Name:
Kinjal Patel
Paper
Name: Literary Theory & Criticism
Paper
No: 7
Roll
No: 16
STD:
M.A. 1
SEM:
2
Submitted
to: Department of English Maharaja Krishnkumarsinhji Bhavnagar University
I.A.Richards Introduction:
I.A.Richards, born in 1893, is
one of the greatest critics of the modern age, and has influenced a number of
critics on both sides of the Atlantic. He and T.S.Eliot are pioneers in the
fields of New Criticism, though they differ from each other in certain
important respects. He is the first-rate critic, since Coleridge, who has
formulated a systematic and complete theory of poetry, and his views are highly
original and illuminating. In his “Principles of Literary Criticism” chapter
34, he discusses that most neglected subject, i.e. the theory of language and
the two uses of language. To understand much the theory of poetry and what is
said about poetry, a clear comprehension of the differences between the uses of
language is indispensable. David Daiches says,
According to I.A.Richards
language can be used in two ways, i.e. the scientific use and the emotive one. It’s
only in recent years that serious attention is given to the language as a
science. In the scientific use of language, we are usually matters of fact. All
the activities covered by this use require undistorted references and
absence of fiction.
Life and Works:
He was also appointed as a
professor of English literature. Thus began a long and distinguished career
both as teacher and critic. He lectured both at Cambridge and Harvard and thus
could influence the course of literary criticism in both the countries. His first
work written in collaboration with C.K.Ogdon
was published in 1992. This was a followed by The Meaning of Meaning,
1993, also written in collaboration with Ogdon. The Principles of Literary Criticism,1924 is one of the major
works, in which he was put the best of himself, and which was at once hailed as
a highly original work likely to give an entirely new orientation to critical
theory. This was followed in 1929, by his The Practical Criticism which shows him
as unrivalled advocate and practitioner of practical criticism.
I.A.Richards was an orthodox
advocate of a close textual and verbal study and analysis of a work of art.
According to Richards there are three objectives to write ‘The Practical
Criticism.’
To introduce a new kind of
documentation:
This documentation is to be
introduced to those who are interested in the contemporary state of culture
whether as critics, philosophers, as teachers, as psychologists, or merely as curious
persons.
To provide new technique:
New technique is to be provided
for those who wish to discover for themselves what they think and feel about
poetry and why they should like or dislike it.
To prepare the way for
educational:
Educational methods are to be
preparing more efficient than those we use now in developing discrimination and
the power to understand what we here and read.
In his methodology, a lot of
importance is given to the “words”. According to him the poet writes to
communicate, and language is the means of that communication. Language is made
of words and hence a study of words is all important if the meaning of work of
art is understood. Words carry four kinds of meaning:
Sense, tone, feeling and intention
To his language of poetry is
purely emotive, in its original primitive state. This language affects
feelings. Hence we must avoid intuitive and over-literal reading of poems.
Words in poetry have an emotive value, and the figurative language used by
poets conveys those emotions effectively and forcefully. His approach towards
criticism is pragmatic and empirical. I.A.Richards by his, own work could make
literary criticism factual, scientific and complete. It no longer remains a
matter of the application of set rules or more ‘intention’ or ‘impressions.’
His factual and scientific method of critical analysis, interpretation and
evolutions has exercised considerable influence on the New Critics everywhere.
The Importance of Words:
A study of his Practical
Criticism together with his work ‘The Meaning of Meaning’ reveals his interest
in verbal and textual analysis. According to him a poets writes to communicate,
and language is the means of that communication. Language consist words so
study of words is significant to understand the meaning. The meaning depends on
Sense: By sense
it meant something that is communicated by the plain literal meanings of the
words.
Feeling:
Refers
to emotions, emotional attitudes, desire, will, pleasure, UN pleasure and the
rest. Words express feelings.
Tone:
Tone here means the writer’s attitude towards his audience. The writer chooses
his words and arranges them keeping in mind the taste of his readers. Feeling
is only state of mind.
