The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism by Unknown

by Vincent B. Leitch

This anthology of critical writing (2624 pp. + XXXVIII) ranges from Gorgias and Plato to Sigmund Freud and Mikhail Bakhtin. Each of the 147 contributions has a headnote introducing the writer and making connections to other critics, theorists and movements. An introduction surveys the history of theory and criticism.

Genres: Nonfiction, Literary Criticism, Reference, Theory, Philosophy, Literature, Criticism

Hardcover

First published June 13, 2001

Reviews

[Liz · Rating 5 out of 5]

I strangely became endeared to this book after loathing its weight in physical, emotional, and mental proportions and now often crawl back to it seeking advice. NERD.

[Nick · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book does offer a huge selection of important critics. It is nice and heavy, and has a cool dust cover. As an introduction to theory for students, however, it is a bit overwhelming and doesn't offer much in the way of engagement with texts that other lit crit anthologies, such as Shirley Staton's "Literary Theory in Praxis" do. The elephant in the room with this book is that the editors lean heavily toward the theory of Derrida and Stanley Fish. Derrida may have the most extensive selection in here, and Guyatri Spivak has an essay. It may be telling that a large number of professors from the University of Illinois @Chicago, where Stanley Fish was formerly the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, are featured (Lennard Davis, Walter Benn Michaels, and Gerald Graff) while the book omits some key critics from the last twenty years (Frank Kermode and Slavoj Zizek, for example). Compared with the Longman 20th century lit crit Anthology, this criticism anthology seems heavy on the white guys, doing little to dispel the "totalitarian tinkerbell" thing. On the other hand, the Norton does have bell hooks and some great feminist criticism. Many of the black theorists and critics, particularly the men, seem to be lumped into their own "identity" category, which can be problematic. The Norton isn't inventing this trend, which has been around for awhile; but it isn't resisting it either. In all, I think there is a great background in criticism here, but in some of the ways I mentioned, this book is a product of a certain time and certain networks of influence, not an objective account of what has been most important nor most forward-looking in criticism and theory.

[H]

obviously didn't read all 3k pages. the intro's perspicuous. selections include all the texts I've always heard of and wanted to read. a broad, broad, oversimplified categorical summary:

1. Classical (Plato, Aristotle/Horace)

2. Medieval (Augustine, Dante, exegetical traditions)

3. Renaissance = Neoclassical (Pope, Spenser; genres, 3 unities, verisimilitude; growth of vernacular)

4. Romanticism (Hegel's/Kant's subjectivity; American/French revolutions; play of consciousness; individual genius)

5. Marxism (Althusser, Foucault; text as social context; art as fugitive, counter-ideology & heteroglossia)

6. Psychoanalysis (Freud; unconscious, dreams; Bloom's "anxiety of influence"; Lacan's "ecriture feminine")

7. Formalism (New Criticism & Russian Formalism; Cleanth Brooks; primacy of text as closed object for analysis)

8. Reader-Response Theory (implied/virtual/historical/ideal/super/critical&resisting/real readers; meaning may be fixed but significance changes; meaning has multifarious angles)

9. Structuralism -> Semiotics/ology (subject and subjectivity; language as symbolic systems with synchronic bases not diachronic effects; reduction of reading conventions and plots into patterns)

10. Deconstruction -> Poststructuralism aka Postmodernism (Derrida's "undecidability", all text as sliding intertext borrowing from other texts; neopragmatism that interpretations don't prove but persuade, are original and useful)

11. Feminism & Queer Theory (Kristeva, Cixous; phallologocentrism; anti-Oedipal; "compulsory heterosexuality"; politics of difference)

12. Post-Colonial Studies (language as cultural power/rule; hybridity = no such pure culture; African-Americans as example of neither Anglo-Saxon nor African)

13. Cultural Studies & New Historicism (embrace of low- & mid-brow culture; expanding definition of lit which changes; art as text to read social context)

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an excellent compendium of criticism for anybody seriously interested in literature. Its only flaw is its complete lack of non-Western criticism. The entire time I was reading it, I kept thinking, "What about Taoist literary theory or Confucian?" Then for that matter, what about the Sanskrit tradition or any Japanese or Arabic theory tradition? Simply nonexistent. It's a decent look at criticism, but it's very, very far from complete.

