ma english question paper punjabi university 2022
APPROACHES TO LITERARY CRITICISM–I
Paper – II
Time Allowed: Three Hours
Maximum Marks: 80
Note: Attempt all questions. Each question carries 16 marks.
1.
Are you convinced with M.H. Abrams’ division of critical orientations into four paradigms? Discuss critically.
OR
What does M.H. Abrams mean by ‘expressive orientations’ of literary criticism? Offer a critique of this orientation as well.
2.
Biographical approach to literature has its advantages and disadvantages. Discuss.
OR
How far the three co-ordinates of ‘man’, ‘moment’ and ‘milieu’ go into the making of a literary work? Discuss.
3.
Is ‘literary truth’ more reliable than ‘historical truth’? Discuss in the light of claims of formalist approach to literary criticism.
OR
To what an extent is the paraphrase important for the appreciation of a poem? Do you agree with the views expressed by Cleanth Brooks against the practice of paraphrase?
4.
How far Freudian concepts can be used to understand the intricacies of a literary work?
OR
Is it valid to say that literature offers us a night-side of life? Does this not undermine the claims to literature to social realism?
5.
Myths are irrational narratives. Is it scientific to use mythical archetypes to understand the structure of work of art?
OR
Offer a critique of Northrop’s theory of archetypes. More than the mythical, it is the personal experience that matters in shaping the literary expression.
ma english question paper punjabi university 2022 solution
MASTER OF ARTS (ENGLISH) 1st SEMESTER
APPROACHES TO LITERARY CRITICISM–I
PAPER – II
COMPLETE SOLUTIONS
1. Are you convinced with M.H. Abrams’ division of critical orientations into four paradigms? Discuss critically.
Answer
M. H. Abrams, in his influential book The Mirror and the Lamp, presents a useful framework for understanding the major orientations of literary criticism. According to Abrams, criticism can be organized around four important elements: the universe, the artist, the work, and the audience. These relationships produce four major orientations: mimetic, expressive, objective, and pragmatic.
1. Mimetic Orientation
The mimetic orientation considers the relationship between the literary work and the universe or reality. Literature is regarded as an imitation or representation of life.
This approach has its roots in Plato and Aristotle. Plato viewed poetry as imitation, while Aristotle gave imitation a more positive and creative significance.
The central concern of mimetic criticism is whether a literary work represents human life and reality effectively.
2. Expressive Orientation
The expressive orientation focuses on the relationship between the artist and the literary work. Literature is understood as an expression of the writer’s emotions, imagination, experiences and personality.
This approach became particularly important during the Romantic period. Romantic critics emphasized the individual imagination and emotional experience of the poet.
Wordsworth’s conception of poetry as arising from powerful feelings is an important example of the expressive approach.
3. Objective Orientation
The objective orientation concentrates on the literary work itself.
Here, the literary work is treated as an independent artistic object. The critic examines its structure, language, imagery, symbolism, irony, paradox, rhythm and unity.
Formalism and New Criticism strongly emphasize this orientation.
4. Pragmatic Orientation
The pragmatic orientation focuses on the relationship between the literary work and its audience.
According to this approach, literature produces an effect upon the reader. It may instruct, delight, persuade, educate or emotionally move the audience.
The classical idea of literature combining pleasure and instruction is closely related to this orientation.
Critical Evaluation
Abrams’s four-part division is useful because it gives critics a systematic way of understanding different approaches to literature. It also shows that literature can be studied from several perspectives.
However, the four orientations should not be regarded as completely isolated categories. A single literary work may simultaneously represent reality, express the author’s imagination, affect readers and possess an independent artistic structure.
Modern literary criticism has also developed approaches such as Marxism, feminism, psychoanalysis, structuralism and post-structuralism, which cannot always be placed neatly within Abrams’s four categories.
Conclusion
Abrams’s division is convincing as a broad framework rather than as a rigid classification. Its greatest value lies in showing the different relationships through which a literary work can be understood. It continues to be useful for organizing the history and methods of literary criticism.
OR
What does M.H. Abrams mean by ‘expressive orientations’ of literary criticism? Offer a critique of this orientation as well.
Answer
M. H. Abrams uses the term expressive orientation for a critical approach that emphasizes the relationship between the artist and the literary work.
According to this orientation, literature is primarily an expression of the writer’s emotions, imagination, experiences, thoughts and personality. The literary work becomes a form through which the inner life of the artist is expressed.
The expressive orientation became particularly important during the Romantic period. Romantic writers emphasized imagination, emotion, individuality and creative freedom.
Wordsworth’s theory of poetry is a major example. He connected poetry with powerful emotional experiences and suggested that poetic creation involves the transformation of personal feeling through imagination.
