Describe your personal relationship to literature and to reading. Begin by considering the meaning of literature. What does the term literature mean to you? What makes something literary in your own mind? If literature means different things to different people, who defines what is and what is not literature?
Literary history is a history of the major literary traditions, movements, works, and authors of a country, region, etc. (Barber 837). The understanding of literary history allows us insight into the past, a recognition of historical events and tensions written into the works of those who witnessed them. By including societal behaviors, political tensions, and common folklore, historical authors have indirectly provided the reader with a broader and deeper understanding of the literature and the period in which it was written. Besides insight into collective societal culture, literary history has provided future writers with models of poetic device, style and content influencing literary works and building upon past literary ideas.
Genre is a kind of writing such as a proposal, a report, a letter, a profile, a poem, ECT. In this section Bullock and Goggins emphasize how “Genres have particular conventions for presenting information that help the writers write and the readers read” (9). A stance is your attitude towards your topic, how others perceive you. Bullock and Goggins point out “The way you express that stance affects the way you come across as a writer and a person” (12). The design should be determined by what circumstances your writing is
Through any and every writing, an author has a point hidden within literary elements. With literary elements authors develop a style to their writing to prove the point they intended from the beginning. There are many various literary elements to make up a rhetorical situation, to develop a side of ideas, some very commonly used in especially rhetorical situations. Like allusion, hyperbole, rhetorical questions, hypophora, and commonly simile. Mohandas K. Gandhi and Henry David Thoreau speak of and develop similar government opinions and points, through their interpretations of Civil Disobedience through literary elements; they prove similar points of civil disobedience but with their own style of writing and use of rhetorical devices.
The theme is the idea the author wishes to convey about that subject. It is expressed as a sentence or general statement about life or human nature. A literary work can have more than one theme. And most themes are not directly stated but are implied. The reader must think about all the elements of the work and use them to make inferences, or reasonable guesses, as to which themes seem to be implied.
Some may say that the written word is solely influenced by the spoken; that one’s written thoughts are a direct result of something one has personally said, heard, or interpreted. Others will argue that a story told through continuous verbal translation can only lead to a less significant conclusion than that which was originally intended. Regardless, establishing a definition for the relationship between the custom of oral tradition and the short story as a literary genre proves to be a complex argument. Oral tradition is thought to have allowed the short story genre to emerge as a tool of knowledge – to create new ideas in a permanent text rather than preserving those of oral cultures. Debates and opinions aside, the real question lies not
This ideology of writing is an attempt to establish a secure or ultimate meaning of a text. Generally, when reading poetry, one does not try to find the purest form of a word. There is always an obvious meaning to the poem on the surface, when each word is taken at face value. So, the superficial meaning of the poem does not change drastically from read to read. However, in each poem there are always several layers of meaning that exist for all readers to discover.
Stories have middle, end, and beginning poem does not consist of any of those things. There is a wide variety of poetry out there and I’m sure there are stories out there to. They both try to catch the reader’s eye. As our Ashford University text book states. Said by Richard Wilbur (b 1921) poetry draws emotions also express strong feelings.
The term “rhetoric” is defined as how writers and speakers use their words in order to influence their listeners. This plays a role of great importance when working with and reading works of writing in order for the writers to attempt to portray their overall message to others. Rhetorical analysis is the process of using critical thinking skills to break down something into different parts in order to interpret how those certain parts fit together. It is not necessarily based on opinion or includes a summary. The main goal of rhetorical analysis is mainly based around how the author writes and how they make their points, instead of keeping the focus on specifically the topic of the writing.
Hence, students of literature brought up in the tradition of Anglo-American New Criticism with its emphasis on “practical criticism” and the organic unity of the text might expect to feel at home with Russian Formalism. Although, these two forms of criticism espouse what many call the “text and text alone” approach to literary analysis, they have some certain important differences in terms of critical theoretical ideology. Through a comparative analysis, this paper tries to discuss two major differences between New Criticism and Russian Formalism; New Criticism’s humanistic, and Russian Formalism’s scientific base as of their literary critical regard and the different evaluation of Literary Canon in their critical positions and practices. The most distinctive common feature of both kinds of criticism is their aim to explore what is specifically literary in texts, and both reject the limp