Northrop Frye's essay The Architype of literature.
Sunday, 06 - 01 - 2020.
Hello Reader...
Today I'm present one more Blog on Northrop Frye. This blog task given by our professor Dilip Barad sir about Northrop Frye's essay on The Architype of Literature.
In literary criticism the term Archetypes denotes recurrent narratives designs, patterns of action, character types, themes, and images which are identifiable in a wide variety of works of literature.
Herman Northrop Frye (July 14, 1912 – January 23, 1991) was a Canadian literary critic and literary theorist, considered one of the most influential of the 20th century.
Frye rose to international prominence as a result of his first book, Fearful Symmetry, published in 1947. Until then, the prophetic poetry of William Blake had long been poorly understood, and considered by some to be delusional ramblings. Frye found in it a system of metaphor derived from Paradise Lost and the Bible.
In 1974–1975 Frye was the Norton professor at Harvard University. But his primary position was as a professor at the University of Toronto, and then chancellor of Victoria College in the University of Toronto.Northrop Frye did not have a Ph.D.
The intelligence service of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police spied on Frye, watching his participation in the anti-Vietnam War movement, an academic forum about China, and activism to end South African apartheid.
Question - 1 :
What is Archetypal Criticism? What does the archetypal critic do?
Archetypal criticism as it applies to literature is a form of criticism "that interprets a text by focusing on recurring myths and archetypes."
It was most popular during the 50's and 60's; this would have been the later part of Jung's lifetime. His work, along with other psychologist and philosophers created the ideas behind archetypal criticism.Rather than looking at the other aspects of the literary work itself, this type of criticism focuses on just the archetypes present.
However, you asked specifically about Carl Jung who was a psychologist. In this case, archetypes are usually referring to a specific behavior exhibited by a certain type of person rather than a literary example. Archetypal criticism isn't often used as a form of literary criticism now days.
Archetypes are "an original model of a person, ideal example, or a prototype upon which others are copied, patterned, or emulated." With regards to literature, this usually refers to ancient models like those from myths.He interprets literature in the light of various rituals and myths. Frye has divided the easy into three parts.
• The First deals with the concept of archetypal criticism.
• The second of part throws light on the inductive method of analysis of a text.
• The third part focuses on the deductive method of analysis. All the method fall under structural criticism.
Question - 2 :
what is Frye trying prove by giving an analogy of 'physics to nature ' and 'Criticism to literature?
Criticism so far ranks only as a subdivision of literature; and hence, for the systematic mental organization of the subject, the student has to turn to the conceptual framework of the historian for events, and to that of the philosopher for ideas. Even the more centrally placed critical sciences, such as textual editing, seem to be part of a “‘background” that recedes into history or some other non-literary field. The thought suggests itself that the ancillary critical disciplines may be related to a central expanding pattern of systematic comprehension which has not yet been established, but which, if it were established, would prevent them from being centrifugal. If such a pattern exists, then criticism would be to art what philosophy is to wisdom and history to action.
Q - 3 : Share your views of criticism as an organized body of knowledge. Mention relation of literature with history and philosophy.
Every organized body of knowledge can be learned progressively; and experience shows that there is also something progressive about the learning of literature. Physics is an organized body of knowledge about nature, and a student of it says that he is learning physics, not that he is learning nature. Art, like nature, is the subject of a systematic study, and has to be distinguished from the study itself, which is criticism. It is therefore impossible to “learn literature”: one learns about it in a certain way, but what one learns, transitively, is the criticism of literature.
Question - 4 :
Briefly explain inductive method with illustration of Shakespeare's Hamlet Grave Digger's scenes.
Hamlet is the great novel written by Shakespeare. Frye's concept is good to understand this book and also his method is also best fo understanding this book very deeply. Inductive method was mostly used by writer. Both method are best understand with this book. In this method specifies a journey from specific to general. Hamlet is the great book is full of sad emotions, unfaithfulness and etc. In the grave digging scene in Hamlet is a specifics scene, we made the general conclusion like, grave digger scene is centrifugal which moves us away from center. In this scene Grave Digging was effected by the death of others. It is manifestation of the absolute integrity of gravedigger. They have romanticized relationship with their jobs. We came to general observation that the corruption in society. They introduced different skull with person and their works.
https://sejalnsolanki.blogspot.com/2020/01/literature-and-religion.html?m=1
Sunday, 06 - 01 - 2020.
