Contemporary Critical Technique: Heart of Darkness
The history of literary criticism has always been filled with vicious tit for tat disputes over the correct way to interpret literature. In the late 16th century there was Sir Philip Sydney and the Puritans, David Hume and John Locke in the 18th century and Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault in recent years, just to name a child's handful. Two of the most conversing contemporary schools of criticism have been Formalism and Reader Response, as the former is very restrictive in terms of methods of interpreting literature, while the latter is so critically liberal that it not only recognizes that there are several different ways to interpret a text, but indeed Reader Response criticism examines those different interpretations that result from the past experiences of an interpreter. As such, Northrop Frye's Archetypal criticism and Stanley Fish's Reader response criticism are shown to be at extreme odds with each other, especially when both are utilized to interpret Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness.Frye takes a completely formalist approach to literary criticism in which he considers the form and structure of a literary text as the main course of criticism, and regards any historical context of the work as an unimportant detail t
Taking the final step back would make obvious the archetype within the novel, allowing for the critic to fully comprehend and properly examine Heart of Darkness. Being a critic of reader response, Fish would not directly interpret Heart of Darkness; rather he would be much more inclined to examine 'the reader's experience' and interpretation of the text (Fish 979). Frye would likely justify the novel's excellence by commenting on the thematic elements in the novel that are patterned in history throughout all great literature: the myth of the hero archetype. Marlow could easily be mistaken for the hero of Heart of Darkness, for after all, it is Marlow who originally tells the story that is imparted to Conrad's readers, and as such, the story is told from his point of view. Fish would further explain that these different interpretations rise as a result of contrary experiences. Frye's definition of the tragedy also includes the subordinate character of the traitor, which at first glance, Heart of Darkness seems to lack since Marlow keeps the true story of Kurtz from the intended at the very end of the story, thus preserving Kurtz's credibility as a decent person. Common among formalist critics is the use of a central theme on which they base their criticism of literature; Frye's theme of preference is the archetype, thus fitting Frye into the subcategory of Formalism known as Archetypal Criticism. The bristles of Conrad's pen left trails of metaphors, and similes, such as the river that was 'deadly - like a snake' (Conrad 25), ironies, like the influence of Marlow's 'excellent aunt' in the midst of his sexism (27), and ambiguities such as Marlow's stance resembling but not exacting 'the pose of a Buddha' (21). The death of Kurtz immediately points towards the archetype of the dying hero, more generally known as the tragedy, which is further supported by Conrad's vivid description of the setting sun just as Marlow begins to tell the story of Kurtz. Those groups whose members share in similar experiences or hold similar interpretive strategies 'not for reading texts. Fish would much rather comment on the ability of the reader to identify with Heart of Darkness. Fish also illustrates that, concerning the first reading of a text, having a prior knowledge of the text even as minute as an awareness of the historical context in which the work was written could have a significant affect on the method of interpretation, termed by Fish as an Interpretive Strategy, that the reader employs on the text. The focus that Frye puts onto the form of a literary work, and the complete disregard he holds for the historical context in which the work was written is completely subjective and self biased. Various aspects of the novel, most specifically the death of the hero Kurtz, mark Heart of Darkness as a rightly made tragedy, and thus a good work of art.
Common topics in this essay:
Heart Darkness,
Literature Frye,
Darkness Frye,
Reader Response,
Interpreting Variorum,
Strategies Fish,
Gulliver's Travels,
Marlow Kurtz,
Watt Watt,
Church Williams,
heart darkness,
reader response,
myth hero,
method interpretation,
literary criticism,
interpretation text,
myth hero archetype,
hero archetype,
interpret text,
marlow's lie,
historical context,
interpret heart darkness,
darkness political perspective,
marlow's lie intended,
close reading technique,
|
Acceptance Essays