[Leslie Wexler · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have to give the Norton Anthology a 'really liked' it rating even though it was intensely painful to read and to carry around twice a week. This book is both a back and ball breaker. Toss away any notions of easy reading and delve into the introductions of most of the main theoretical arguments beginning with Plato and rounding out with "Theory is dead" criticism. I especially enjoyed the psychoanalytic theorists (especially Jacques Lacan), felt as though my discarded feelings regarding women's rights and responsibilities were revived with feminist critique (espcially my beloved Simone de Beauvoir -- I actually cried reading the Second Sex). I was challenged by Hegel, Heideigger, Barthes and Derrida in ways I've never even considered thinking before - and love their minds (even though I think Hegel is kind of kooky in his teleology.) The post-modernists kept my interest and have sparked my continued desire to follow trends in architecture as a mode of revealing new modes of living and thinking, but my favourite ... hands down is Foucault. God, to sit in that man's mind for a day (had he not died of AIDS) would be fascinating.

Cracking open this book at the beginning of the school term, I knew I was in for something difficult but would ultimately change the way I looked at the universe. That has definitely happened, and has contributed to shaping my graduate studies moving forward.

[Mickey · Rating 5 out of 5]

Studied this massive tome my junior year in college. It was where I first met the likes of Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault, Freud, and scores of other cultural critics. It was the first time I realized how many interesting ideas are out there. A good reference and introduction for people interested in training their critical thinking skills. (Favorites; 2500+ pages)

[Dusty · Rating 4 out of 5]

Of the (too) many collections of essays on literary theory I have been compelled to buy by graduate school professors who refuse to agree upon one standard textbook -- this one is probably my favorite. At least, it's the one I'm most likely to refer back to. I say that despite the fact that it's seriously skimpy on texts written before 1900 (all of which are crammed into the first third of the book) and in Latin America (none, unless you count Gloria Anzaldúa, an American). These (glaring) omissions make possible the inclusion of what is probably an excessive number of hip Europeans and North Americans who are products of the cultural studies movement but, though I love them, aren't nearly as important long-term as, say, Émile Zola, Oswald de Andrade or Octavio Paz. Those problems aside, I like the book's introductions and appreciated that for a tome of nearly 3,000 pages it carries surprisingly well in a backpack. No risk of spinal injury. Anyway, if you're looking for a book of philosophy that contains an adequate mix of canonical musts (Plato, Freud, etc.) and others, you could do worse.

[Kate · Rating 5 out of 5]

Theory madness! Marvelously informative. More lit crit than the mind can manage. Handily content-tabled by movements and issues (e.g., "The Body," "Marxism," "Gay and Lesbian Criticism and Queer Theory") as well as by author and historical period. Really a book about thinking and sociocultural-historical-philosophical-artistic developments in all areas.

Tome doubles as doorstop. Actual philosophers and crazy intellectual writers sold separately.

[Rae]

Now that's I've completed Literary and Critical Theory, I'm honestly not sure what to say about it. I do think it's far to say I will never forget some of what I've learned, and I think more and more aspects of these theories will pop up in my life as I go along.

[Behzad · Rating 2 out of 5]

While the introductions to the theorists and philosophers are concise and clear enough, the book becomes more and more anglo, and americo, centric as it approaches the end of the 20th century, in a truly disgusting way.

[Biblio Curious · Rating 5 out of 5]

I spent about a week reading the bios of everyone mentioned, who influenced who & skimming the samples of their work provided. So I didn't read this cover to cover like a novel. I did go to the Norton website & print out the table of contents to annotate while I read through this mammoth of a book. My end result is a list of books/theorists to explore and my 1st impressions of them jotted into a notebook or onto this table of contents.

Overall, it was very worthwhile to discover some schools of thought for how to examine literature. This anthology goes through the history of literary theory beginning with the ancient greeks and ending in the 1990s. The later years are more inclusive of African & feminist thinkers. There's also a great sample of disability in literature that's presented in such an interesting way.

