Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
23 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Some good and some bad points., January 17, 2003
Terry Eagleton's "Literary Theory" advertises itself as a clear, lucid introduction to the topic, written for the unitiated. In many ways, the book fulfills this promise, particularly in its discussions of the New Criticism, reception theory, hermeneutics, deconstruction and the overall arch of literary theory's history. Eagleton also does a superb job of placing each of these theories within their sociopolitical context (no surprise there). Most of this book is engaging and well-written.There are weak areas, however. In his discussions of structuralism, phenomenology and a few other areas, Eagleton gets bogged down and its difficult to get straight to the heart of these methodologies, which is ostensibly the point of this book. Overall, though, I recommend this to anyone interested in literary theory as an historical and academic phenomenon, and as a fascinating subject in itself, even if you find much of it obscurantist and even devious (which many do). People looking for other introductions to this topic might also look at the equally superb "Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction" by Cornell deconstruction guru Jonathan Culler, or Peter Barry's excellent "Beginning Theory."
|
|
|
18 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
If you only read one book about literary theory..., February 3, 2003
...who would blame you? Still, the educated layperson who wants to bump their understanding of contemporary literary criticism up to a respectable cocktail party level probably can't do much better than Eagleton's slim, thoroughly accessible introduction to the subject. "Literary Theory" traces the history of literature as a subject of academic study from English Romanticism, through Saussure and semiotics, all the way to the fashionable heavy-hitters of postmodernism. Neither an acolyte nor a debunker, Eagleton gives each theory a clear explanation and a fair shake in crisp, jargon-free prose. He is up front about his own ideological slants (feminist, Marxist), and although the last of these can at times make him sound quaintly Cold War, at no point does he drop into didacticism. This is a book that truly lives up to its subtitle.
|
|
|
15 of 16 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Not incomplete, just a bit dated!, May 17, 2005
I have to answer "a reader" from Los Angeles who wrote of the book's (in)completeness. "Literary Theory" was published in 1983 and so recent movements in theory are left out due to the failure of modern science to yet render humankind a time machine. I wonder if "a reader" even made it to the copyright page! As a result of its publication date, New Historicism, which came of age under Greenblatt's guidance in the mid 80s and Queer Theory, which found its published voice in the early 90s, are omitted. Both are discussed in the "Afterward" of the 2nd edition as important movements since the book's publication. This critique is as valid as decrying Theodor Adorno for disregarding the Internet in his writings on the Culture Industry from the early 70s and before. The same is true for Post-colonialism, which was too immature in the early 80s to give an account of, but which Eagleton praises in the "Afterward" and many other places as one of the most important movements in theoretical discourse.
Regarding the comment that "Eagleton for some reason wants to stay far away from gays, women, and people of color!" nothing could be more naive. As for the "people of color," Eagleton would not write about an African-American theory since he is Irish/English and not overly concerned with the regional theories of the United States (just as the US critics wouldn't spend much time on Irish/English ethnic theory). Overall, the purpose of the book is to review continental philosophy & theory, and its offspring in America and Britain. It could be labeled a Eurocentric work, but the author is pretty open about its purpose as a guide for students of English.
Finally, the absence of feminist scholarship in the work is the most absurd claim that "a reader" from LA makes. Eagleton clearly states that, "there are feminist theories which are more important than any of the theories here....One reason why I have not an account of feminist literary theory is that I believe such a move might encourage the reader to make what the philosophers call a 'category mistake'" In other words, Feminism (and Marxism) are not separate categories from theory, but are intertwined within all of theory. Despite his claim that feminism is absent from the book, Eagleton discusses it at length through its interactions with post-structuralism, psychoanalysis, semiotics, etc. Resultantly, Feminism is not relegated to one chapter as "a reader" from LA would like, but is everywhere in the book.
I must conclude then that "a reader" did not read the book, only its table of contents. I wonder: does he do this with every book that he comes across?
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Maggie Humm
by K. M. Newton
by Terry Eagleton
by Julie Rivkin
See all 100 books citing this book
