upon the
socio-historical context in which they arise.
They evolve with time. Additionally, they vary according on the society from which they
originate. prevalent Western standards of aesthetics in the

While innovation and change were valued throughout the 20th century, this was not always the
case in other civilizations. For instance, Japanese theatre has long been seen as a highly stylized
and stable art form, in part because of its adherence to established traditions.
The concept of aesthetic worth is significantly impacted by this element of the relationship
between inherent aesthetic qualities and institutional concerns, a topic we will revisit in the
following study unit.

The institution, in the context of art and literature, refers to the broader social, cultural, and
economic structures that influence the creation, distribution, reception, and interpretation of
aesthetic objects. These institutions include publishing houses, art galleries, educational systems,
cultural organizations, and the broader socio-political context in which they operate. Here's how
the institution can affect the intrinsic features of the aesthetic object:

Censorship and Regulation: Institutions such as governments, religious bodies, or regulatory

agencies may impose censorship or regulations on artistic expression. This can affect the content,
themes, or style of aesthetic objects, as artists may self-censor or modify their work to comply
with these regulations.

Commercialization and Market Forces: Institutions such as the art market, publishing industry, or
entertainment industry operate within commercial frameworks driven by profit motives. As a
result, aesthetic objects may be influenced by market demands, consumer preferences, and
commercial trends, impacting their content, style, and thematic choices.

Canonization and Cultural Hierarchies: Institutions such as academic institutions, literary canons,
and cultural authorities play a role in determining which works are deemed worthy of recognition,
preservation, and study. This can influence the visibility, reception, and interpretation of aesthetic
objects, as certain works are elevated to canonical status while others are marginalized or
overlooked.

Education and Interpretation: Institutions such as schools, universities, museums, and cultural
organizations shape the ways in which aesthetic objects are taught, studied, and interpreted. This
can affect the methodologies, theories, and approaches used to analyze and understand aesthetic
objects, as well as the dissemination of cultural values, norms, and ideologies.

Collaboration and Networking: Institutions facilitate collaboration, networking, and interactions

within artistic and literary communities. This can influence the development, production, and
reception of aesthetic objects through collaborative practices, collective movements, or shared
artistic influences.

THE RELATION BETWEEN THE SENDER'S INTENTIONS AND THE CONTEXT

We came to the conclusion that in order for a thing to be considered attractive, the sender must
intend to generate an aesthetic object. We also observed that a certain kind of activity—one that
pays attention to the inherent qualities of the object—realizes this aim.
The previous part leads us to the conclusion that no aesthetically pleasing thing is ever created in
a vacuum. The next stage is to demonstrate how the various contextual factors relate to the
sender's aims.
An aesthetic object's sender does not create aesthetic items by themselves. The sender is not a
lone person, but rather a part of a civilization.
As the sender, the society I live in has shaped my attitudes, beliefs, presumptions, aspirations,
fears, and intentions, at least in part. I need to have some understanding of what an attractive item
in my community is before I can set out to create one. I must know a little something about the
rules governing beautiful things.
For instance, without understanding what a poem is and the convention that indicates that poems
have specific rhythmic patterns or employ metaphorical language, rhyme, and other methods, I
cannot even attempt to create a poem, much less succeed in doing so. Thus, informing the
intention to produce an aesthetic object, I the sender participate in the institutional practices that
govern the production of aesthetic objects.
sender participate in the institutional practices that govern the production of aesthetic objects. A
lot of the time, the sender purposefully deviates from them, but as we've seen, divergence only
makes sense in the context of existing customs and practices.
In addition to these external factors, I as the sender am also impacted by the social, political, and
historical environment in which I create an artistic work. As a sender, I belong to a certain culture
and, to some extent, share its concerns and views. By the sender's objectives, all these contextual
factors have an impact on the shape and substance of the beautiful objects created. They have an
impact on, say, the selection of concrete topic matter.
The literature and artistic output of South Africa is a prime illustration of this. Many authors and
artists of the apartheid era felt obliged to depict the political and social inequalities that the
government was enforcing. A large portion of the writing and art created had political overtones.
The aesthetic items of the apartheid era were also influenced by political situations. Protest poetry,
for instance, follows a very specific format that is thought to be ideal for conveying the message
as clearly as possible. Writers and artists have begun to move away from overtly political subjects
after apartheid ended.
Thus, we are also taking into account the many contextual aspects involved when we argue that
the sender's intentions are an important part in our definition of attractive objects. Contextual
elements manifest themselves in the particular intents that senders create, the decisions they
make, and so on.
When we discuss the phenomena of rock art, for example, it becomes clear that we need to know
something about the sender's goals as well as the setting in which they are formed.
We are largely perplexed by these artworks. It's evident that they depict human people, and their
creative worth has been acknowledged. However, we are unable to understand them. Because we
are unaware of the creators' goals, we are unable to determine whether or not they are attractive
objects. Because we do not know enough about the society and culture in which they were made,
we are unable to determine the motive behind their creation.
They could have been a part of a holy ceremony. It is unknown to us if the act of representation
was thought to have some sort of magical quality or if the goal was just to represent the people.
As a result, we are unable to appreciate the drawings' value to the people who created them.

Thus, intentions and their context play a significant role in how we interact with attractive items.
Any attempt to define what constitutes an artistic object should take this into consideration.
Consequently, we may keep defining as follows:

This adds to our understanding of aesthetic items. We are far from defining aesthetic objects,
though, for two reasons: first, our definition still uses the word "aesthetic," which puts it in danger
of becoming circular; second, the sender is not the only one who can decide whether something
qualifies as an aesthetic object. This is due to the fact that the crucial evaluative aspect of the
aesthetic has not yet been taken into consideration.
Therefore, a third need that demonstrates the importance of judgement is necessary for the
definition of aesthetic items.