Literary Criticism and Literary Theories
Глеб Струве
Abstract
Глеб Струве
Abstract
Throughout the second half of the nineteenth century the dominant tendency in Russian literary criticism was towards the so-called “social” or “civic” criticism, towards estimating literary works by their social content and appeal. The beginning of Formalism as a school dates from the first years of the War, when a group of young students of literature organized in Petrograd the so-called Association for the Study of Poetical Language which issued its non-periodical publication. The extreme Formalists not only ban altogether the element of contents in the usual sense, and study the naked forms of literary works, but they have a tendency to deny all causal connection between literary facts and other facts that co-exist with them. Boris Eichenbaum denies just as emphatically all causal connection between art on one hand, and life, social environment, etc., on the other. Doubtless some of the Formalists, and especially Eichenbaum, realized the insufficiency, narrowness and futility of the purely formalistic method.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Throughout the second half of the nineteenth century the dominant tendency in Russian literary criticism was towards the so-called “social” or “civic” criticism, towards estimating literary works by their social content and appeal. The beginning of Formalism as a school dates from the first years of the War, when a group of young students of literature organized in Petrograd the so-called Association for the Study of Poetical Language which issued its non-periodical publication. The extreme Formalists not only ban altogether the element of contents in the usual sense, and study the naked forms of literary works, but they have a tendency to deny all causal connection between literary facts and other facts that co-exist with them. Boris Eichenbaum denies just as emphatically all causal connection between art on one hand, and life, social environment, etc., on the other. Doubtless some of the Formalists, and especially Eichenbaum, realized the insufficiency, narrowness and futility of the purely formalistic method.
Key concepts: Literary criticism, Literary science, Literature, Criticism, Literary theory, Sociological criticism, Philosophy, Art