Summary
In his article “Tackling Textuality – With Theory”, The Use of English (Volume 52, Number 1, Autumn 2000), Peter Barry argues that “close reading” on its own is not enough to fully understand works of literature, and that literary theory therefore is a necessary complement. He appears to be criticizing the lack of the latter in introductory courses, though his argument also applies to literary studies in general. Through several examples and analogies Barry (often humorously) explains the fundamental concepts involved in interpreting literature, and in doing so, argues his case in favor of literary theory. He starts by listing and discussing ten typical close-reading approaches, which include identifying large-scale and small-scale patterns, explicit and implicit content, literal and metaphorical meaning, similarities and dissimilarities, as well as understanding the different stages of a work, the implications of its genre, and the original semantic intent. Stressing the fact that these are all essential to the interpretation of literature, and that they are irreplaceable, Barry still do not think that they are enough. His claim is essentialy that close reading can merely be used to focus on the text itself, whereas literary theory takes into account the world surrounding the text – by considering literature in its relationship to history, language, gender and psychoanalysis, respectively. Barry explains these four cornerstones in turn by analyzing a famous sonnet by Shakespeare, and tries to show that they fit together well with ordinary, close-reading methodologies. In his example, he uses literary theory to perform historical interpretation, to examine the use of deeper language features, to find characterstics due to the author's gender, and finally to consider implicit content as a means for the author to persuade readers. Barry then chooses to dig deeper into the relationship between literature and language, by focusing on the process of deconstructive reading (which basically means to look for contradictions within the text – to break its harmony), which he claims is helpful in literary theory and bears striking resemblences to close-reading practises. A “deconstructor”, he says, looks for paradoxes, linguistic pecularities, shifts, and information left out. Barry exempliefies these approaches with two additional, multilayered poems. He thus shows how literary theory can be used to reveal more information without necessarily using additional sources than the text itself. Having thus exemplified some of the uses of literary theory, Barry also acknowledges its complexities and difficulties, but concludes with two reasons for using it nevertheless: problems exist that do require complex interpretations, and it can be both rewarding and entertaining.
Tags: literary studies, literary interpretation, close reading, literary theory, deconstructive reading