Main Features
The expressive approach gives importance to:
- the personality of the author,
- personal experience,
- emotion,
- imagination,
- creativity,
- psychological condition,
- individual vision.
A critic following this approach may study the author’s biography, letters, diaries, beliefs and experiences in order to understand the literary work.
Merits
The expressive approach can help explain recurring themes, emotions and images in an author’s writings. It may also help us understand the relationship between an author’s experiences and artistic development.
It is particularly useful when personal experience clearly contributes to a work.
Limitations
However, the approach has several limitations.
First, a literary work cannot always be treated as a direct record of the author’s life. Literature involves imagination and artistic transformation.
Second, the meaning of a work cannot necessarily be reduced to the author’s intention.
Third, excessive attention to biography can make the critic ignore the language, structure, imagery and formal qualities of the work.
The New Critics therefore emphasized the importance of studying the literary work itself.
Conclusion
The expressive orientation is valuable because it recognizes the creative personality of the writer. Nevertheless, it should not be used exclusively. A complete interpretation should consider the author while also paying attention to the independent artistic structure and language of the literary work.
2. Biographical approach to literature has its advantages and disadvantages. Discuss.
Answer
The biographical approach studies a literary work in relation to the life, personality, experiences and circumstances of its author. It assumes that knowledge of the writer’s life can sometimes contribute to a better understanding of literature.
Advantages
1. Understanding the Author
Biography helps us understand the personality, experiences, beliefs and interests of the writer.
2. Understanding Themes
Some literary themes may become clearer when examined in relation to the author’s personal experiences.
3. Historical Context
Biography places an author within a particular historical and cultural period. This helps explain the circumstances surrounding the production of a work.
4. Understanding Literary Development
Studying an author’s life can help explain changes in style, themes and literary interests throughout his or her career.
5. Additional Evidence
Letters, diaries and autobiographical writings may provide useful information about the author’s literary intentions and intellectual background.
Disadvantages
1. Literature Is Not Biography
A literary work is an artistic creation and may contain fictional events and characters. It cannot automatically be treated as an account of the author’s life.
2. Danger of Reductionism
A complex poem or novel may be reduced to a simple biographical event if the critic depends too heavily on biography.
3. Neglect of Form
Excessive biographical criticism may ignore language, structure, imagery, symbolism, irony and other literary techniques.
4. Authorial Intention
The author’s intention does not necessarily determine all the meanings available in a literary work.
5. False Connections
A critic may make unsupported assumptions by identifying fictional characters or events directly with the author’s personal life.
Conclusion
The biographical approach is useful when information about an author’s life genuinely illuminates a literary work. However, biography should be treated as one source of interpretation rather than the complete explanation of literature.
OR
How far the three co-ordinates of ‘man’, ‘moment’ and ‘milieu’ go into the making of a literary work? Discuss.
Answer
The three terms man, moment and milieu provide an important way of understanding the relationship between literature and its circumstances of production.
1. Man
“Man” refers to the individual author.
The writer’s personality, education, imagination, experiences, beliefs and psychological characteristics influence literary creation.
Every writer possesses an individual way of observing and interpreting the world. Therefore, personal experience plays an important role in literary expression.
2. Moment
“Moment” refers to the historical period in which a writer lives and produces a literary work.
Political events, wars, revolutions, intellectual movements and social changes can influence literature.
For example, literature produced during a period of war may reflect fear, loss, nationalism, violence or social uncertainty.
3. Milieu
“Milieu” means the social and cultural environment surrounding the writer.
Family, class, religion, education, community, traditions and political institutions form part of the writer’s milieu.
The writer receives language, cultural traditions and social ideas from this environment.
Relationship Between the Three
These three elements work together:
Man + Moment + Milieu = Literary Creation
The author does not simply reproduce his environment. He or she transforms experience through imagination and artistic technique.
Two writers living in the same historical period may therefore produce very different literary works because their personalities and creative visions differ.
Conclusion
Man, moment and milieu are important factors in the making of a literary work. They help us understand the author’s personal background, historical circumstances and social environment. However, literature cannot be completely explained by these factors because imagination, artistic skill and individual creativity also play a major role.
3. Is ‘literary truth’ more reliable than ‘historical truth’? Discuss in the light of claims of formalist approach to literary criticism.
Answer
The concepts of literary truth and historical truth refer to two different ways of understanding truth.
Historical truth is concerned with facts and events that can be established through evidence. Literary truth, however, refers to the emotional, psychological and human truths revealed through literary imagination.
A fictional story may not describe an actual historical event, yet it may communicate a profound truth about human life.
Formalist Approach
Formalism emphasizes the literary work itself rather than external sources such as biography or history.
