Assignment 109 "Figurative Frontiers: Analyzing I. A. Richards's 'Practical Criticism' Across Cultures & Time"

This blog digital representative version of An assignment is part of a task which is based on the academic paper Literary Theory & Criticism and Indian Aesthetics, The assignment is based on Unit 1, I A Richards's The Practical Criticism - Figurative Language. The Assignment task was given by Dr. Dilip Barad, and for the reference of the task detail reading click here. Certainly, here's a unique and intriguing answer so, this blog is given out under this topic…

* Personal Details:- 

Name:- Hiral Vaitha 

Roll No:- 10 

Semester:- 2(Batch 2023-25) 

Enrollment No:- 5108230046 

Email Id:- hiralvaitha2@gmail.com

* Academic Assignment Details:- 

Paper Name:- Literary Theory & Criticism and Indian Aesthetics

Paper Code:- 22402

Paper No:- 109

Topic:- "Figurative Frontiers: Analyzing I. A. Richards's 'Practical Criticism' Across Cultures & Time"

Submitted to:- Smt. S. B. Gardi Department of English, MKBU. 

Date Of Submission:- 26 April,2024.

* Table of Contents:- 

• Abstract 
• Keywords 
• Introduction
• Theoretical Framework

• Methodology

• Universal vs. Culturally Specific Aspects
• Comparative Analysis of Figurative Language
• Conclusion
• References

Abstract:-

This comparative study delves into the nuanced understanding and varied interpretations of figurative language within I. A. Richards's seminal work, 'The Practical Criticism'. By analyzing literary interpretations across diverse cultures and historical epochs, this research elucidates the universal and culturally specific aspects of figurative language appreciation. Theoretical underpinnings on the significance of figurative language in literature are explored, providing a framework for understanding its role in shaping literary interpretations. Methodologically, a comparative approach is employed, selecting literary critiques from different cultural contexts and time periods, and subjecting them to rigorous analysis to discern patterns of interpretation.

The comparative analysis dissects the employment of metaphors, similes, and other forms of figurative language within 'The Practical Criticism', juxtaposing them against interpretations from various cultural and historical milieus. Through this comparative lens, commonalities and disparities in the understanding and appreciation of figurative language emerge, shedding light on the dynamic interplay between universality and cultural specificity in literary interpretation. Moreover, the study illuminates universal themes and symbols that transcend cultural boundaries, while also highlighting the intricate cultural nuances that shape interpretative frameworks. Ultimately, this research contributes to a deeper comprehension of figurative language's impact on literary analysis and underscores the importance of cultural context in shaping interpretative practices.

Keywords:-

• Figurative language
• Literary interpretation
• Cultural context
• Comparative analysis
• I. A. Richards

Introduction:-

Figurative language serves as a cornerstone of literary expression, imbuing texts with layers of meaning and evoking vivid imagery that resonates with readers across cultures and time periods. At the forefront of understanding and dissecting the intricacies of figurative language stands I. A. Richards, whose seminal work, 'The Practical Criticism', remains a beacon in literary criticism. This introduction provides a brief overview of Richards's influential text and elucidates the significance of figurative language within the realm of literary analysis.

I. A. Richards's 'The Practical Criticism' pioneered a groundbreaking approach to literary criticism, focusing on the close reading and interpretation of texts devoid of authorial attribution or historical context. Through this method, Richards aimed to uncover the raw, unfiltered responses of readers, revealing the inherent complexities and nuances of literary interpretation. Central to this endeavor is the exploration of figurative language, encompassing metaphors, similes, and other rhetorical devices that enrich textual meaning and provoke emotional resonance.

The importance of figurative language in literary analysis cannot be overstated. It serves as a conduit for conveying abstract concepts, eliciting emotional responses, and engaging readers on multiple levels of comprehension. Figurative language transcends linguistic barriers and cultural divides, offering a universal mode of expression that resonates with audiences across diverse backgrounds. In light of its paramount significance, this comparative study endeavors to delve into the varied interpretations and nuanced understanding of figurative language within 'The Practical Criticism', spanning different cultural contexts and historical epochs.

