good introduction to literary theory text?

[georgestrait1982]

Hello all!

I'm entering an MA program in lit next fall and am looking for a concise yet comprehensive (if possible) book covering the major bases of literary theory. I did get a "Methods of Literary Study" course as an undergrad but pooh-poohed it a fair amount at the time and would like to give myself as much of a crash course as possible before I have to start dealing with it every day as a grad student.

Someone else recommended Terry Eagleton's "Literary THeory: an introduction" but I am finding him a bit pretentious (haha) and while I can appreciate his obvious Marxist approach in other contexts, I would rather not have his particular views clouding my introduction to these theories. I am looking for something that tries to be a little more objective and to present more of a textbook style overview of the different schools of literary theory. Eagleton gives a good review of the evolution of literary crit and theory from the 1700s, but he wrote it in 83 or something and it feels a bit outdated.

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks guys!

[ktlynnjoy]

Beginning Theory by Peter Barry might be a good choice. Personally, I've only briefly worked with a few chapters for an extracurricular thing, but one of my professors uses it in his literary theory course (which I unfortunately did not get to take), and he recommended it as an accessible intro to lit theory. From what I read, it seemed pretty good.

http://www.amazon.com/Beginning-Theory-Introduction-Literary-Cultural/dp/0719079276/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1338763379&sr=8-1

[viracity]

Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael, Eds. Literary Theory: An Anthology. Wiley-Blackwell, 2004.

Huge book, tons of information on the various literary theories in the form of essays by scholars in each field. My undergraduate program was self-designed, so I had to teach myself about lit theory and I found this book incredibly helpful.

[Jbarks]

Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael, Eds. Literary Theory: An Anthology. Wiley-Blackwell, 2004.

Huge book, tons of information on the various literary theories in the form of essays by scholars in each field. My undergraduate program was self-designed, so I had to teach myself about lit theory and I found this book incredibly helpful.

I second this recommendation. We used this anthology in my literary theory MA class. It's hefty, but a great investment.

[Two Espressos]

I'd suggest just buying the Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism and jumping right into it. There's a fairly lengthy introductory chapter that covers the theoretical schools and movements, and the editors likewise include a one to three page intro to every theorist in the volume. I'm unfamiliar with most of the other texts listed here, but the Norton is definitely better than Eagleton's book, far more recent and comprehensive.

[margarethale]

Richter's "The Critical Tradition" is very thorough (and excellent)

[veniente]

I third the Rivkin and Ryan edited opus, and second the Norton and Richter suggestions. For a more pithy text, I would mention Jonathan Culler's Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction, which, from memory, was a pleasant read on the subject.

[Augusta]

For a more pithy text, I would mention Jonathan Culler's Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction, which, from memory, was a pleasant read on the subject.

I haven't read any of the other texts mentioned in this thread, although they're all on my Amazon wishlist, but I do own a copy of Culler's work. I read it just a few months ago in preparation for the GRE Literature Test. While it is very short, it's also a very good overview of the major literary theories. It introduces important names and terms, which the reader can then seek out more information about in a more comprehensive text.

[cowglands]

I enjoyed Eagleton's Literary Theory: An Introduction, but only as a companion guide to the writings of the original theorist, (or a student.) I agree he is more than a bit pretentious, but some of his charm comes from the unending string of jibes against anything non-Marxist.

[hopscotcher]

The Cullers one is both barely readable and (sometimes) misinformed. It's incredibly reductive pertaining to specific schools and (at least a few times) misuses terminology and conflates theories.

It's a terrible way to get the context of Theory. And again, his writing style leaves much to be desired.

I'll agree with the Norton. It's great: expansive, organized, and contextual.

[Grunty DaGnome]

The best overview materials I ever found were the Literary Theory Yale Lecture Series, which I downloaded on my iPad.

[user_name]

http://oyc.yale.edu/english/engl-300

fuck reading. TV! TV! TV! TV!

[Grunty DaGnome]

http://oyc.yale.edu/english/engl-300

fuck reading. TV! TV! TV! TV!

Yup, that's the one I meant. Paul Fry is excellent; clear without being simplistic.

[sunshan]

Are there any other good courses for download from iTunes? My eyes can only take so much reading a day - listening would be a nice change!

[Historiogaffe]

The Paul Fry course is wonderful. I listened to the audio version. I've actually listened to certain episodes multiple times, as they're so much fun, and both thorough and thoroughly accessible. I'm not hugely familiar with theory, though I say this coming from an undergraduate program with a preponderance of theoryheads, so I may have osmosed a fair amount at pub nights. (Nerrrds and beeeer.) But... yes. I'm just going to blather on about how great the course is.