The formalist critic studies the internal features of a text, including:
- imagery,
- symbolism,
- irony,
- paradox,
- language,
- structure,
- repetition,
- rhythm,
- unity.
Meaning is therefore discovered through close attention to the text.
Literary Truth
Literature can communicate truths about human emotions and experiences even when its events are fictional.
A fictional character may represent genuine experiences of love, suffering, fear, ambition or loneliness.
Thus, literary truth does not necessarily depend upon historical factuality.
Historical Truth
Historical truth depends on evidence and factual accuracy. A historian asks what happened and when it happened.
A literary writer may instead explore what an event means to individuals or how it is emotionally experienced.
Comparison
Literary truth and historical truth should not necessarily be placed in competition.
Historical truth provides factual knowledge, while literary truth can provide emotional and psychological insight.
A historical account may tell us what happened during a war, while a novel or poem may help us understand the human experience of that war.
Conclusion
Literary truth cannot simply be declared more reliable than historical truth. They serve different purposes. From the formalist perspective, the value of literary truth is found through the artistic structure and language of the work itself.
OR
To what an extent is the paraphrase important for the appreciation of a poem? Do you agree with the views expressed by Cleanth Brooks against the practice of paraphrase?
Answer
Paraphrase means expressing the meaning of a poem in simpler or different words.
Paraphrase can be useful when a poem is difficult. It may help a reader understand its basic subject, situation or literal meaning.
However, Cleanth Brooks, a major New Critic, strongly opposed reducing poetry to paraphrase.
Brooks and the “Heresy of Paraphrase”
Brooks argues that the meaning of a poem cannot be separated from its form. He calls the attempt to reduce a poem to a simple statement the “heresy of paraphrase.”
According to Brooks, poetry is an organic whole in which language, imagery, irony, paradox, rhythm and structure work together.
Why Paraphrase Is Inadequate
Suppose a poem uses a particular metaphor. The metaphor may contain several meanings simultaneously. A prose paraphrase may communicate only one literal interpretation.
Similarly, irony may disappear when the poem is rewritten in ordinary language.
Therefore, paraphrase can tell us approximately what a poem says, but it cannot fully explain how the poem creates its meaning.
Importance of Form
For Brooks, the critic should examine the relationship between:
- words,
- images,
- symbols,
- paradoxes,
- ironies,
- rhythms,
- structure.
These elements together constitute the poem’s meaning.
Evaluation
Paraphrase is not completely useless. It can serve as an introductory aid for readers who are unfamiliar with a difficult poem.
However, it should never replace close reading and formal analysis.
Conclusion
Brooks’s criticism of paraphrase is largely convincing. A poem is more than a message that can be translated into ordinary prose. Its meaning emerges from the interaction of content and form. Therefore, paraphrase may assist comprehension, but it cannot substitute for appreciation and interpretation of the poem itself.
4. How far Freudian concepts can be used to understand the intricacies of a literary work?
Answer
The psychoanalytic theory of Sigmund Freud has had a major influence on literary criticism. Freudian criticism interprets literature through concepts such as the unconscious, repression, dreams, desire and psychological conflict.
The Unconscious
Freud argued that human behaviour is influenced by unconscious desires and memories.
Literary works can therefore be examined for hidden psychological meanings.
Id, Ego and Superego
Freud divided the human personality into three major components.
Id represents instinctive desires and impulses.
Ego deals with reality and attempts to balance different demands.
Superego represents internalized moral and social rules.
Conflict among these three elements can be reflected in literary characters.
Repression
According to Freud, unacceptable thoughts and desires may be repressed into the unconscious.
These repressed elements may return indirectly through dreams, symbols, fantasies and behaviour.
Dreams
Freud considered dreams important expressions of unconscious wishes.
Dreams and strange symbolic experiences in literature can therefore be examined through psychoanalytic interpretation.
Oedipus Complex
Freud’s concept of the Oedipus complex has also been used to interpret family relationships and conflicts between parents and children in literary works.
Usefulness
Freudian criticism can reveal hidden psychological dimensions of characters and narratives. It can be particularly useful for studying:
- dreams,
- desire,
- guilt,
- fear,
- repression,
- family conflict,
- psychological instability.
Limitations
However, Freudian criticism also has limitations.
Not every symbol necessarily represents a repressed desire. Literary works are complex artistic structures and cannot always be reduced to psychological explanations.
Furthermore, Freud’s theories themselves have been challenged and revised by later psychological approaches.
Conclusion
Freudian concepts can provide valuable insights into the hidden psychological dimensions of literature. However, they should be used as interpretative tools rather than as complete explanations of literary works.
OR
Is it valid to say that literature offers us a night-side of life? Does this not undermine the claims to literature to social realism?
