Macherey discusses the means of criticism and literary production from the absence of words; by avoiding the many 'langues' available to choose from when describing something. To the untrainined eye this seems like a contradiction to talk about a topic by remaining silent, yet Macherey makes a point to make clear that it is not only the words we use that evoke meaning but it is also the words that we do not choose to use (whether aware to us or not) that simultaneously describe that same topic.
Macherey's recognition of criticism is that it extends the work of an author but attempting to make apparent the words that were missing from the original piece. Coinsidently, this week for my Enlgish Literature class I was assigned to read 'An Essay on Criticism' by Alexander Pope, written in 18th Century Britain. Pope does on to describe criticism as part of human nature and being important to the development of litrature and language. He also goes on to reference the Ancient Greeks and Romans for their excellent knowledge in writing and criticism and how we should be knowledgable of them in order to pursue criticism in writing.
Pope and Macherey both make excellent observations in defining what criticism is and how it is applied. While Pope's work is written in the form of a poem with rhyming couplets and epigrams (short witty stanzas), the points he make are paralleled in Macherey's work, for Macherey focuses on the silence that is not disclosed however does recognise the desire to find out. Although written over two hundred years apart there is still evidence that the nature of criticism, the evaluation of literary works, has remained fundermentally the same.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It is clear that you have a very good understanding of the Macherey reading. It was great and very relevant that you included what you learned from the Alexander Pope essay. You made very strong connections between the two.
-Starfish
Post a Comment