Hello Reader...
Today I'm present one more Blog on Northrop Frye. This blog task given by our professor Dilip Barad sir about Northrop Frye's essay on The Architype of Literature.
In literary criticism the term Archetypes denotes recurrent narratives designs, patterns of action, character types, themes, and images which are identifiable in a wide variety of works of literature.
Herman Northrop Frye (July 14, 1912 – January 23, 1991) was a Canadian literary critic and literary theorist, considered one of the most influential of the 20th century.
Frye rose to international prominence as a result of his first book, Fearful Symmetry, published in 1947. Until then, the prophetic poetry of William Blake had long been poorly understood, and considered by some to be delusional ramblings. Frye found in it a system of metaphor derived from Paradise Lost and the Bible.
In 1974–1975 Frye was the Norton professor at Harvard University. But his primary position was as a professor at the University of Toronto, and then chancellor of Victoria College in the University of Toronto.Northrop Frye did not have a Ph.D.
The intelligence service of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police spied on Frye, watching his participation in the anti-Vietnam War movement, an academic forum about China, and activism to end South African apartheid.
Question - 1 :
What is Archetypal Criticism? What does the archetypal critic do?
Archetypal criticism as it applies to literature is a form of criticism "that interprets a text by focusing on recurring myths and archetypes."
It was most popular during the 50's and 60's; this would have been the later part of Jung's lifetime. His work, along with other psychologist and philosophers created the ideas behind archetypal criticism.Rather than looking at the other aspects of the literary work itself, this type of criticism focuses on just the archetypes present.
However, you asked specifically about Carl Jung who was a psychologist. In this case, archetypes are usually referring to a specific behavior exhibited by a certain type of person rather than a literary example. Archetypal criticism isn't often used as a form of literary criticism now days.
Archetypes are "an original model of a person, ideal example, or a prototype upon which others are copied, patterned, or emulated." With regards to literature, this usually refers to ancient models like those from myths.He interprets literature in the light of various rituals and myths. Frye has divided the easy into three parts.
• The First deals with the concept of archetypal criticism.
• The second of part throws light on the inductive method of analysis of a text.
• The third part focuses on the deductive method of analysis. All the method fall under structural criticism.
Question - 2 :
what is Frye trying prove by giving an analogy of 'physics to nature ' and 'Criticism to literature?
Criticism so far ranks only as a subdivision of literature; and hence, for the systematic mental organization of the subject, the student has to turn to the conceptual framework of the historian for events, and to that of the philosopher for ideas. Even the more centrally placed critical sciences, such as textual editing, seem to be part of a “‘background” that recedes into history or some other non-literary field. The thought suggests itself that the ancillary critical disciplines may be related to a central expanding pattern of systematic comprehension which has not yet been established, but which, if it were established, would prevent them from being centrifugal. If such a pattern exists, then criticism would be to art what philosophy is to wisdom and history to action.
Q - 3 : Share your views of criticism as an organized body of knowledge. Mention relation of literature with history and philosophy.
Every organized body of knowledge can be learned progressively; and experience shows that there is also something progressive about the learning of literature. Physics is an organized body of knowledge about nature, and a student of it says that he is learning physics, not that he is learning nature. Art, like nature, is the subject of a systematic study, and has to be distinguished from the study itself, which is criticism. It is therefore impossible to “learn literature”: one learns about it in a certain way, but what one learns, transitively, is the criticism of literature.
Question - 4 :
Briefly explain inductive method with illustration of Shakespeare's Hamlet Grave Digger's scenes.
Hamlet is the great novel written by Shakespeare. Frye's concept is good to understand this book and also his method is also best fo understanding this book very deeply. Inductive method was mostly used by writer. Both method are best understand with this book. In this method specifies a journey from specific to general. Hamlet is the great book is full of sad emotions, unfaithfulness and etc. In the grave digging scene in Hamlet is a specifics scene, we made the general conclusion like, grave digger scene is centrifugal which moves us away from center. In this scene Grave Digging was effected by the death of others. It is manifestation of the absolute integrity of gravedigger. They have romanticized relationship with their jobs. We came to general observation that the corruption in society. They introduced different skull with person and their works.
https://sejalnsolanki.blogspot.com/2020/01/literature-and-religion.html?m=1
ðððð
ReplyDeleteðððð
ReplyDeleteThanks
Delete