Broader point being that I've looked for other overviews via iTunes and haven't found any. There are a couple of lectures by important theorists (one fabulous one by Butler, I think, and another great though more specific on religion by Derrida).

[hopscotcher]

The Paul Fry course is great but sort of useless if you aren't actively reading the texts.

[Historiogaffe]

The Paul Fry course is great but sort of useless if you aren't actively reading the texts.

I actually disagree here; I wasn't reading any of the texts when I listened to it. A relevant caveat might be that I'd read a few of the texts before (Marx, Saussure), or was vaguely familiar with the gist of the ideas (e.g. I hadn't yet read Gender Trouble, but was familiar with Butler's idea in broad strokes). But I found it helpful for material I hadn't read too (most of it -- e.g. Russian formalism; Jameson).That said, it won't turn you into a theory-head without giving other things, like the Norton, a look -- the benefits are that Fry's explanations are very accessible, and it will get you comfortable thinking about and approaching theoretical texts.

[nokingofengland]

Yeah, I agree with Proper here. If you're familiar with the major ideas of any given school, Fry's courses are an excellent intro. I watched most of his lectures on youtube. I found them very helpful, esp. for schools with which I had had little or no previous contact. Great starting point. The only thing is (and I know this is really shallow) his voice gets on my nerves for some reason. I can only take an hour at a time, and that's already pushing it.

Just putting it out there.

[user_name]

The only thing is (and I know this is really shallow) his voice gets on my nerves for some reason. I can only take an hour at a time, and that's already pushing it.

Plus it is mastered horribly. I have listen to it with my headphones all the way up. It's Yale; you think they'd hire a decent sound guy to edit it.

[NowMoreSerious]

I actually disagree here; I wasn't reading any of the texts when I listened to it. A relevant caveat might be that I'd read a few of the texts before (Marx, Saussure), or was vaguely familiar with the gist of the ideas (e.g. I hadn't yet read Gender Trouble, but was familiar with Butler's idea in broad strokes). But I found it helpful for material I hadn't read too (most of it -- e.g. Russian formalism; Jameson).That said, it won't turn you into a theory-head without giving other things, like the Norton, a look -- the benefits are that Fry's explanations are very accessible, and it will get you comfortable thinking about and approaching theoretical texts.

I think more than anything the benefit of Fry's video series is that he historicizes and contextualizes everything relationally. Yes, it is a bit linear obviously, since they are 1 hour-ish courses and in a certain order, but he always connects the ideas of critics and theorists to each other.

I thought his treatment of Jameson was ok. I'm not trying to be a hipstery idiot by saying that either. Obviously Fry's a brilliant scholar, but as a huge fan of The Political Unconscious I felt his treatment lacked a bit, though I am 100% sure I would have done far, far worse trying to contract that entire book into one lecture.

[Historiogaffe]

The only thing is (and I know this is really shallow) his voice gets on my nerves for some reason. I can only take an hour at a time, and that's already pushing it.

I love your comment, noking. I found that, too, at first, but then his voice grew on me (sort of a dweeby remix of wry earnestness). I completely get where you're coming from in part because of an 18th-century course I took where, due to having not-so-brilliantly WAY overloaded on courses that term, I listened to all the books for that specific course as audiobooks from Librivox. There's this one reader on their edition of Tom Jones who just drives me up the WALL. I couldn't even listen for 15 minutes at a time, and I love Jones. Unfortunately, this guy was one of the most prolific of the several readers.

I thought his treatment of Jameson was ok. I'm not trying to be a hipstery idiot by saying that either. Obviously Fry's a brilliant scholar, but as a huge fan of The Political Unconscious I felt his treatment lacked a bit, though I am 100% sure I would have done far, far worse trying to contract that entire book into one lecture.

The image of hipstery professors gives me such pained joy. I hope the profession's around long enough for a hipster emerita to develop.

[lolopixie]

Richter's "The Critical Tradition" is very thorough (and excellent)

We used this as our primary text in my MA theory course, and coupled it with Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice by Charles Bressler. I recommend using a text like this as well because it simplifies the theories and gives the big hitting points. It really helped to read this simplified theory book while learning the theories to get a better grasp with the basics and then utilizing a book like Richter's to bring in the heavier information and direct texts.