The last few weeks have been the our first assessment period of the degree course. We've had class tests and we've had essays. I particularly enjoyed the New Criticism essay I did for Readers and Texts. I think I gained quite an insight into literary criticism and the potential advantages and short comings of applying the principles of New Criticism to practical analysis of poetry, in this case Wilfred Owen's Dulce et Decorum Est. As a discipline in it's self I found that New Criticism was a bit on the stuffy side. I couldn't come to terms with ideas like the “affective fallacy” and the “intentional fallacy”. How could you possibly separate the intention of the poet and the effect the poem has on the reader from a critical analysis of a poem, especially when a poem like Dulce et Decorum Est is concerned? Surely the whole point of poetry is for the poet to create a relationship between themselves and the reader, New Critic or just the casual reader. I do think that some of the principle in New Criticism are invaluable but, to my mind, they have to be accompanied by principles from other theories like Reader Response, for example.
If I had to do anything differently I would have started my preparation as soon as the assignment was issued, but I still fell I did finished with plenty of time to spare. All in all I really enjoyed doing the essay and I feel like I have learned a lot from it.