The Literary Blog Hop is a monthly meme run by The Blue Bookcase.
This month’s question comes is:
To what extent do you analyze literature? Are you more analytical in your reading if you know you’re going to review the book? Is analysis useful in helping you understand and appreciate literature, or does it detract from your readerly experience?
I think those who have majored in literature cannot help but be analytical about the the things they read. I know, that when we first studied various ways in which we can perceive a literary piece of work, I loved to sit and think about everything I read. It was beautiful to discover literary devices, intended or intended, and made enjoying the work even better. I cannot, now, read a book without turning off this analytical side of me. I find myself, right from the first word of the first chapter, thinking, wonder, working things out. The wheels in my head begin to turn, and sometimes I feel that it turns too fast for me to keep up.
I don’t know if any of you have experienced this, but many times I find myself coming across a sentence, then pausing and debating about the merits/demerits of said sentence and how things are not clear. I spend about five or ten minutes just thinking about it. Then, when I get back to the story I find that I’d just wasted my time because the author has it all down pat on in the very next paragraph!! Personally, I think, that is the biggest disadvantage of reading analytically – I tend to see a ghost round every single corner, and sometimes that can be a waste of time and a waste of brain energy (I cannot think of a better phrase or word)! There have been times when I have wished for those long gone days when I could read a story for the story alone….especially in cases of very simply works.
However, on the whole I love analysis. I find that I am able to appreciate a piece of work much better through analysis. It might be that many things I understand from the literary work would not have been intended by the writer. But then I strongly believe in the Reader-Response Theory. A piece of literature is incomplete without its reader. To me literature is the vast sum of human knowledge, thought and experience that communicates itself to an individual’s knowledge, thought and experience. A reader can only, in most cases, interpret a piece of work in his/her relation to it. A story becomes more than a story when it affects the reader on a very personal level (whether intellectually or emotionally). Then, I believe, that story becomes literary.
What about you? Do you analyse literature? If you do, how do you find it? If you don’t, how do you respond to a literary piece?
When reading controversial works, I especially find myself delving heavily into literary criticism: Who or what was the author responding to, reacting against? I’ve given up even trying to shut that one off most of the time, because it doesn’t work, anyway!
Sorry, I meant “HISTORICAL criticism”. Don’t mind me. I’m still recovering from what I’ve named Heinous Head Cold from Hell.
Lol! No worries!
And yes, I think that’s very important too…historical criticism and background. I think that tends to put the right perspective on such kinds of novels. This puts me in mind of authorial background as well. Sadly, while I tend to look up facts and history of a certain time in which a novel is set, I very rarely look at an author’s background. Later I find that much could have been gleaned from a story had I been aware of a particular event in the author’s personal life, and such.
I expanded a bit on my I guess rather opaque answer to this question based on your comment-I do very much analysis what I read-it is a very important part of what I do-in terms of reader response, I think this explains why many people love short stories as they require more work from the readers than novels do-it also explains why most people do not really like them
I love your response! I’m the same, and to be honest it confuses me a little when people insist there’s a complete dichotomy between analysing and reading for fun. This *is* how some of us have fun
Lol! I agree!….I mean how can messing around with an engine be fun? But some people love it, don’t they?
I really think you’ll have fun with those particular theories! There are some that can be a drag and you feel dissects a piece of work unnecessarily…at least I’ve thought so. Though I’m afraid I cannot recall the names of these theories. There was a time when I found post-colonial theory a dead bore as well. But I have learnt to appreciate it in the last year or two.
Blah. Pretend the blockquote worked up there. That first paragraph is me quoting you!
Cool.
Hahah, I totally know what you mean about the wasting brain power thing, I’ve done that SO many times. One of the most difficult things I think in learning to analyze literature it to be able to look at the text as a whole while still retaining all the details.
True. We get so bogged down by the really tiny, sometimes insignificant details, that we miss something bigger. I get so frustrated with myself sometimes because of that!!
woah, you live somewhere very far from me if it’s 10pm where you are. It’s 10am where I am!
Heheh…I’m from India. If you’re from the States then there’s always a minimum difference of 9 hours depending on which time zone in America you are.
Hi, Risa! Great posting, and I loved your observations and comments. I think you are spot-on with your application of Reader-Response Theory too. Intuitively, the notion of developing and maintaining a successful relationship between author and reader seems to me to be a critical element in viewing the literary merits of a novel. I’d like to explore this theory some more too. Cheers! Chris
I feel a little left out because I havn’t studied literature and don’t know anything about formal school of literary criticism. I read the book and as I read, I take mental notes of those things that grab my attention. Certain sentences, certain themes, character traits etc. When I am finished the book I pull of those things together in my review. Now that I have answered this question I wonder whether what I am doing is analysis at all, or proper analysis anyway. I am quite jealous of people that studied literature at university and have a better grasp of these things. I think that if I did it would improve my reading experience
Hi Becky!