The purpose of this comparative analysis is twofold: firstly, to elucidate the universal and culturally specific aspects of figurative language appreciation, and secondly, to underscore the importance of cultural context in shaping interpretative practices. By examining literary interpretations across diverse cultures and time periods, this research aims to discern patterns of interpretation, identify commonalities and disparities in understanding, and shed light on the dynamic interplay between universality and cultural specificity in literary interpretation. Through this endeavor, we seek to deepen our comprehension of figurative language's impact on literary analysis and underscore its enduring relevance in shaping our understanding of the human experience.

Theoretical Framework:-

In his seminal work 'Practical Criticism' (1929), I.A. Richards laid the groundwork for New Criticism, advocating for a meticulous examination of poetic texts focusing on their internal mechanisms rather than extraneous contextual factors. While figurative language is not the sole focus of Richards's approach, he acknowledges its profound influence on shaping a poem's meaning and eliciting reader responses. Central to Richards's framework are the Four Modes of Meaning, which he posits as the primary channels through which words in poetry convey significance. 

• Sense: Literal or denotative meaning of words.
• Feeling: Emotive or suggestive power of words.
• Tone: Attitude conveyed through word choice and arrangement. 
• Intention: The poet's purpose behind using specific language.

Richards contends that figurative language permeates all four modes of meaning, as exemplified by how metaphors alter the literal sense of words to evoke emotive associations. While Richards emphasizes the importance of close textual analysis, he does not discount the significance of context entirely. He acknowledges that the context of the poem itself, including surrounding words and figurative devices, profoundly influences readers' interpretations of the four modes of meaning. Figurative language, in particular, proves adept at shaping readers' emotional responses and overall engagement with the poem. For instance, a simile comparing a rose to fire not only alters the literal sense but also evokes a complex array of emotions, intertwining beauty with danger due to the connotations associated with fire.

One of Richards's notable critiques is directed at what he terms the "Heresy of Paraphrase," wherein a poem is reduced to a mere summary or paraphrase. He argues that such an approach fails to capture the richness and complexity inherent in poetic language, especially the nuances created by figurative devices. More, Richards's framework places a unique emphasis on reader response, recognizing the active role readers play in constructing meaning through their interpretations of figurative language and the four modes of meaning. While acknowledging the importance of context, Richards prioritizes the poem as an object in itself, with figurative language serving as a primary tool for shaping its meaning and resonance.

                     (Barad)(“I.A. Richards on Rhetoric”)

Methodology:-

Here's a response focusing on the methodology I.A. Richards employs in "The Practical Criticism" to analyze figurative language, incorporating unique points and referencing credible academic sources:

I.A. Richards's Methodology for Figurative Language in "The Practical Criticism"

In "The Practical Criticism," I.A. Richards outlines a methodology for close reading that emphasizes careful attention to a poem's language, particularly figurative language. Here are some key aspects of his approach:

• Close Reading:

Richards emphasizes the importance of meticulously examining the poem's words, syntax, and imagery. This involves paying close attention to how figurative language is used and how it contributes to the poem's overall meaning and effect.

• Contextualization:

While Richards prioritizes the text itself, he acknowledges the importance of some context. This might involve considering the poem's historical period, literary tradition, or the poet's biography. However, the primary focus remains on how the language itself functions within the poem.

• Dissociation of Sense and Feeling:

Richards distinguishes between "sense" (literal meaning) and "feeling" (emotional response evoked by the language). Figurative language plays a crucial role in shaping the reader's "feeling" towards the poem's subject matter. By analyzing how figurative language deviates from literal meaning, Richards helps readers understand the poem's emotional impact.

• The Reader's Experience:

Central to Richards's methodology is the reader's active participation in constructing meaning. Figurative language is not simply an ornament added to the poem; it is a tool that shapes the reader's experience. By analyzing how figurative language functions, Richards helps readers become more aware of their own responses to the poem. 

• Unique Aspects of Richards's Methodology

Emphasis on Neutrality: Richards advocated for a neutral approach to reading, avoiding imposing personal interpretations or biases onto the poem. The focus is on understanding how the language itself works to generate meaning and feeling.

