110 pages • 3-hour read
Lois TysonA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
The domain of critical theory expresses a normative view of the world, meaning that it argues how things should be rather than “objectively” characterizing the way things are. It uses this “critical” stance as a tool to create a more just world. Literary analysis is one method critical theory uses to advance this goal of social justice. Critical theory holds that our understanding of the world is shaped by the language we use to describe it, with this language promoting different ideologies. By analyzing, critiquing, and advancing the language and ideologies of literary texts, new understandings will be reflected in the world.
This understanding of literary analysis can be found in many of the domains of critical theory covered in Critical Theory Today, particularly in the domains that address the concerns of historically marginalized populations: feminism, queer theory, and African American theory. For instance, feminist critical theory focuses on the way that patriarchal ideology is reflected throughout society, including in literature. French feminist theorists in particular use this understanding of the patriarchy in language and literature as the basis for creating a specifically “feminine” poetics.
One example is Hélène Cixous’s écriture feminine, “a new, feminine language that undermines or eliminates the patriarchal modes of thinking and writing [that is] fluidly organized and freely associative” (84). Queer theory likewise focuses on how antigay ideologies have been perpetuated throughout society and in literature to marginalize diverse sexualities and gender identities. They seek to correct this injustice through the creation and identification of a queer body of literature that valorizes queer experiences.
As in feminist theory, some argue for a specifically queer poetics that uses non-traditional modes of expression to escape the heteronormative ideology inherent to typical language use and literary structures. African American critical theorists pursue a similar project to correct injustices caused by racism. For instance, they address how African American literary works have historically been overlooked or marginalized in the canon and how depictions of African American people in canonical works by white authors are often offensive. Like the above-mentioned theories, some African American literary critical theorists also work to analyze and establish an African American poetics that reflects their particular cultural practices, use of language (such as AAVE), thematic concerns (particularly enslavement, its legacy, and freedom), and archetypal figures (like the trickster).
By analyzing how literary works promote or undermine ideologies, one can understand better how those ideologies function in the world. This knowledge enables people to better address issues like misogyny, antigay bigotry, and racism. In addition, critical literary analysis contributes to creating a more just world by providing tools to create and identify works that advance a vision of a more just and equitable world.
A key commonality across many methods of critical literary analysis covered in Critical Theory Today is the focus on the role of personal connections to literature. Critical theorists are often interested in the ways that personal identity, experiences, and understandings shape the creation and interpretation of literary works. This principle is referred to as “subjectivity,” or the notion that viewpoint shapes understanding. Its seeming opposite is “objectivity,” or the notion that there are concepts that exist in the real world that can be understood without reference to personal viewpoint. An example of a subjective statement is “I like cats”; an example of an objective statement is “Cats are mammals.”
Some theories emphasize personal connections to literary works more than others. For instance, new criticism promotes an “objective” understanding of texts based solely on the work itself, whereas reader-response criticism focuses entirely on how a reader’s subjectivity is engaged with the written text to derive meaning. The importance of personal connections to literature is modeled in Critical Theory Today itself in the way that the author, Lois Tyson, includes frequent reference to her own subjectivity and experiences of literature. For instance, Tyson describes herself as “a recovering patriarchal woman” and describes how this aspect of her identity and experience shapes her understanding of the patriarchy and gender roles, in life and in literature (74).
Elsewhere, she describes her personal experiences reading F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, noting that it is “one of the most moving and exquisitely written literary works it’s ever been my pleasure to read” (467). When providing examples of The Great Gatsby literary criticism in different modes, Tyson uses the personal pronoun “I,” as in, “The Great Gatsby portrays, I think, another kind of tipping point” (443). The use of personal pronouns is another method to highlight her subjectivity when analyzing literary works.
As noted, some modes of critical theory emphasize personal connections to literature more than others. The modes that do, such as reader-response as noted above, often have their basis in psychoanalytic theory. Psychoanalysis theorizes and describes internal mental processes. When applied to literary analysis, it can reveal how personal psychologies shape understanding. For instance, psychological reader-response theory analyzes how “readers’ motives strongly influence how they read” (160). This is often deeply personal, such as when works trigger unconscious anxieties; for example, if one has experienced abuse, they will read works about abuse differently than those who have not.
Further, most critical theories advise writers to be upfront about their personal identities to highlight how that might shape their analysis. For instance, a heterosexual person analyzing a queer text would likely approach the work differently from a queer person doing the same.
A foundational element of most critical theories is the understanding that language both shapes our understanding of reality and in turn shapes reality. In other words, language and reality are mutually constitutive. Many modes of critical theory, including feminist theory, queer theory, and cultural criticism, recognize that language is a vehicle for expressing and promoting ideology. By analyzing how language performs this function, it is possible to understand how ideology functions and shapes worldviews.
For instance, patriarchal language emphasizes gender essentialism and the assumption that women are naturally submissive. Cultural products (books, films, etc.) then reflect and transmit this ideology by portraying women as submissive and using language to describe them in that way. People then take in these cultural products and reinforce that expectation in the real world based on these representations.
Structuralism and deconstructive criticism are two domains of critical theory that most closely analyze how language is constituted and creates our understanding of reality. Structural linguistics holds that “signifiers, or linguistic sound-images, do not refer to things in the world but to concepts in our minds” (186). Thus, “tree” does not really refer to a physical tree but rather to our concept of a tree. Deconstructive criticism builds on this finding to argue that both signifiers and signified in language do not refer to singular concepts, instead creating meaning through reference to chains of related signifiers and signified elements. Thus, “tree” both refers to everything associated with the concept of tree and is defined by its difference from other concepts.
Deconstructive criticism is valuable in that it emphasizes that language is highly flexible. It shapes our world based on the ideologies it communicates, but language can be stretched or shaped to express new understandings or new ideologies. This concept is applied by, for example, feminist theorists who argue that the universal “he” should be discarded because it promotes the idea that the masculine is the default or “neutral” point of view (71).
This notion appears in other critical theories as well, such as Lacanian psychoanalysis, which posits that once a human has language acquisition, they are initiated into the symbolic order, or “a symbolic system of meaning-making” (22), in which language shapes and defines their understanding of themselves and their subsequent separation from others, particularly from the mother.
These understandings of the relationship between language and reality are particularly significant in theories of literary analysis because “literature is a verbal art; it is composed of language” (190). Thus, understanding how language shapes reality helps clarify how literature in turn shapes our world and society.



Unlock every key theme and why it matters
Get in-depth breakdowns of the book’s main ideas and how they connect and evolve.