“Socrates was the first person to distinguish between the ability to criticize literature and the ability to compose it.” –Abercrombie
Is old criticism still “good” criticism?
“The realm of criticism is occupied by the activities of three distinct powers: the power to CREATE; the power to ENJOY; the power to CRITICIZE.
“The powers to criticize can be acquired, with process and system to be studied, and deliberately put into practice.
“There are no principles which will tell you how to create literature, nor how to enjoy it.”
“Criticism consists in asking and answering rational questions about literature.”
Basically two kinds of criticism, or critical inquiry, can be determined: studying the function of literature, the nature of literature, the theory of literature (aesthetics). The second, criticism proper, may be called practical criticism (studying unique qualities in actual concrete examples of literature).
“The history of criticism has been very largely the history of attempts to formulate rules for criticism. But rules derived from some particular instances in one kind of literature…have been found wanting.
“Only the principles which express the nature, and define the function, of literature in general can determine what is essential in any kind of literature; and only by appealing to what is essential can criticism provide itself with trustworthy rules.”
So where does one begin? At the beginning: “The first and most celebrated of all systematic theories of literature? Aristotle’s Poetics.” [That’s old.]
“Aristotle raises almost all the problems out of which emerge the principles required by criticism for its security.” (But he doesn’t always solve the problems satisfactorily, yet he compels us to consider them exactly. How could he ever imagine a Catcher in the Rye or À la recherche du temps perdu–or even Joyce’s Ulysses?)