What do you think?
Rate this book
Northrop Frye and Critical Method
256 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1978
5 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
July 2, 2021
Visual Depiction of Frye’s Approach to Literary Criticism - When first reading Frye’s “Anatomy of Criticism, “ I could grasp its undeniable use in analyzing literature, but believed it would be that much more understandable and valuable if its various aspects were illustrated with charts and diagrams. Well, Robert Denham’s “Northrop Frye and Critical Method” provides such a book.
After a brief preface, Denham covers Frye’s unconventional use of terms, then diagrammatically presents and explains his theories of Modes (e.g. comedies, tragedies), Symbols (e.g. literal, descriptive, formal, mythic, and anagogic), Myths (e.g. romantic, idealistic, realistic, and demonic imagery) and Genres (e.g. drama, exposition, fiction, or lyric) in the first four chapters (parallel to the four essays of Frye’s “Anatomy...”). The text complements the major aspects outlined in 24 figures where all but one appear in the initial chapters. In the following three chapters, Denham discusses issues that have arisen related to Frye’s remarks, the ways he applies his approach as well as its powers and limitations.
Most of my favorite parts occur around some of the more prominent diagrams. These figures include the one that represents the general structure of the “Anatomy of Criticism” (Figure 6 - pg. 59) that shows how the literary modes and the phases of symbolism relate as well as where the types of mythos (or processes such as season change) and genre come into play (kind of a “data flow/relationship diagram” of Frye’s book). Then, there is the “triadic framework” that illustrates the manner in which the elements of the ancient trivium of grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic (or logic) are incorporated within the book to describe contrasting literary styles (Figure 14 - pg. 90). Mention of other scholars like Robert Scholes (“The Nature of Narrative”) who have developed Frye-like frameworks for clarifying similarities and differences in literature is also enlightening. For instance, one chart lays out specific forms of prose fiction (Figure 21 – pg 112) in a 2X2 or “four box model” (like Scholes does later in “Fabulation and Metafiction”), providing a basis for some 68 examples of the 15 major fiction forms and hybrids, e.g. Charles Dickens’ novel “Little Dorit,” Emily Bronte’s romance “Wuthering Heights,” Augustine of Hippo’s “Confessions,” Robert Burton’s “Anatomy of Melancholy,” Joseph Conrad’s novel/romance “Lord Jim” and so on. Furthermore, examples such as those from Frye’s “Return to Eden” about “Paradise Lost” and “Paradise Found” where the critic applies his method and presents an image of Milton’s works using a dial and the face of the clock to represent their structures (pg 163) also illuminate.
As Denham states, it’s not whether Frye’s work can be scientifically verified, but how meaningful and useful it is. Similarly, it is the benefit of Denham’s visual depiction of Frye’s approach to literary criticism that counts. If you are looking to “get” Frye, get this book by Denham.
After a brief preface, Denham covers Frye’s unconventional use of terms, then diagrammatically presents and explains his theories of Modes (e.g. comedies, tragedies), Symbols (e.g. literal, descriptive, formal, mythic, and anagogic), Myths (e.g. romantic, idealistic, realistic, and demonic imagery) and Genres (e.g. drama, exposition, fiction, or lyric) in the first four chapters (parallel to the four essays of Frye’s “Anatomy...”). The text complements the major aspects outlined in 24 figures where all but one appear in the initial chapters. In the following three chapters, Denham discusses issues that have arisen related to Frye’s remarks, the ways he applies his approach as well as its powers and limitations.
Most of my favorite parts occur around some of the more prominent diagrams. These figures include the one that represents the general structure of the “Anatomy of Criticism” (Figure 6 - pg. 59) that shows how the literary modes and the phases of symbolism relate as well as where the types of mythos (or processes such as season change) and genre come into play (kind of a “data flow/relationship diagram” of Frye’s book). Then, there is the “triadic framework” that illustrates the manner in which the elements of the ancient trivium of grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic (or logic) are incorporated within the book to describe contrasting literary styles (Figure 14 - pg. 90). Mention of other scholars like Robert Scholes (“The Nature of Narrative”) who have developed Frye-like frameworks for clarifying similarities and differences in literature is also enlightening. For instance, one chart lays out specific forms of prose fiction (Figure 21 – pg 112) in a 2X2 or “four box model” (like Scholes does later in “Fabulation and Metafiction”), providing a basis for some 68 examples of the 15 major fiction forms and hybrids, e.g. Charles Dickens’ novel “Little Dorit,” Emily Bronte’s romance “Wuthering Heights,” Augustine of Hippo’s “Confessions,” Robert Burton’s “Anatomy of Melancholy,” Joseph Conrad’s novel/romance “Lord Jim” and so on. Furthermore, examples such as those from Frye’s “Return to Eden” about “Paradise Lost” and “Paradise Found” where the critic applies his method and presents an image of Milton’s works using a dial and the face of the clock to represent their structures (pg 163) also illuminate.
As Denham states, it’s not whether Frye’s work can be scientifically verified, but how meaningful and useful it is. Similarly, it is the benefit of Denham’s visual depiction of Frye’s approach to literary criticism that counts. If you are looking to “get” Frye, get this book by Denham.
Displaying 1 of 1 review