LEADER 03529nam 2200625Ia 450 001 9910787542903321 005 20220305005041.0 010 $a0-8122-0387-9 024 7 $a10.9783/9780812203875 035 $a(CKB)2670000000418205 035 $a(OCoLC)605032516 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebrary10748463 035 $a(SSID)ssj0001035707 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)11596990 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0001035707 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)11033055 035 $a(PQKB)10410165 035 $a(MdBmJHUP)muse26849 035 $a(DE-B1597)449267 035 $a(OCoLC)979740824 035 $a(DE-B1597)9780812203875 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL3442086 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10748463 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL682405 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC3442086 035 $a(EXLCZ)992670000000418205 100 $a20060822d1997 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurcn||||||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 10$aLiterary criticism$b[electronic resource] $ean autopsy /$fMark Bauerlein 210 $aPhiladelphia $cUniversity of Pennsylvania Press$d1997 215 $a1 online resource (175 p.) 225 0 $aCritical authors & issues 300 $aBibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph 311 0 $a1-322-51123-3 311 0 $a0-8122-1625-3 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $tFront matter --$tContents --$tPreface --$tIntroduction --$tA Critical Glossary --$tEpilogue --$tBibliography --$tIndex 330 $aAs the study of literature has extended to cultural contexts, critics have developed a language all their own. Yet, argues Mark Bauerlein, scholars of literature today are so unskilled in pertinent sociohistorical methods that they compensate by adopting cliches and catchphrases that serve as substitutes for information and logic. Thus by labeling a set of ideas an "ideology" they avoid specifying those ideas, or by saying that someone "essentializes" a concept they convey the air of decisive refutation. As long as a paper is generously sprinkled with the right words, clarification is deemed superfluous. Bauerlein contends that such usages only serve to signal political commitments, prove membership in subgroups, or appeal to editors and tenure committees, and that current textual practices are inadequate to the study of culture and politics they presume to undertake. His book discusses 23 commonly encountered terms?from "deconstruction" and "gender" to "problematize" and "rethink"?and offers a diagnosis of contemporary criticism through their analysis. He examines the motives behind their usage and the circumstances under which they arose and tells why they continue to flourish. A self-styled "handbook of counter disciplinary usage," Literary Criticism: An Autopsy shows how the use of illogical, unsound, or inconsistent terms has brought about a breakdown in disciplinary focus. It is an insightful and entertaining work that challenges scholars to reconsider their choice of words?and to eliminate many from critical inquiry altogether. 606 $aCriticism 606 $aLiterature$xHistory and criticism$xTheory, etc 615 0$aCriticism. 615 0$aLiterature$xHistory and criticism$xTheory, etc. 676 $a801/.95 700 $aBauerlein$b Mark$01092716 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910787542903321 996 $aLiterary criticism$93809410 997 $aUNINA