[Lief · Rating 3 out of 5]

This anthology does a good job of providing salient works by a wide variety of authors on the various theories of literary criticism. Some of the strengths of this work are that it is organized in such a way that it is easy to find a work on a particular theory or by a specific author. Also, each author is given an introduction that can help to understand their background as well as the theory they are known for.
For me, the largest weakness of this anthology is that aside from a very brief synopsis (that at times confuses more than elucidates) in the introductions, each essay or section(s) from a book is simply given with no further explanation. While it could be argued that this would make for an even thicker and longer text, it is something that this volume certainly lacks.
In short, this is a good reference volume, but without further research or learning from a class it would make learning the various literary theories fairly difficult.

[Zach Thomas · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you need one book on literary theory, this monster is just about all you need. I've owned this book since 2003, back when I took an intro. to lit. theory class as an undergraduate at UC. Since then, I've constantly referenced the writings contained inside as an undergrad of English, then as a graduate student of journalism (interested most in ideas of replication, what it means to be "original") and finally working on my thesis, in which this book has illuminated my understanding of hegemonic structures, the artifice (?) of subculture.

This isn't bedtime reading, unless you have insomnia, but with a bit of caffeine it makes for an incredibly engaging and pleasurable time.

[Mary Lynn · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a monstrous anthology; it was used as the primary textbook for my Critical Theory and Literary Criticism course (ENGL 602 at University of Maryland). I liked the course very much but it's a little hard for me to rate "how good" this Norton Anthology is; the excerpts were sometimes highly chopped up versions of much larger works. (And the material itself was, of course, dense and challenging.) One thing I found very helpful in this book were the author biographies before each of the critical works. They helped place the excerpt or essay in context and really enhanced my ability to understand the theory.

[Leah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Oh boy - an anthology of literary criticism. It's for a class. We're trying to touch on all the major periods and modes. It's useful for someone, like me, who does not have time to read all of those philosophers and poets in-depth while taking two other classes and raising a child. How I sometimes wish this could be my only class this quarter - it's an enormous quantity of various and complex ways to look at the world through literature.

[Jacob Hurley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent selection of texts from Plato's Republic to Stuart Moulthrop's McLuhanist evaluation of the internet. You can enter in knowing nothing and come out with a reasonable grasp of Marxism, formalism, german idealism, feminism, queer theory, reader-response theory... anything. I got this for only 20 bucks and over the course of a year and a half I got much more than my money's worth out of it. Highly recommended

[Julie Ruble · Rating 4 out of 5]

I love this book. Great introductions to theory and pithy excerpts from everyone from Aristotle to Stanley Fish. It's not the sort of thing you read through cover to cover. It's more of a reference book. Actually, I'm not going to lie, I know people who would enjoy reading this cover to cover :)

[Gemma · Rating 3 out of 5]

Obviously have not read the whole thing! Its a beast of a book to carry around uni. But from what I did read I liked Postcolonialism the best and I really liked reading Freud's essays. Having studied him in A-level psychology I really liked being able to read the actual essays on dreams.

[Notnotnerdygirl · Rating 4 out of 5]

Super interesting, super helpful. A great look at theory over time - but there was a lot more politics (mostly Marxism) and theology than I was expecting.

[Allegra]

No, I have not read every page of this book (lol)! But I am tired of seeing it on my "currently reading" shelf.

[Waldo · Rating 5 out of 5]

მორჩა.
მგონი, ყველაზე დიდი წიგნია, რაც ოდესმე წამიკითხავს და დიდში არ ვგულისხმობ ზომასა და გვერდების რაოდენობას.
არაჩვეულებრივი გზამკვლევია. ლიტერატურა ვისაც ნამდვილად აინტერესებს, ყველასთვის საჭირო, წესით.
საყვარელი ავტორები ვიპოვე მრავლად, ისინი, ვის ტექსტებსაც მთლიანად წავიკითხავ და ის თეორიებიც, თემებიც, რომლებზეც მეტი რამის გაგება მინდა.
ყველა მონაკვეთი თანაბრად საინტერესო არ ყოფილა და ზოგჯერ თავს ძალას ვატანდი, წამეკითხა, მაგრამ ეს სრულიად ბუნებრივია. ზოგიერთი მიდგომა ნაკლებად საინტერესოა ჩემთვის და მაგათ თავიანთი თაყვანისმცემლები ჰყავთ.

