1.) Peter Barry explains in his article "Tackling Textuality - With Theory" (The Use of English Volume 52, Number 1, Autumn 2000) how we usually interpret a text. He gives us ten check points in a list and emphasizes the fact they all being needed during literary studies.
Barry also emphasizes the fact that those ten points is not enough if we are going to get close to a text. We also need four principles for looking not only inside a text, but also outwards it. Even if close reading is a central part we also need to pay attention to cultural context, language, gender and the mental process to be able to cover the whole text. This is why a literary theory is needed and Barry exhibit how this works in reality by using Shakespeare's sonnet 73 with its exciting composition.
Barry strongly point out the relationship between literature and language as the most important aspect because it enables deconstructive reading. Barry explain the decontructive reading and the difference between deconstructive reading and close reading aims by using a cat as an example for a text; if we are close reading we pet the cat as it wishes and it shows how much it love the treatment, but if we pet it against the fur and the cat gets upset we use the deconstructive reading. Deconstructive reading provokes the text while close reading soothes it.
Barry uses Hilda Doolittle's poem "Ored" and Adrienne Rich's poem "Transit" to show how to practice deconstructive reading. He points out strange behaviours of words, the attitudes of figures in the text and how we as readers should not chose the simplest answer while reading a text, because there is no security of how things ought to be. Barry admits that reading is difficult but also fun sometimes when we manage to break up the complexities.
2.) The article contains phrases which ought to be quoted directly because it is so central parts of the article and a bit hard to rephrase in such a striking way as Barry has manage to do. Examples of parts which ought to be quoted directly are Barry's explanation of deconstructive reading, his explanation of how to use the ten points of interpretation and what is missing when we use only them. Finally I think the parts Barry has chosen from the poems should be quoted directly too if I am going to talk about them, because that is what he has analyzed in his article.
3.) Peter Barry's article is really interesting and in a way an "aha-experience" because I usually use some of his principles without having any deeper knowledge - until now.
I must admit I was terrified when I started to read the article, because it is not easy to follow Barry directly from start with all those tricky words and phrases. The text did not make any sence to me when I read it the first time. But as soon as I read it a second time - using the close reading method - it became clear and I understood what Barry meant. And by the third time I could agree with him.
The text is convincing; the argument for using more than ordinary surface reading and frame work, just to mentioning some of the parts, is absolutley something I agree with. Of course a reader must look both outside and inside a text to be able to unravel it.
The text is also well structured and easy to follow during a second reading. The structure with the check points in a row with examples after, is very good and make it easy to get an overview. This might be a useful way of describing the other principles as well to make it less confusing during a first reading.
Barry also emphasizes the fact that those ten points is not enough if we are going to get close to a text. We also need four principles for looking not only inside a text, but also outwards it. Even if close reading is a central part we also need to pay attention to cultural context, language, gender and the mental process to be able to cover the whole text. This is why a literary theory is needed and Barry exhibit how this works in reality by using Shakespeare's sonnet 73 with its exciting composition.
Barry strongly point out the relationship between literature and language as the most important aspect because it enables deconstructive reading. Barry explain the decontructive reading and the difference between deconstructive reading and close reading aims by using a cat as an example for a text; if we are close reading we pet the cat as it wishes and it shows how much it love the treatment, but if we pet it against the fur and the cat gets upset we use the deconstructive reading. Deconstructive reading provokes the text while close reading soothes it.
Barry uses Hilda Doolittle's poem "Ored" and Adrienne Rich's poem "Transit" to show how to practice deconstructive reading. He points out strange behaviours of words, the attitudes of figures in the text and how we as readers should not chose the simplest answer while reading a text, because there is no security of how things ought to be. Barry admits that reading is difficult but also fun sometimes when we manage to break up the complexities.
2.) The article contains phrases which ought to be quoted directly because it is so central parts of the article and a bit hard to rephrase in such a striking way as Barry has manage to do. Examples of parts which ought to be quoted directly are Barry's explanation of deconstructive reading, his explanation of how to use the ten points of interpretation and what is missing when we use only them. Finally I think the parts Barry has chosen from the poems should be quoted directly too if I am going to talk about them, because that is what he has analyzed in his article.
3.) Peter Barry's article is really interesting and in a way an "aha-experience" because I usually use some of his principles without having any deeper knowledge - until now.
I must admit I was terrified when I started to read the article, because it is not easy to follow Barry directly from start with all those tricky words and phrases. The text did not make any sence to me when I read it the first time. But as soon as I read it a second time - using the close reading method - it became clear and I understood what Barry meant. And by the third time I could agree with him.
The text is convincing; the argument for using more than ordinary surface reading and frame work, just to mentioning some of the parts, is absolutley something I agree with. Of course a reader must look both outside and inside a text to be able to unravel it.
The text is also well structured and easy to follow during a second reading. The structure with the check points in a row with examples after, is very good and make it easy to get an overview. This might be a useful way of describing the other principles as well to make it less confusing during a first reading.
Well done Susanne! I will post your text with my comments in FC, because I have not been able to figure out how to cut and paste here... I was really impressed by your assignment./Anna
SvaraRadera