Author: Allan Johnson

Textual Analysis, or ‘close reading’

You might be surprised to discover that the academic discipline of English literature, as we know it today, only came into existence around 1900.  Eager to make the study of English literature an academically rigorous undertaking, early twentieth-century literary critics sought to codify and professionalize their discipline, and developed a technique that is now called ‘close reading’. By paying careful, specific attention to the ways in which words are put together, we can form some significant evidence for what we believe to be happening in a literary text.  In many ways, close reading forms the backbone of what we now know of as literary criticism, and is the skill that differentiates English literature students from students in other Humanities departments.  Historians, art historians, theologians, and philosophers share many of the same skills that we do, but what sets us apart is our sensitivity to the words on the page.  The skill of close reading is an important one, and one which you will develop over the course of your degree.

Historical Context

Much of the debate in twentieth-century literary criticism centred on the role which historical and authorial context should play in analysis.  Should the critic be concerned that Charles Dickens’ childhood experience in a workhouse contributed to many of his most famous novels?  When reading Alan Hollinghurst’s The Swimming-Pool Library should the critic be aware that AIDS-victims were heavily stigmatized during the early 1980s?  The answer is almost certainly ‘yes’ in both cases.  In order to put forward a clear, convincing argument about a text, it is important that the critic has a working knowledge of the relevant contextual material which bears weight upon the text.

Critical Context

Literary analysis does not happen in a vacuum, and the changing understanding of texts across generations is important.  We know that Bram Stoker was convinced that Dracula was a moral, ethical parable about good versus evil.  Literary critics, however, have been unable to leave unacknowledged the significant, and sometimes subversive, sexual imagery which marks that text.  Henry James’s The Turn of the Screw was left purposefully ambiguous as a stylistic feature, and that is an issue with which generations of critics have contended.  It is for this reason that a compelling argument about a literary work must take into account the critical context and what other critics have said about it.

Theoretical Context

A theory is a system of acute observations of the material world, which can provide the literary critic with a useful framework for exploring meaning in literary texts. Through the accumulated conventions of style, lexis, and incentive, theory creates cogent models of analysis.  These models often seek to foreground the sociological issues which bear significant weight in English literature (e.g. psychoanalytic theory, feminist theory, postcolonial theory, queer theory, eco-criticism, and disability studies).  Theory can provide a powerful, robust route into texts, but it is important that you do not allow theoretical context to overpower your analysis.  Remember, your argument is about the text, and theory is only one of four analytical tools which you have at your disposal.

The major debates between various schools of twentieth-century literary criticism came from the differing levels of importance afforded to each of these four categories.  For example, New Criticism favoured textual analysis at the expense of historical context; psychoanalytic literary criticism saw historical context as significantly more important than critical context; the Poststructuralists thought that theoretical context was of prime importance.  Literary criticism in the twenty-first century tends to acknowledge the value of all four of these categories of evidence, though each critic will inevitably develop his or her own personal style of working with these.  As you develop increasing confidence and skill in analysis, you will likely find yourself moving through these categories.  It is important to remember, however, that it is impossible to produce sophisticated, well-nuanced essays if appropriate attention is not paid to textual analysis.  It is for this reason that many of your tutors will focus a great deal of attention on the skill of close reading.

This post is based upon teaching materials developed while I was teaching at the University of Leeds.

The main focus of any essay should be your argument about the text or texts that you are studying. So, how do you form an argument about a literary text?  It is important to point out that contemporary literary criticism no longer accepts that there is simply one meaning in a text, a meaning which the critic must work to uncover.  Instead, it is seen as the job of the critic to uncover his or her unique interpretation of the text, which might then impact upon the interpretations of others.  This is not to say, of course, that all interpretations will be equally valid, or that a critic is given complete freedom (we will get to evaluating argument validity later on).  What this means is that it is your job to articulate—with the aide of certain discipline-specific principles and conventions—what you believe the text to be saying.  This is your argument.

Because your argument is a unique, personal reading of the text, it is your job to communicate your argument in as clear and comprehensive a way as possible.  A sophisticated argument does not begin as an abstract idea, but a clear statement of what you believe to be going on in the text.  How might one go about articulating an argument about a text?  There is a three step analytical model that you can follow.

Topic

The first step is selecting which one topic from the text you will be addressing. We all know that a text will concern itself with many different topics and ideas: love, death, revenge, anxiety, public vs. private, gender, sexuality, etc.  In an essay or exam response it will be impossible to address all of the topics covered in any one text.  Instead, you must move into the text with surgical precision by drawing out just one main topic.  The first step in forming your argument about a text is to select the one topic that you will be examining.  Customarily, essay titles give you a specific topic, and ask you to consider how that topic is operating in the text.

Theme

In order to form your argument, you must ask yourself what you believe the text to be saying about the topic you have selected.  If you are writing on the topic of mental illness in Mrs. Dalloway, for example, your statement of theme might be: ‘the novel portrays mental illness as a feminizing force, which is feared and misunderstood by the patriarchal medical establishment.’  That is your argument.  That is what you believe the text to be saying about the topic you have selected, and it will then be your duty to provide your reader with evidence and support for your argument.  Why should someone agree with what you perceive to be happening in the text?

Example:

Topic: Mental Illness

Theme: In the novel, mental illness is portrayed as a feminizing force, which is feared and misunderstood by the patriarchal medical establishment.

Reading

The final step in this analytical model is to prove the validity of your argument to the reader through your own reading of the text.  You must demonstrate to your reader that the text does, indeed, say what you claim it to be saying.  While literary critics have an extraordinary amount of power and control in shaping texts, it is important to remember that not all arguments will be equally valid.  An argument can only be perceived as valid through:

1. The extent to which it takes the full text into consideration.
2. The extent to which it successfully acknowledges appropriate, substantial analytical evidence.

This post is based upon teaching materials developed while I was teaching at the University of Leeds.