Literary Theory
Structuralism
Mr. John Patrick J. Famadulan
Structuralism brings literature together with
language. In A Glossary of Literary Terms we
read, "As applied in literary studies,
structuralist criticism views literature as a
second-order system that uses the first-order
structural system of language as its medium,
and is itself to be analyzed primarily on the
model of linguistic theory" (Abrams, 1993, p.
280). In this position, structuralism is a
linguistic study of literature, a search for the
langue of it.
For a structuralist analysis of literature, it
is strategic to investigate all literary
productions of a certain author or even a
whole period. The primary task of such an
analyst is to study the grammar of
literature, that is, the rules that govern
the production and interpretation of
fiction as a verbal structure. An inference
of this is perhaps that literature and
language are similarly structured: the
first is a self-enclosed system of rules
that is composed of language, while the
second needs no outside referent but its
own rule-governed and socially
constrained system.
A further feature of structuralism is its capacity
to demystify literature scientifically. It denies
literature of any mystical power that has been
bestowed upon it. Structuralists claim that they
can delve deep into the grammar of language
and narrative and unravel the secrets of literary
texts. Therefore, the text is no longer a unique
and autonomous object. The author's intention is
not the same as its overall meaning, for meaning
is determined by the system governing the
author. All texts refer to other texts, which is
another indication of intertextuality of meaning.
Foundational Questions of Structuralist Criticism
Does the plot follow a recognizable pattern?
What patterns in the text reveal its similarities to other
texts?
What binary oppositions (e.g., light/dark, good/evil,
old/young, masculine/feminine, and natural/artificial, etc.)
operate in the text?
How is each part of the binary-valued? Does the binary
imply a hierarchy (e.g., is light better than dark, is an old
age more valuable than a young age, etc.)?
What dialogue or other aspects in the text indicate how
each pole of the binary is valued?
Do words, dialogue, imagery, or allusions associated with
the binaries contribute to the denigration or elevation of
one part (e.g., light) over the other part (e.g., darkness)?
Sonnet CXXVII
William Shakespeare
In the old age black was not counted fair,
Or if it were, it bore not beauty's name;
But now is black beauty's successive heir,
And beauty slander'd with a bastard shame:
For since each hand hath put on nature's power,
Fairing the foul with art's false borrow'd face,
Sweet beauty hath no name, no holy bower,
But is profaned, if not lives in disgrace.
Therefore my mistress' brows are raven black,
Her eyes so suited, and they mourners seem
At such who, not born fair, no beauty lack,
Slandering creation with a false esteem:
Yet so they mourn, becoming of their woe,
That every tongue says beauty should look so.
ANALYSIS
Analyze the poem’s use of words like
“black,” “fair,” “fairing,” “beauty,”
“art,” [“art’s”] and “false.”
Main Question:
1. How the poem creates tension around the
meaning of these words?
2. Does the poem seem to CONTRAST the
meaning of words like BLACK, FAIR, OR
BEAUTY?
3. How does the poem contrast the connotation of these
words?
4. What binary oppositions operate in the text? (black/fair)
5. How is each part of the binary valued?
6. Does the binary imply a hierarchy (e.g., is light better
than dark, is an old age more valuable than a young age,
etc.)?
7. What dialogue or other aspects in the text indicate how
each pole of the binary is valued?
8. Do words, dialogue, imagery, or allusions associated
with the binaries contribute to the denigration or elevation
of one part (e.g., light) over the other part (e.g., darkness)?
“If you can meet with triumph and disaster,
and treat those two impostors just the same.”