What do you think?
Rate this book
Fraud: Literary Theory and the End of English
188 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1989
12 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 6, 2022
Washington's eloquent and scathing critique of critical theory identifies the underlying contradictions and moral superiority on which recent developments in the field of literary theory are founded. 'Radical literary theory', as Washington terms it, sees literature as a tool ensuring the continued oppression of the working class (and my recent reading of Eagleton certainly suggests so). All 'radical' criticism is inextricably linked with a certain political agenda. Washington notes that theories grounded in this principle are easy to pick apart as the claim they rest on - literature propagating suppression of the masses - can neither be proven nor disproven. Additionally, he rightly objects on principle to radical literary theory being taught in educational institutions, where teachers should be fostering critical thought, not indulging political and moral ideologies.
The first chapter of the book deals with the history of literary criticism and theory, which he traces back to Plato and Aristotle. Aristotle encourages critical detachment and the use of technical (but elusive, as demonstrated by the controversy over the precise meaning of 'catharsis') vocabulary; Plato focuses on the moral and political function of literature as a means of positive indoctrination. Radical theory tends to assume Aristotelian language for Platonic effect, but as opposed to Plato and Aristotle’s shared view of art as a representation of the world, RLT sees literature as a means of changing the world by reinterpreting literature (based in part on Wilde’s assertion that Nature imitates Art and not the other way round).
RLT assumes authority on moral and political matters, presenting itself, as Washington puts it in an amusing simile, as the white knight rescuing literary theory from the hands of the dragon that is the bourgeoisie. Ironically, while radical theorists present their aims as a heroic struggle to bring about the liberation of the working classes, they simply want to displace the current values and aims of academic study with their own political agenda. It is the very institutions which RLT criticises which allow for its continued existence.
Having just read some of Eagleton's work, this is refreshingly critical and does not have the same moralistic and ideological overtones which made Eagleton an ordeal to get through. Washington's writing is clear, witty and well-informed, making this a thoroughly informative (and enjoyable!) read.
The first chapter of the book deals with the history of literary criticism and theory, which he traces back to Plato and Aristotle. Aristotle encourages critical detachment and the use of technical (but elusive, as demonstrated by the controversy over the precise meaning of 'catharsis') vocabulary; Plato focuses on the moral and political function of literature as a means of positive indoctrination. Radical theory tends to assume Aristotelian language for Platonic effect, but as opposed to Plato and Aristotle’s shared view of art as a representation of the world, RLT sees literature as a means of changing the world by reinterpreting literature (based in part on Wilde’s assertion that Nature imitates Art and not the other way round).
RLT assumes authority on moral and political matters, presenting itself, as Washington puts it in an amusing simile, as the white knight rescuing literary theory from the hands of the dragon that is the bourgeoisie. Ironically, while radical theorists present their aims as a heroic struggle to bring about the liberation of the working classes, they simply want to displace the current values and aims of academic study with their own political agenda. It is the very institutions which RLT criticises which allow for its continued existence.
Having just read some of Eagleton's work, this is refreshingly critical and does not have the same moralistic and ideological overtones which made Eagleton an ordeal to get through. Washington's writing is clear, witty and well-informed, making this a thoroughly informative (and enjoyable!) read.
Displaying 1 of 1 review