• Multiple Reading:

Richards acknowledges the possibility of multiple valid interpretations of a poem. His methodology encourages close attention to the details of the language, allowing readers to arrive at their own informed interpretations while considering the various effects of figurative language.

(Culler)(Maria)

Universal vs. Culturally Specific Aspects:-

In "The Practical Criticism," I.A. Richards champions a close reading approach that prioritizes the examination of language itself, delving into its nuances and intricacies. However, within his framework, the tension between universal and culturally specific aspects of figurative language becomes apparent. Richards acknowledges that while some elements of figurative language may tap into universal cognitive processes, such as the creation of connections through metaphors, others exhibit culturally specific nuances that shape their interpretation. 

On one hand, Richards recognizes universal aspects inherent in figurative language. He posits that certain cognitive universals underlie the use of figurative language, such as the ability of metaphors to create connections between seemingly dissimilar concepts, a function deeply rooted in human cognition. Furthermore, figurative language has the capacity to evoke emotions that are universally recognized, transcending cultural boundaries to elicit responses such as joy, sadness, or fear.

Conversely, Richards acknowledges the existence of culturally specific aspects in the interpretation of figurative language. Symbolic meanings attached to particular words or phrases can vary significantly across cultures, leading to diverse interpretations. For example, while a rose may symbolize love in Western cultures, it may hold different connotations in other cultural contexts. Additionally, Richards highlights the importance of historical context in understanding figurative language, particularly in older works where cultural references or allusions may be unfamiliar to contemporary readers.

Within Richards's approach, he emphasizes the poet's intention to communicate effectively, recognizing the role of figurative language in evoking responses from readers. Despite acknowledging cultural variations, Richards underscores the significance of the reader's engagement with the text, striving to grasp both the universal and culturally specific aspects of the language. He introduces the concept of the "ideal reader," positing that this hypothetical reader possesses the requisite knowledge and sensitivity to fully comprehend the nuances of figurative language, bridging the gap between universal themes and culturally specific interpretations.

(Maria) (MAMBROL) (“Cognitive Blame Is Socially Shaped”)

Comparative Analysis of Figurative Language:-

I.A. Richards's "The Practical Criticism" (1929) stands as a seminal work in literary criticism, championing the practice of close reading and delving into the intricate ways in which figurative language shapes a poem's meaning and impact on the reader. Richards's approach underscores the importance of effective communication in poetry, highlighting how metaphors, similes, and other figures of speech offer fresh perspectives that extend beyond literal interpretation. Moreover, Richards introduces the concept of the Four Modes of Meaning, wherein he elucidates how figurative language significantly influences the emotional response and tone of a poem, alongside the poet's intended message. This emphasis on the communicative power of figurative language distinguishes Richards's approach from other critical frameworks.

In comparing Richards's approach with New Criticism, similarities emerge in their shared emphasis on close reading and the intrinsic significance of analyzing the text itself. Both perspectives recognize the indispensable role of figurative language in conveying a poem's meaning and eliciting an emotional response from the reader. However, a notable difference lies in the New Critics' tendency to focus more on the internal structure and symbolism of the poem, whereas Richards acknowledges the reader's experiential context as a vital component in shaping interpretation.

Similarly, Richards's approach contrasts with Reader-Response Criticism in its emphasis on objectivity and the search for an "ideal reader" capable of grasping the poem's inherent qualities. While both perspectives acknowledge the reader's role in constructing meaning and interpreting figurative language, Richards's framework leans towards a more standardized interpretation based on the poem's inherent qualities, rather than allowing for a broader range of subjective interpretations based on individual reader experiences.

Richards's unique contributions to literary criticism include his emphasis on achieving a balance within the reader through poetry, wherein figurative language serves to present contrasting ideas or emotions, ultimately fostering an "equilibrium of opposed impulses." Additionally, his concept of the "ideal reader" highlights the importance of possessing both knowledge and sensitivity to fully appreciate the poem's meaning, encompassing both universal and culturally specific aspects of language.

Richards's framework provides a foundational understanding of how figurative language operates within poetry, emphasizing close reading, effective communication, and the reader's role in constructing meaning. While subsequent theories have expanded on the significance of reader context, Richards's insights into the communicative power of figurative language remain invaluable in the study of literature.

