Literature (The New Critical Idiom)

by Peter Widdowson

This brilliant guide provides an introductory overview of the history of 'literature' as a cultural concept, reflecting on its contemporary nature, place and function, and what the literary might mean for us today.

Genres: Nonfiction, Philosophy

240 pages, Paperback

First published December 10, 1998

Reviews

[Philip Lee]

"Literature"

by Peter Widdowson

This book explains what is meant by the term “post-modernist”. It also explores poetry and fiction of both the past and present by using post-modern critical tools. This means, it shows how ideas derived from linguistics, feminism and post-colonialism have changed critical thinking. The author presents the idea that the enjoyment of literature is a political act; and furthermore, that writers are engaged in creating alternative views of the world we live in.

We may, for example, see Shakespeare's play “The Tempest” as a commentary on the attitude of Europeans towards the native people of the New World. Although this particular play was written long before the morality of colonialism began to be criticised, nevertheless the text deconstructs itself to reveal underlying attitudes and assumptions. Likewise, nineteenth century novels such as George Eliot's “Adam Bede” are shown to contain a commentary on contemporary attitudes towards women's place in society.

More modern texts may be commentaries on literature itself. Ted Hughes' poem 'The Thought Fox' when analysed in detail reveals itself to be a poem about a poem. Other modern texts studied include poetry by Seamus Heaney (about ambivalence towards violent sectarianism), Tony Harrison (about the desecreation of his parents' grave by vandals) and Grace Nichols (about the “'double colonialisation' of being a black woman”). Also included are short critiques of fiction by Salman Rushdie (“Midnight's Children”) and Isabel Allende (“The House of the Spirits”).


Widdowson has a theory about what he calls “the literary”, which is his own hobby-horse. It's not too difficult to follow him, as he writes without pretentious references, and I think what he's saying is that the best writing is self-aware, and that good writers deploy words and expressions and use plot lines which foster new awareness in the reader.

[Kayli]

I read this book to help me with my thesis and it proved very helpful. It outlines different components of literature and how to work with them in an analytical sense. It also provides various examples to highlight the process being taken. While it is very informative and a great book for study, it was very dry to read as it is similar to a textbook. I definitely recommend it to individuals looking for direction on how to analyze literature academically.

[Teerabhat Ruensiri]

Disappointing. There are adequate sections in it but the author is obviously not skilled to do any worthwhile philosophy of literature. I feel like reading a c+ report by my student.

[Tracy Poff]

I read the first chapter of this before giving it up as a bad job. The book reads like the author swallowed a book on theory and puked it up all over the page. He spends pages and pages failing to commit to any intellectual positions, while saying "oh, I kind of agree with this thing, but it's not convenient for the way I want to talk about literature, so I'll be ignoring part of it".

Widdowson says that he'd like to consider this book as a long essay, and I've got to agree--it's like the kind of rambling, unfocused essay that undergraduates get marked down for. If the book were more concise, the chatty tone it takes might soften the rather involved theoretical questions the book (no doubt) addresses, but as it is, it's just annoying.

Much though I wanted to read a book on this topic, this book isn't it.