Intentional Fallacy & Affective Fallacy | Wimsatt & Beardsley | New Criticism | Literary Theory
Summary
TLDRThis video explores two key concepts from New Criticism: intentional fallacy and affective fallacy, as introduced by Wimsatt and Beardsley. Intentional fallacy warns against trying to discern an author's intent from their personal life, while affective fallacy argues that a reader's emotional response does not determine a work's literary value. The video emphasizes New Criticism's focus on close reading, where only the text matters, independent of the author's biography or the reader's feelings. The host also explains the concept of an 'autotellic text,' a self-contained, unified literary work.
Takeaways
- 📘 New Criticism is an American literary approach that focuses on close reading of the text, disregarding external factors like the author's background or historical context.
- 🔍 The concept of the 'autotelic text' in New Criticism means that the text is complete and self-sufficient, needing no reference to the author's life or external circumstances.
- ✍️ Intentional Fallacy refers to the mistaken belief that a critic should try to discover the author's intentions behind a work, when the text itself should provide all necessary meaning.
- 📖 The belief that the author's life story or personal background is essential to understanding a text is considered incorrect in the New Criticism framework.
- 🧐 William K. Wimsatt and Monroe C. Beardsley argue that it is impossible to fully understand an author’s true intentions, especially if they are no longer alive.
- 💡 Affective Fallacy describes the error of evaluating a text based on the emotional response it elicits in readers, which can vary based on personal experiences.
- ❌ Emotional reactions do not determine the literary value of a work; just because a work moves readers to tears does not mean it is a great piece of literature.
- 🔗 The feelings and sentiments expressed in a poem should be attributed to the speaker or narrator, not the poet, according to Wimsatt and Beardsley.
- 📚 The core belief of New Criticism is that the text alone is the primary focus for analysis, and both the author's intentions and the reader's emotional responses are irrelevant.
- 😊 The speaker briefly discusses personal reasons for a recent absence from creating content, mentioning recovering from COVID-19, and promises to be more active moving forward.
Q & A
What is the main focus of New Criticism?
-New Criticism focuses on the close reading of the text itself, disregarding the author's historical background, life story, or the reader's emotional reactions. The text is viewed as a complete and unified entity.
What do New Critics mean by 'autotellic text'?
-The term 'autotellic text' refers to the belief that a literary work is complete and self-contained, meaning the text itself holds all the meaning, without needing external context such as the author's background or reader's reactions.
Who coined the terms 'Intentional Fallacy' and 'Affective Fallacy'?
-The terms 'Intentional Fallacy' and 'Affective Fallacy' were coined by American literary critics William K. Wimsatt and Monroe C. Beardsley.
What is the concept of 'Intentional Fallacy'?
-'Intentional Fallacy' refers to the mistaken belief that a critic should attempt to uncover the author's intention behind a literary work. Wimsatt and Beardsley argued that the intention, if present, is within the text itself, and examining the author's personal life or intentions is unnecessary.
Why do Wimsatt and Beardsley reject the idea of trying to find the author's intention?
-They reject this idea because it's impossible to accurately determine the author's intention, especially if the author is no longer alive. Even if the author is alive, interviews or statements may not reveal their true intention.
What does 'Affective Fallacy' refer to?
-'Affective Fallacy' is the mistaken belief that a literary work's value can be determined by the emotional response it evokes in readers. Wimsatt and Beardsley argue that emotions are subjective and influenced by the reader's own experiences, and should not be used to judge the quality of the work.
How do New Critics view the relationship between the text and the author's life?
-New Critics believe that a text is independent of the author's life and personal experiences. The meaning of a text should be derived solely from the text itself, without considering the author's biography.
Why is the reader's emotional reaction not important in New Criticism?
-According to New Criticism, the reader's emotional reaction is irrelevant because it is influenced by personal experiences, not by the intrinsic value or meaning of the text itself. The text should stand on its own, independent of how it emotionally affects the reader.
How does New Criticism differ from historical or biographical approaches to literature?
-New Criticism differs by ignoring the author's historical context, life events, and external factors. In contrast, historical or biographical approaches consider the author's background and the cultural context when interpreting a literary work.
What are the main works by Wimsatt and Beardsley associated with these concepts?
-Wimsatt and Beardsley's most important work is 'The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry,' which includes essays on 'Intentional Fallacy' and 'Affective Fallacy.'
Outlines
📚 Introduction to Intentional and Affective Fallacies in New Criticism
In this opening paragraph, the speaker introduces the concepts of 'intentional fallacy' and 'affective fallacy,' which are key terms in New Criticism, coined by William K. Wimsatt and Monroe C. Beardsley. The video sets the stage to discuss these terms in relation to close reading of literary texts, where the author's background, the historical context, or the reader's emotional response is considered irrelevant. The speaker encourages viewers to subscribe to the channel and hit the bell icon for updates.
