Romantic Tradition & Modern Thinking in Literary Criticism
Topic X: The Romantic Tradition and the Emergence of Modern Thinking in Literary Criticism
The Shift in Literary Studies
In the latter half of the 13th century, a significant cultural transformation began to unfold, giving rise to what we now broadly refer to as literary studies. While previous chapters focused on identifying underlying commonalities despite differences, our focus now shifts to exploring differences within a shared identity. We are examining the historical horizon in which we currently exist. As Gadamer noted, achieving objective understanding of our own historical context is challenging due to our immersion within it. Therefore, our interpretations must be provisional. We must strive for understanding by establishing a distance, unlike when examining earlier periods where temporal distance was readily available.
Understanding vs. Critical Self-Reflection
When studying historical traditions, our primary goal was understanding in the Gadamerian sense—accepting the truth claims of texts and seeking agreement with them. However, as we approach contemporaneity, our focus shifts towards critical self-reflection. This self-reflection, applied to our field of knowledge, necessitates emphasizing the historical nature of both literary criticism and literature itself.
The Evolution of Literary Criticism
Initially, literary criticism wasn’t defined by its opposition to theory or history, but by its contrast with classical poetics. It was a subgenre or part of a broader discourse known as Criticism, culminating in Kantian philosophy. Literary criticism rationally examined the traditions embedded within poetry. The concept of literature arose because the existing concept of poetry proved inadequate for describing new forms of discourse like the novel and tragicomedy. This new concept of literature signaled a departure from the ideas of Pinziano Cascales, as it valued poetic forms that lacked traditional models.
The Rise of “Literature”
Around 1800, Mme. de Staël’s publication, De la littérature considérée dans ses rapports avec les institutions sociales, solidified the use of “literature” to mean a collection of texts from a specific period or country, and as the art of writing distinct from other arts. However, the term’s meaning remained ambiguous in the early 19th century. The challenge was to ascribe “poetic value” to texts not traditionally considered poetry, leading to uncertainty about which texts qualified as “literature” in the sense of “products of intellectual expression.”
Defining Literary Value
The primary hurdle for literary criticism became establishing literary value itself—determining which discourses are classified as literary based on specific characteristics. Before the institutionalization of literary studies, literary criticism wasn’t defined by analyzing specific texts or authors, unlike theory, which studies general literary principles, or history, which traces the evolution of literary objects.
The Influence of Romanticism
Both “higher criticism” (what we now call critical theory) and critical journalism existed because they diverged from traditional poetry. They liberated themselves (initially in the name of reason, later in the name of genius) from the constraints of traditional poetic concepts, creating a new object—the concept of literature—defined by semantic features like “free,” “autonomous,” “individual,” and “great.”
The Romantic Writer
The Romantic era elevated the writer’s status. The poet, once considered eccentric, surpassed the philosopher in prominence. The poet became the seat of not only logos but also Sophia, a wisdom previously denied. Pierre Bénichou viewed this revaluation as an attempt to reconcile traditionally opposed philosophical and religious views with faith in humanity, maintaining balance in a post-revolutionary society. Literature assumed a new responsibility, inaugurating a mythology of the writer as extraordinary, uniquely created in God’s image.
Historicism and Literary History
Another key aspect of Romantic theory is the historicism of modernity. Schiller’s distinction between naive and sentimental poetry offered an early formulation of this historical sense applied to poetry. Sentimental poetry was seen as a consequence of modern society’s advanced culture. This led to viewing history, and literary history, as a progression of spiritual development.
Schlegel and the Theory of Interpretation
Friedrich Schlegel is considered a key figure in Romantic criticism, contributing not only to romantic theory but also to ideas about literary history and criticism. René Wellek even regards Schlegel as the father of hermeneutics, or the theory of interpretation.
Romanticism in Spain
In Spain, critics like Albert Lista, Quintana, and Martínez de la Rosa paved the way for Romantic ideas. Agustín Durán’s 1828 Discurso was pivotal, criticizing the “ridiculous mania” of evaluating Spanish National Theatre (Lope de Vega and Calderón) by the same standards as Greek, Roman, and French neoclassical drama. Mariano José de Larra stands out as a key figure in Spanish literary criticism, incorporating genuinely modern Romantic concepts, such as literature as an expression of national spiritual progress, the relativity of taste, and the necessity of criticism.
The University and Literary Studies
Romanticism profoundly transformed the university setting, influencing philologists and literary researchers. Manuel Milá y Fontanals’s early works prefigured his Estética y teoría literaria, a foundational work of modern literary theory in Spain.