Intention:
Intention
is author’s conscious or unconscious aim. It is the effect that one tries to
produce. Also intention controls the emphasis, shapes the arrangement or draws
attention to something of importance. Richards says that
Words in poetry have an emotive
value and the figurative language used by poets conveys those emotions
effectively and forcefully. Words have different meanings in different
contexts. Words are symbols or signs and they deliver their full meaning only
in a particular context sense and feeling have a mutual dependence.
“The
sound of a word has much to do with the feeling it evokes.”
“The
feelings already occupying the mind limit the possibilities of the new word.”
Importance
of Rhythm and Meter:
Rhythm
and Meter and integral and important parts of any poem because they determine
the meaning of the words used by the poets. Rhythm, meter and meaning cannot be
separated; they form together a single system.
The
Nature of Poetic Truth:
The
‘poetic truth’ is much, different form the ‘scientific truth’. In the principle
of literary criticism he writes “It is evident that the bulk of poetry consists
of statement which only the very foolish would think of attempting to verify.
They are not the kind of things which can be verified. If we recall what was
said in chapter 16 as to the natural generality of verge of reference, we shall
see another reason why references as they occur in poetry are rarely susceptible
to scientific truth or falsity. Only references which are brought in to certain
highly complex and very special combinations, so as to correspond to the ways
in which things actually hang together, can be either true or false and most
references in poetry are not knit together in this way. But even when they are
on examination, frankle false, this is no defect. Indeed, the obviousness of
the falsity forces the reader to reactions which are incongruent or disturbing
to the poem. An equal paint more often misunderstood, their truth when they are
true, is no merit.”
Metaphorical
language is important purpose of communication.
Is it the return of the repressed
in the form of Moore’s ‘What do you mean by that?’ is this what is behind
Richards’s wish to eliminate the question, ‘Is the passage good or bad poetry?’
, and to invite answers only to the question, ‘What does it mean?’ at the
outset of Practical Criticism? Commentators have pointed to the underplaying of
meaning in poetry in the early work, inherent in the division between symbolic
and evocative language for scientific and poetic use respectively.
Source of Misunderstanding in
Poetry:
According to I.A.Richards there
are four sources of misunderstanding of poetry. It is difficult to diagnose
with accuracy and definiteness, the source of some particular mistake or
misunderstanding. First, there might be a misunderstanding of the sense of
poetry. It arises from inattention, or sheer, cardessness. I.A.Richards warns
readers- In most poetry the sense is as important as anything else; it is quite as a subtle, and as
dependent on the syntax, as in prose, it is the poet’s chief instrument to
other aims when it is not itself his aim. His control of thoughts is ordinarily
his chief means to the control of our feelings, and in the immense majority of
instances we miss nearly everything of value if we misread his sense.
An over literal-reading is as
great a source of misunderstanding in poetry as careless, ‘intuitive’ reading.
Careless, intuitive reading and prosaic “over-literal” reading are the
simple-grades, the justing rocks. Defective scholarship is a third source of
misunderstanding in poetry. The reader may fail to understand the sense of the
poet, because he is ignorant of poet’s sense. A far more serious cause of
misunderstanding is the failure to realize that the poetic use of words is
different from their use in prose. Complaints may rest upon an assumption about
language that can be fatal to poetry. Literary is one serious obstacle in the
way of a right understanding of the poetic words. According to Richards-‘poetry
is different from prose and needs a different attitude for right
understanding.’
FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE:
A Simile is a FIGURE OF THOUGHT:
A simile is a figure of thought
in which one kind of thing is compared to a markedly different object, concept,
or experience; the comparison is made explicit by the word “like” or “as”;
“jen’s room is like a pig sty.” The simile can be carried further and specify
some feature of the comparison: “jen’s room is as dirty as a sty.” In either
case, the effect is that the subject and the analogy are pictured in quick
sequence, side by side.
Similes occur in both poetry and prose,
and they may be short and simple or long and extended. They provide an
important indication of an author or speaker’s TONE; that is implied attitude
towards the subject. As with a METAPHORE, the means is to use a comparison that
reflects some key quality of the literal subject. For, use a comparison that
reflects some key quality of the literal subject. For example, the tone of
simile may be exalted, as in Robert Burns’ lyrical tribute: “O, May luve’s like
a red, red rose.” Here, the image evoked is of a fresh, vibrant, and lovely
object of adoration.