So don’t feel bad! 
I think your way of reading counts as analytical or critical reading. Looking for themes and character development and poignancy… that’s what I do, and it’s what I was talking about when I wrote the prompt.
You’re doing analysis, Becky.
You don’t really need formal training in order to analyse. The fact that you’re noticing themes and characterisation and stuff like that, PLUS reacting to what you read, is what analysing is basically about. Other than that there’s just theories about the role of a piece of work, its author and its reader. In fact your sort of analysis would fall under the technical term of Reader-Response theory, if I’m not wrong. 
I think that it depends on the person doing the analyzing. I am not a lit major, but did major in history and when you are writing a history paper, you are trying to find something meaningful in the dates and names that clearly have broader implications later on. I suppose what I am trying to say is that those of us with majors in arts disciplines are always analyzing things and that doesn’t help when one is a reader, because you are always trying to get some sort of meaning from the text.
I agree that that can be a real bane sometimes. We tend to over-analyse and sometimes look for things that aren’t even there!!
It’s funny how sometimes our backgrounds can get in our way! I don’t have a literature background (I only had two semester of literature in college), so analysis doesn’t get in my way while reading. I don’t believe I even know how to analyze properly. I suppose if I analyze anything, I analyze non-fiction–what is its bias, do I have the whole picture, what is being left out, etc. When I read fiction I’m not usually thinking so much, just looking out for whatever catches my eye.
That’s interesting. I don’t think I ever read a piece of non-fiction with an analytical mind-set. Thought, it actually makes a great deal of sense because it is critical in a manner of speaking. …especially when it comes to news or people dealing with facts of any kind, bet it history, current affairs, politics, and so forth. Hmmm…that’s something I need to wrap my head about…
I think I look at non-fiction critically more when I’m reading an “issue” or current topic, and less so if it’s history, although they do say that the winner writes history, so I suppose there’s an angle to the history books, too!
I know my dad views history through a very critical eye. And I’ve understood that in order to know the truth in history, one needs to read all accounts of it, by which I mean perspectives. Strange, how a factual area can actually be very subjective! One needs only to read novels based on history to see that so clearly!…
“A story becomes more than a story when it affects the reader on a very personal level (whether intellectually or emotionally). Then, I believe, that story becomes literary”.
This statements made me reflect on tha fact that I tend to react more intellectually if reading classic literature or literary texts in general, while I usually react especially emotionally to light reads.
I’m glad I took part in this blog hop. Great discussions on all the blogs participating in it!
Well, I think one can react both intellectually and emotionally at the same time. For example, I recently finished The Scarlet Letter. While my head was busy analysing themes, motives, etc, I was also reacting toward it at a very personal level. I was completely involved. On the other hand, just before Hawthorne I’d finished Woolf’s Mrs Dalloway. It was rather dry. If I like it, it was because of the intellectual stimulation and nothing else. I think my favourites would always stimulate me emotionally. Intellectually as well would be a bonus. Just intellectual?…not much, I believe.
I so enjoyed reading your response to this week’s blog hop. And though you and I read in pretty different ways, your response made me realize that the little bits of unconscious cultural or feminist criticism that I acknowledge in my reading are probably more than just “little bits.”
Heheh…true. I believe that if you have even heard of a critical way of thinking you can’t help but start looking at things in that light. It’s like, if someone brings to your notice, for the first times, the meaning, say, of someone’s body language. YOu start looking for it in everybody, first out of curiosity and interest, and then rather automatically!
I try to “think deeply” about what I’m reading but I haven’t reached the analysis phase yet. I do try to approach what I read critically, ask questions, and consider the context and the author. My background isn’t in literature so I’m just getting my footing in that arena as well.
I appreciate your thoughts on RR theory – well said.
As I was telling Becky, you’re still doing an important part of analysis. Inspite of all the theories out there, at the end, it’s really what interests you that catches your attention. Sometimes, though, a little reading up on critical theories might help you look at things differently…if you’re interested.
Hi Risa,
I loved your first paragraph; I can agree whole-heartedly with that. However, I still seem to whip through pages pretty quickly and then think at pauses. I am never more aware of this reading style than when I read Kant or other meaty philosophers. With them, I finish the page only to go, “Wait…what??” For those authors, perhaps it would be much better to ponder each sentence at a time as you automatically do. Anyway, I enjoyed your post and I hope you keep reading so thoughtfully but with fun too!
*sigh* I really wish I could flip through pages quickly! I’m always so afraid I’d miss something!! But yes, it’s understandable that when the reading is about heavy stuff, then we’re given too much to ponder over and thereby prolong the reading.
And thank you so much, Amy!
….I still have fun. I just lament the fact that I’m slow. Lol!
[...] Literary Blog Hop: Analysing Literary Works (breadcrumbreads.wordpress.com) [...]
[...] Literary Blog Hop: Analysing Literary Works (breadcrumbreads.wordpress.com) [...]