წიგნის ერთადერთი ნაკლი ისაა, რომ უზომოდ მძიმეა და მოუხერხებელია. სხვა მხრივ, ერთ-ერთი ყველაზე ღირებული წიგნია, რაც კი შეიძლება თავის ბიბლიოთეკას შემატოს ადამიანმა.

[v · Rating 3 out of 5]

I grabbed this highly regarded anthology hoping to discover or brush up on rewarding ways of thinking about literature.
After discarding the huge, cankerous collection of grievance studies and the philosophy and theory which I'd already read and saw little need to return to, I was left with over 1000 pages of stimulating selections to read from two thousand years of criticism. For that I'm grateful.
However, anthologies of this kind and this generation fundamentally distort their contents by their narrow vision of selection and contextualization.
Just one paper in the whole thing offered what was for me a compelling and new perspective, and that was Georges Poulet's "Phenomenology of Reading."

[Sam Reader · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fuck this book but also it’s probably the smartest book I own

[Courtney Hatch · Rating 5 out of 5]

Didn’t read every page, but spent a lot of time with it haha.

[Aibhlin]

Didn't read the whole thi g but my lit theory class caused me enough pain to deserve counting it

[Chrisanne]

I believe I left it blank because I never read the entire thing(thank you, compassionate professors).

My thoughts now are that it is an incredibly convenient book but not, by far, the best of the contained writers' thoughts. It's definitely a compendium what they are often most known for. But I think that many have written better and thought better. As an anthology it does a good job and is helpful for those who don't necessarily want to read it all. But I would choose different selections.

[Kris Rafferty · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brilliant.

[J. Alfred · Rating 3 out of 5]

In a life full of reading books, there are few books that have given me so much satisfaction to be done with. This complement is backhanded but sincere: I'm glad that I know more about the theories and history: I'm glad I won't have to toil through this thing any more.

Since reading this felt like a marathon, let's hand out some awards:

Cleverest rhymer: Pope
Most impossible to understand: Kant (narrowly edging out Hegel)
Most surprisingly interesting and variously talented (also a composer): Schiller
Most likely to make you quit your job and live life right, man: Emerson
Most hauntingly interesting: Jung and Heidegger (tie)
Most likely to make you think that maybe there's something to this deconstructionist stuff: de Man
Most impressive on feminism: Rich
Most impressive on Marxism: Jameson
Most impressive on the act of reading: Fish
Most likable for anyone who has tried to balance personal and academic life: Tompkins

Most realistically helpful: the editors. The notes are really good. This book is a good tool, and it will increase your sense of self every time you look at the thing on your shelf.

[Miriam · Rating 5 out of 5]

Even though it's one of the most humongous books I've ever owned, this Norton Anthology holds a special place in my heart. If this hadn't been a good read, all these travels from home to parent's home and to uni with it in my backpack would have been for nothing. My backaches would've been for nothing. But I feel I very much learned something from this beast. The Norton Anthology provides a very good biography of each author, which then gives you sufficient background knowledge to be able to understand the primary texts. I loved the diversity in their choice of authors (still way to go but it is an important step towards more inclusivity). So if you want to dabble into literary criticism out of free will or because you have to, I highly recommend this big friendly giant.

[Jessica · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of the most useful/favorite books in my library, which is to say that the (bible-thin) pages are wrinkled and dirty from my fingertips paging over them--and that's saying quite a lot, since I take ridiculously good care of my books. This is also the only book of mine with writing (pencil) in the margins. It was necessary to break the cardinal rule against defacing texts, since I need little notes to jog my memory and make chains of connection while I'm reading... and I could never have enough sticky notes.