A distinguished literary critic analyzes his colleagues' obscure and ideological treatment of American fiction and makes a powerful case for facing works of literature squarely and empirically.
| ||||||||||||||||||
Book Description
Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
In this collection of book reviews and review-essays, many of which first appeared in the New York Review of Books , Crews examines how, through excess methodological zeal, critics have mistreated the works and literary reputations of American novelists. The author, a professor of English at the University of California,Berkeley, exposed earlier critical follies in The Pooh Perplex ; in the first essay here, he confesses to his own too-strict adherence to Freudian criticism applied to Hawthorne in his previous book The Sins of the Fathers. The collection looks at how Twain, Hemingway, Faulkner, O'Connor and Updike have fared at the hands of critics wielding New Critical, poststructuralist, Marxist, formalist, conservative, liberal, psychoanalytic and/or politically correct agendas. Crews handles these academic battles with a light touch, eschewing jargon in order to introduce general readers to contemporary literary-critical issues. His liberal/pluralist orientation--"I want keen debate, not reverence for great books"--doesn't prevent him from exposing the illusions of Right and Left alike, or from debunking any approach that treats literary works as mere grist for critical mills.
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc.
From Library Journal
In recent years, English departments around the country have become storm centers of political/cultural controversy. Noted scholar and critic Crews ( Skeptical Engagements , Oxford Univ. Pr., 1988) joins the fray in this collection of eight recently published essays reviewing books on Twain, Hemingway, Faulkner, and Updike, as well as the "American Renaissance." The essays all reject the reductive readings of both Right and Left, resisting the tendency of some academic critics to engage in either cultural nostalgia or political correctness. Conceiving of literary studies as an open-ended discussion, Crews prefers to focus on the works' complexities rather than gloss over problems or contradictions. His essays make a clear, witty, and provocative contribution to the PC debate.
- T.L. Cooksey, Armstrong State Coll., Savannah, Ga.
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc.
- T.L. Cooksey, Armstrong State Coll., Savannah, Ga.
Copyright 1992 Reed Business Information, Inc.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Lit Crit Encounters Common Sense,
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Critics Bear it Away: American Fiction and the Academy (Hardcover)
Never mind that this book was written in the 90s. Crews was there at the beginning of nonsensical Lit Crit Theory and saw through it. In his indispensable satires The Pooh Perplex and Postmodern Pooh, Crews proves that starting with a theory and then trying to match the facts to it doesn't work in literature any better than in does in science or technology. But what happens when rational and empirical principles are applied to today's most conspicuous writing? The Critics Bear It Away -- the title borrows from Flannery O'Connor -- shows how Crews clear-headed approach to careful consideration of what's actually in the written record can find something useful to readers even of writers that lie hidden behind smoke screens of contradictory and misleading critical verbiage. Readers wanting to find a helpful place from which to critique today's better writing and what would like to be mistaken for it can start here.
0 of 4 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Writes with left-wing perspective for left-wing audience that doesn't understand or like great literature,
By
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Critics Bear it Away: American Fiction and the Academy (Hardcover)
Prof. Crews writes very confidently, at times arrogantly, about the subjects presented in this book. He makes no effort to understand fiction beyond a standard, very opinionated (assumes you accept him as an expert on fiction--balderdash), left-wing (may I say N.Y. lit crowd groupie or member),very inconsistent in quality analysis of lit. His chapter on Flannery O's Connor should be read carefully as a classic example of making no effort to understand the context of her writing or understand her stories and novels apart from his own limited worldview; is afraid to admit he doesn't really understand what he is writing about.I though he was very condescending and unilluminating (confusing when writing about O'Connor) in the three essays I read. The Faulkner chapter was okay if a Berkley undergrad had written it. He doesn't really get the South nor does he care to enlighten himself. His chapter on O'Connor is confusing and shows he doesn't really understand at a literal level her writing. His last sentence damns her with faint praise. Her religion and her Southern background are beyond him (see above). Only a very superficial reading of her stories and Wise Blood yields his cliched (in that many liberals write this way about O'Connor) conclusion that she writes in a very narrow way about a very small world. or Crews her chief and dispositive failure is to write more or less the same story over and over. He is ironically wrong in his judgment of her and of his judgment of his own critical powers. Her writing is original and powerful and subtle and not easy to whiz through. I think his main problem is that he doesn't like all the praise she receives. He doesn't understand her stories (see his last sentence and the cop-out conclusion about either explaining her electric writing or explaining it away--binary confusion for reader and Crews). In fact his satirical critical writing could easily include his chapter on O'Connor as an example of lit crit. gone amok. See the Pooh books. I agree with Crews about Freud, but there is a parallel to his chapter on O'connor and his writing on Freud--lack of deep understanding of what Freud and O'Connor are doing. He dances on the surface. By the way, this was originally published in The New York Review of Books, a biased, overrated journal of opinion, if there ever was one. Did Hugh Kenner, a truly great lit critic, ever publish anything in this Easter Bastion of Ignorance? No. By the way, Kenner and O'Connor were both devout Catholics. I am not, if anyone is interested.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
