If I was a "New Critic," I would probably approach the passage in a similar fashion to the way I already have. Since I color coded for themes and main tensions/contrasts, I would say I had a "New Critic" approach. I noticed a lot of imagery, especially regarding nature and character descriptions. There were also many paradoxes, mainly in the allegations John was making versus the lack of meaningful evidence. The overall structure of the podcast was certainly manipulated to reflect many recurring motifs and main ideas, and I have confidence in the fact that the podcast will likely "integrate" the story; as the book says: "towards the close of the text... [have everything] successfully resolved" (Pope p 139). New critics look for common themes within Brian's narration, rather than questioning his motives or overall established story structure. As discussed in class, Brian Reed uses some of his descriptive talents to establish setting to parallel characters: mazes, clocks, and lumber are all very symbolic of various people in this story.
I feel as if Formalists, who center their ideas on the text, would be more invested in the juiciness of the narrative. Since it is, at its core, a murder mystery of sorts, the text is very important; particularly, in its structure. The narrator is obligated to maintain a sense of mystery and uncertainty so that the audience is kept in the dark enough to have their attention invested.
Comments