Posted: January 17, 2000 at 16:42:22: by David Freitag
For negative criticism, look in some of the older anthologies of criticism, like _Tolkien and the Critics_ edited, I believe, by someone named Zimbardo. Or look in the library for early reviews. Especially devastating (and cheaply snide) is a piece called "Oooh, Those Awful Orcs" by the esteemed critic Edmund Wilson.On the deeper question, "What is Literature?" This is tricky. There is the problem that while the sum total of an early culture's output is considered "Literature," their output is by volume far less than even a sigle years new output nowadays. Are you familiar with (Theodore) Sturgeon's Law: "90% of Everything (all artisitic categories) is Crap." If you consider Lit as works that have stood the test of time, then you find some intersting things. Guys like Dickens and Dostoevsky produced their stuff as episodic serials for the daily paper, eg the equivalent of today's soap operas. Shakespeare's plays are careful balanced to appeal to both the High and Low tastes, in turn crude and exalted. Dante takes a lot of time indulging in petty character assassination of Florentine political figures obscure to us. Some say popular or "hack" writing accepts conventions while true Literature challenges or stretches them. I have no theory. I've always liked the LR and find it fits easily on the shelf with favorites from all ages. In the long run, it will still be read, and in my book, qualifies as Literature.
|