🧐 The Emergence of New Criticism and Its Focus on Textual Autonomy
This paragraph dives into the core beliefs of New Criticism, which emerged in America. New Criticism advocates for 'close reading' of the text itself, dismissing the relevance of the author's biography, historical context, and the reader's personal reactions. The text is viewed as an 'autotelic' or self-contained entity, meaning that it holds a unified identity independent of external factors. The paragraph further introduces Wimsatt and Beardsley's work, particularly their significant contribution through the book *The Verbal Icon*, which contains the essays on intentional and affective fallacies.
❌ The Intentional Fallacy: Avoiding the Author's Intentions
The term 'intentional fallacy' refers to the mistaken belief that a critic should seek the author's intention when interpreting a text. Wimsatt and Beardsley argue that if an author is deceased, it is impossible to determine their true intent. Even if an author is alive, any statements regarding their intentions cannot be entirely trusted. Therefore, critics should focus solely on the text rather than investigating the author's life or personal clues. The author's intention, if present, is already embedded within the text.
🗣️ Intentional Fallacy: Separating the Poet from the Speaker
Wimsatt and Beardsley assert that the emotions and sentiments expressed in a poem should not be confused with the poet's own feelings. Instead, these should be attributed to the speaker or narrator of the poem. For example, when analyzing Coleridge's *The Rime of the Ancient Mariner*, critics should not assume that the emotions expressed are Coleridge's personal feelings, but rather those of the poem's speaker. This supports their argument that searching for the author's personal intent is irrelevant to literary criticism.
💔 The Affective Fallacy: Reader’s Emotional Reaction vs. Literary Value
The 'affective fallacy' highlights the error of confusing the emotional response of the reader with the literary value of the text. Wimsatt and Beardsley emphasize that just because a reader feels emotionally moved by a text does not mean it holds greater literary merit. The emotional reaction is more reflective of the reader's personal life experiences and mood rather than the quality of the work itself. Thus, the emotional impact should not be used as a measure of a text's greatness.
📖 The Text as an Independent and Unified Entity
In this paragraph, the speaker reiterates that Wimsatt and Beardsley believed the text is autonomous, complete in itself, and independent of both the author’s intentions and the reader's reactions. The text should be analyzed on its own merit through close reading. The speaker summarizes the key points discussed in the video, including the definitions of intentional and affective fallacies, the importance of the autotelic nature of the text, and New Criticism’s emphasis on the text's independence.
💬 Closing Remarks and Personal Update
The video concludes with the speaker providing a personal update, explaining their absence from the channel due to a COVID-19 infection and post-recovery challenges. The speaker expresses gratitude to the audience for their patience and reassures them that regular content will resume. The video ends with a call to stay connected on social media platforms and a heartfelt thank you to viewers for their support.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡New Criticism
💡Intentional Fallacy
💡Affective Fallacy
💡Autotellic Text
💡Close Reading
💡William K. Wimsatt
💡Monroe C. Beardsley
💡Verbal Icon
💡Speaker/Narrator
💡Historical Context
Highlights
Introduction to the video discussing intentional fallacy and affective fallacy in New Criticism.
Intentional and affective fallacies are terms coined by William Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley.
New Criticism focuses on close reading of texts, disregarding historical background, author biography, and reader reactions.
The text is considered autotelic in New Criticism, meaning it is complete in itself and independent of external factors.
Wimsatt and Beardsley's work 'The Verbal Icon: Studies in the Meaning of Poetry' includes essays on intentional fallacy and affective fallacy.
Intentional fallacy refers to the mistaken belief that critics can determine the author's intention behind a work through biographical or historical context.
It is impossible to determine the true intention of a long-deceased author, and even if an author is alive, interviews may not reveal the real intentions.
Critics should focus on the text itself, as the intention, if present, is found within the text.
The feelings expressed in a poem should be attributed to the speaker or narrator, not the poet personally.
Affective fallacy refers to the mistaken belief that the emotional response of readers determines the literary value of a text.
Readers' emotional reactions are influenced by their own moods and life experiences, not necessarily by the quality of the literary work.
The emotional impact of a literary work on readers should not be used to evaluate its greatness or quality.
Wimsatt and Beardsley argue that the text is independent of both the author's intention and the reader's emotional response.
The video explains that the text is a unified and complete identity, and critics should not rely on external factors for interpretation.
The creator of the video mentioned their absence due to COVID-19 but promises to be more consistent with future content.