Answer
The phrase “night-side of life” refers to the hidden, disturbing, irrational and psychologically complex aspects of human existence.
Literature often explores experiences such as:
- fear,
- death,
- desire,
- guilt,
- loneliness,
- madness,
- violence,
- dreams,
- repression.
These aspects may remain hidden in ordinary social life.
Literature and the Hidden Self
Literature gives writers the freedom to explore experiences that society may suppress or avoid. Through fiction, poetry and drama, writers can reveal the psychological conflicts behind ordinary behaviour.
Relation to Social Realism
The exploration of the night-side does not necessarily undermine social realism.
Social realism is not limited to pleasant or ordinary aspects of society. Poverty, oppression, violence, alienation, psychological suffering and social conflict are also realities.
Therefore, literature can be socially realistic while simultaneously exploring hidden psychological experiences.
External and Internal Reality
Human beings exist in both an external social world and an internal psychological world.
Social conditions influence psychological life, while psychological experiences influence social behaviour.
Literature can therefore connect both forms of reality.
Conclusion
The “night-side of life” actually broadens the meaning of realism. Literature can represent not only visible social events but also the hidden psychological realities of individuals. Therefore, psychological exploration and social realism are not necessarily contradictory.
5. Myths are irrational narratives. Is it scientific to use mythical archetypes to understand the structure of work of art?
Answer
Myths are traditional narratives involving gods, heroes, supernatural events and symbolic explanations of human existence. From the viewpoint of modern science, many mythological narratives cannot be treated as factual explanations of the physical world.
However, literary critics do not necessarily use myths as scientific explanations. They use them as symbolic and structural patterns for understanding literature.
Archetypes
An archetype is a recurring image, character, symbol or narrative pattern found across literary and cultural traditions.
Common archetypes include:
- the hero,
- the quest,
- the journey,
- the mother,
- the wise old man,
- death and rebirth,
- the fall,
- conflict between good and evil.
Literary Use
Many literary works reuse older mythic patterns.
For example, a hero may leave home, face difficulties, undergo transformation and return. This pattern resembles the traditional quest narrative.
Archetypal criticism helps readers identify such recurring structures.
Is It Scientific?
Archetypal criticism is not scientific in the strict empirical sense.
It cannot be tested in a laboratory in the same way as a scientific hypothesis.
It is better understood as a humanistic interpretative method.
Its purpose is to discover recurring patterns and symbolic relationships in literature.
Limitations
Archetypal criticism can become problematic if every work is forced into the same mythic pattern.
It may also ignore cultural differences and the individual creativity of writers.
Conclusion
The use of mythical archetypes is not “scientific” in the strict sense. Nevertheless, it is a legitimate critical method for studying recurring literary structures, symbols and patterns. Its value depends upon careful application and attention to the individuality of each literary work.
OR
Offer a critique of Northrop’s theory of archetypes. More than the mythical, it is the personal experience that matters in shaping the literary expression.
Answer
The question refers to Northrop Frye’s theory of archetypes. Frye is one of the most important critics associated with archetypal criticism.
His approach attempts to understand literature through recurring myths, symbols, narrative patterns and literary conventions.
Frye’s Theory of Archetypes
Frye argues that literary works are not isolated creations. They participate in larger patterns that recur throughout literary history.
He connects literary patterns with myth and with the cycle of the seasons.
Seasonal Patterns
Frye associates:
Spring with comedy, renewal and rebirth.
Summer with romance, adventure and fulfilment.
Autumn with tragedy and decline.
Winter with irony, isolation and death.
These patterns help explain recurring structures in literary genres.
Strengths of Frye’s Theory
Frye’s approach has several strengths.
First, it connects individual literary works with broader literary traditions.
Second, it encourages comparative study.
Third, it helps identify recurring symbols and narrative structures.
Fourth, it provides a systematic way of studying genres and literary forms.
Criticism of Frye
However, Frye’s theory can be criticized for giving excessive importance to universal mythic patterns.
Literary works are also shaped by:
- personal experience,
- historical circumstances,
- social conditions,
- cultural identity,
- political environment,
- individual imagination.
A writer may use an archetypal pattern but transform it according to personal experience.
Personal Experience
Personal experience is particularly important because two writers may use the same archetype in completely different ways.
The hero, journey, mother, death or rebirth pattern may acquire different meanings depending upon the author’s individual circumstances and imagination.
Thus, archetypes provide a framework, but they do not completely determine literary expression.
Conclusion
Northrop Frye’s theory is valuable because it reveals recurring mythic patterns in literature. However, it should not be treated as a complete theory of literary creation. Myth and archetype provide traditions and patterns, while personal experience, historical circumstances and individual imagination transform those patterns into unique works of art.