(Douglass)

Conclusion:-

In observation of an assignment, the comparative study of I. A. Richards's "The Practical Criticism" across cultures and time periods offers valuable insights into the nuanced understanding of figurative language appreciation. Through meticulous analysis, it becomes evident that figurative language serves as a universal mode of expression, transcending linguistic and cultural boundaries to evoke emotions and convey abstract concepts. Richards's framework, grounded in the Four Modes of Meaning, highlights how figurative language significantly influences the emotional response and tone of a poem, underscoring its paramount importance in shaping literary interpretations. Moreover, the comparative analysis sheds light on the dynamic interplay between universality and cultural specificity in the interpretation of figurative language. While certain aspects may tap into cognitive universals, others exhibit culturally specific nuances that shape their interpretation. Richards's emphasis on the poet's intention to communicate effectively underscores the role of figurative language in evoking responses from readers, while his concept of the "ideal reader" bridges the gap between universal themes and culturally specific interpretations. In comparing Richards's approach with other critical frameworks such as New Criticism and Reader-Response Criticism, it becomes apparent that his emphasis on close reading, effective communication, and the reader's role in constructing meaning distinguishes his work. While New Criticism focuses more on the internal structure and symbolism of the poem, Richards acknowledges the reader's experiential context, seeking a balance between objective analysis and subjective interpretation. Similarly, while Reader-Response Criticism allows for a wider range of interpretations based on individual reader experiences, Richards's framework leans towards a more standardized interpretation grounded in the poem's inherent qualities. Overall, Richards's framework provides a valuable foundation for understanding the intricate ways in which figurative language operates within poetry. By delving into the universal and culturally specific aspects of figurative language appreciation, this comparative study contributes to a deeper comprehension of its impact on literary analysis and underscores the enduring relevance of Richards's insights in shaping our understanding of the human experience through literature.

References:-

Barad, Dilip. “(PDF) I.A. Richards - Figurative Language - Practical Criticism.” ResearchGate, 5 January 2024, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/377146653_IA_Richards_-_Figurative_Language_-_Practical_Criticism. Accessed 23 April 2024.

Brooks, Cleanth. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27543909?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchKey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3A0f399130ee855e97e045bb7ef4549185. The Sewanee Review, vol. 89, no. 4, 1981, 586-595 (10 pages). JSTOR, Accessed 23 April 2024.

“Cognitive Blame Is Socially Shaped.” Current Directions in Psychological Science, vol. 31, no. 2, 2022, pp. 169-176. Sage Journals, https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214211068845. Accessed 23 April 2024.

Culler, Jonathan. “Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction - Jonathan Culler.” Oxford University Press, https://global.oup.com/academic/product/literary-theory-a-very-short-introduction-9780199691340?cc=in&lang=en&. Accessed 23 April 2024.

Douglass, David. “Issues in the use of I. A. Richards’ tenor‐vehicle model of metaphor.” 2009, pp. 405-424. Taylor & Francis Online, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10570310009374684. Accessed 23 April 2024.

“I.A. Richards on Rhetoric.” Slane College of Communications and Fine Arts, http://interactivemedia.bradley.edu/ell/iarichar.html. Accessed 23 April 2024.

MAMBROL, NASRULLAH. “IA Richards' Concept of Four Kinds of Meaning – Literary Theory and Criticism.” Literary Theory and Criticism, 18 March 2016, https://literariness.org/2016/03/18/ia-richards-concept-of-four-kinds-of-meaning/. Accessed 23 April 2024.

Maria, Robert De. “The Ideal Reader: A Critical Fiction.” ublications of the Modern Language Association of America., vol. 93, no. 3, 1978, pp. 463-474. Cambridge Core, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/pmla/article/abs/ideal-reader-a-critical-fiction/DD8DA995185A416587E9A343A397F3E5. Accessed 23 April 2024.

Shafer, Robert E. “The Practical Criticism of I. A. Richards and Reading Comprehension.” Journal of Reading, vol. 14, no. 2, 1970, 101-108 (8 pages). JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/40012942. Accessed 23 April 2024.

Words:- 2731

Image:- 1

Thank You.