The Value of Figurative Language:
The use of figurative language
can create problems. It is difficult to turn poetry into logical respectable
prose. Only through accuracy and precision is combined with recognition of the
liberties which are proper for a poet, and the power and value of figurative
language.
The use of figurative language
can create problems. It is difficult to turn poetry into logical respectable
prose. Only through accuracy and precision is combined with a recognition of
the liberties is combined with a recognition of the liberties which are proper
for a poet, and precision is combined with a recognition of the liberties which are a recognition of
the liberties which are proper for a poet, and the power and value of
figurative language.
A
Health, a ringing health, unto the king, of all our hearts today! But what
proud song, should not followed on the thought, nor do him wrong? ………………….. Away
into the sunset-glow.
There are various comments on the
above piece of the hyperbole of sea-harp. The only concrete simile in the
octave is the likening of the sea to a harp-surely a little extravagant.
There is no doubt that the
similarity between the sound of a harp and the sea but in poetry such things do
happen. It is clear that the effect proposed by the poets is, “an exhilarating
awakening of wonder and a fusion of the sea, lightning and spring, those three
‘most moving manifestations of Nature.’
Mixed Metaphors:
Mixtures in metaphors work well
if in the mixture the different parts or elements do not cancel each other out.
The mixture must not be of the fire and water like. ‘Woven’ does not mix well
with sea and lightening and so here the mixed metaphor is a serious fault.
Figurative Language:
The poet is rather negligent in
the choice of means he has employed to attain his end. The enjoyment and
understanding of the best poetry requires a sensitiveness and discrimination
with words, a nicely, imaginativeness and deftness in taking their sense which
will prevent the poem in question, in its original form receiving the approval
of the most attentive readers.
The
Value of Personification:
Personification comes naturally
to us. Personification may not express sense but it expresses the feelings of
the poet towards what he is speaking about personification enables the poet to
clear and comprehend the difficult work. Personification should not be
over-elaborated. There are degrees of personification. If it is over-elaborated
it becomes over-burdened.
Comparative Criticism:
Richards warns his readers
against the dangers of over simple forms of ‘comparative criticism’. A critic
has compared the poet and Shelley is clear in the conception. One thing should
be noted that ‘end’ and ‘means’ both differ. As two poets are often closely
paralleled in their intents, divergence in their methods does not prove one
poem better than the other, ‘Comparative Criticism’ has value under conditions
and circumstances.
“When after five years of
‘antics’ chiefly concerned with the cloud- shadows, he turns to the cloud
itself in its afternoon dissolution, he cuts the personification down, mixing
his metaphors to reflect its incoherence, and finally, ‘O frail steel issue of
the sun,’ depersonifying it altogether in mockery of its total loss of character.
This recognition that the personification was originally an extra vantage makes
the poem definitely one of fancy rather than imagination to use the
Wordsworthian division but it rather increases than diminishes the descriptive
effects gained by the device. And its peculiar felicity in exactly expressing a
certain shade of feeling towards the cloud deserves to be remarked.”
Conclusion:
Briefly, a proper understanding
of figurative language needs closer study. Its literal meaning must be traced.
Its literal meaning cannot be found in any imaginative appreciation of it.
There should be a judicious balance between literalism and imaginative freedom.
One should comprehend the meaning of poetry properly and then come to the judgment
whether it has any fault or not. I.A.Richards says. “The chemist must not require that the poet writes like a chemist,
not the moralist, not the man of affairs, nor the logician, nor the professor,
that he writes as they would. The whole trouble of literalism is that the
readers forget that the aim of the poems comes first and is the sole
justification of its means. We may quarrel, frequently we must, with aim of the
poem, but we have first to ascertain what it is. We cannot legitimately judge
its means by external standards which may have no relevance to its success in
doing what it set out to do.”
Sources:
Net and Reference Book
Words: 2,797
