Critical Terms for Literary Study, Second Edition [Paperback]

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

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

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

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

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