Transcripts
hello everyone welcome to learning
literature with burba
in today's video we are going to talk
about intentional fallacy and effective
fallacy these are the terms associated
with new criticism and they're coined by
william kevin sad and monroe c beardsley
so if you haven't yet subscribed to our
channel then do subscribe to it and hit
the bell icon so that you never miss an
update
so before we talk about intentional
fallacy and effective fallacy let's take
a look at new criticism so new criticism
emerged in america it was the new way of
critiquing literary works that is why it
was called new criticism and new
criticism focused on close reading of
the text
so the new critics believed that the
historical background of the author the
society and culture during which the
author wrote the person a life story of
the author the author's own background
biography
nothing matters the reader's reaction to
the text does not matter the only thing
that matters is the text alone so only
the text matters
and therefore another term associated
with new criticism is autotellic text
the new critics believed that the text
is complete in itself it is a unified
identity every text is complete in
itself we do not need to refer to the
historical background of the author the
author's life story the reader's
reactions the cultural conditions
nothing matters only the text matters
and therefore the new critics focused on
close reading of the text
william k wimsatt and monroe cbhd went
to american literary critics their most
important work is the verbal icon
studies in the meaning of poetry where
we have the famous essays the
intentional fallacy and the affective
fallacy
so let's first take a look at the
intentional fallacy
now the word fallacy means mistaken
belief or false reasoning
the critic should never try to find the
intention of the poet behind writing a
particular poem
if there is any intention it is there in
the poem itself the critic should not
try to investigate
the author's life story or other
personal clues
in order to try to find out the
intention of the poet behind writing a
particular poem
so the belief
that there is an intention in the mind
of the poet while writing a poem
and that it is the critics job to find
out that intention
is actually a fallacy it is a mistaken
belief
it is not possible to find out the
intention of the author behind writing a
particular work
because if the author is not alive then
it is impossible to find out what was
the intention
because if we try to think why chaucer
wrote the canterbury tales we can never
find out the real intention of chaucer
we can only guess that
this can be the intention of chaucer but
these will only be guesses at the end of
the day
and if the author is alive then even by
taking interviews a critic can never be
sure that the author is telling the
truth that the author is revealing his
or her true intention behind writing a
particular work
therefore the critic should not waste
time by reading the personal life story
of the author
and trying to figure out what was the
intention of the author behind writing a
particular work it is a waste of time
and it is not the job of the critic
windsor and weirdly believed that the
life story of the author should be of
interest to the historian not to a
literary critic
wimpson and beardsley also believed that
the feelings and sentiments expressed in
the poem should not be attributed to the
poet but should be attributed to the
speaker or the narrator for example
coleridge wrote the rhyme of the ancient
marina but we should not say that
everything that is written in the poem
they are cholera's personal feelings and
sentiments no
we should say that these are the
feelings and sentiments of the speaker
of the poem
so that is what windsor and beardsley
meant by intentional fallacy
that the belief that there is an
intention in the mind of the poet while
writing a poem and that it is the
critics shocked to figure out that
intention
is a fallacy the intention if there is
there in the text itself the critic
should not read the author's personal
life story and try to find out what was
the intention of the author behind
writing a particular work
now we will look at the next term
affective fallacy
sometimes
readers get very much emotional while
reading a particular poem or a novel the
readers get emotionally affected they
get moved to tears even while reading a
novel or a poem
windsor and beardsley said
that just because some readers are
getting emotionally affected by a
particular work that does not mean it is
a great work of literature the value of
a literary work should never be confused
by the emotional
effect that it is arousing in readers
just because readers are getting
affected by the work emotionally that
does not mean it is a great literary
work
so that is what wimshurt and beardsley
meant by affective fallacy because they
say it that the reader's own mood and
life experiences
have a lot to do with how the reader is
reacting to a particular novel on a
particular poem it has nothing to do
with the text or the quality of the
literary work and therefore how the
reader is getting affected emotionally
to a particular literary work does not
mean that it is a great work of
literature and that is what wimsa and
blc meant by affective fallacy
so they said that the text is
independent of the
author and the reader the text is
autotellic it is and unified identity it
is complete in itself it is not
dependent on the author's intention it
is not dependent on how a reader is
reacting
while reading the literary work
so that was all for today's video where
we looked at these two concepts
intentional fallacy and effective
fallacy given by wimsatt and bhc we also
looked at
new criticism what is autotellic text
and the importance of closed reading
i'll be back very soon with a new video
on a literary work or a literary theory
now i was absent for quite some time and
that is because i was tested covered
positive i was not well i was having a
lot of post covet cuff and that is why
it was not present for one month here in
the channel and i missed all of you
thank you so much for hanging on and now
i will be quite regular with the videos
thank you so much do stay connected on
facebook and instagram and thank you so
much for watching
[Music]
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
Who decides what art means? - Hayley Levitt
10 Types of Literary Criticism
Literary Theory 1: New Criticism - Concept + Questions - NTA UGC NET English - Sunaina Jethani
What is Formalism? | A Comprehensive Guide to Literary Criticism
How to Make a Double-Sided Journal (Dialectical Journal)
Fallacies: Appeal to Hypocrisy
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)