ENG3703
Assignment 3
Unique No:
Due 2025
,Theoretical Approaches to English Language and Literature
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Perspectives in Literary Studies
Introduction
The study of literature has long been shaped by debates on how texts should best be
understood. Some scholars argue that literature should be examined as an autonomous
artistic entity, with primary focus on its style, structure, and use of language. Others
contend that texts cannot be separated from the cultural, historical, and ideological
forces that shape both their production and reception. This essay explores these two
traditions: intrinsic approaches, which concentrate on textual form and internal
coherence, and extrinsic approaches, which situate works within their wider cultural and
political frameworks. The discussion outlines the main assumptions of each approach,
highlights their respective strengths and weaknesses, and considers whether
contemporary literary studies gain more from choosing one perspective or by combining
both.
Intrinsic Approaches: Literature as an Autonomous Art Form
Intrinsic approaches gained prominence in the early twentieth century as a reaction
against earlier methods that placed excessive weight on biography or historical
background. Proponents of this view argued that literature should be assessed on its
own merits rather than as a reflection of an author’s personal life or historical context.
Movements such as Russian Formalism and Anglo-American New Criticism exemplify
this tradition. Formalists like Viktor Shklovsky and Roman Jakobson emphasized the
distinct techniques that set literary language apart from everyday communication.
Shklovsky introduced the notion of defamiliarization, arguing that literature refreshes
perception by unsettling routine ways of viewing the world. Jakobson, on the other
hand, articulated the concept of the poetic function of language, which highlights how
literary texts emphasize their own form rather than merely pointing to external reality.
Similarly, New Critics in Britain and the United States—including Cleanth Brooks, W.K.
Wimsatt, and Monroe Beardsley—focused on uncovering the text’s internal unity. They
, dismissed approaches reliant on authorial intention or reader response, warning against
what they termed the intentional fallacy. Instead, they championed close reading, a
method that pays detailed attention to symbolism, paradox, imagery, and structure to
reveal a work’s inner harmony.
From this perspective, literature is viewed as possessing inherent order and meaning,
which can be uncovered through careful textual analysis. Such an approach treats
literature primarily as art, distinct from social commentary or historical record.
Extrinsic Approaches: Literature as a Social and Historical Construct
Extrinsic perspectives take the opposite stance, asserting that literary texts cannot be
fully understood without considering the broader contexts that shape them. In this view,
literature is inseparable from the social, ideological, and historical forces within which it
is embedded.
Marxist criticism has been one of the most influential schools within this tradition.
Building on the ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, it regards culture as a reflection
of material and economic structures. Later thinkers such as Raymond Williams
expanded this view through cultural materialism, which acknowledges that literature
both influences and is influenced by prevailing ideologies. Marxist critics argue that texts
expose the tensions of class conflict and must be analyzed as part of wider social
dynamics.
Feminist literary criticism provides another key strand of extrinsic analysis. Figures like
Elaine Showalter highlighted how women’s voices have been marginalized in the literary
canon and how texts often reinforce patriarchal ideologies. Similarly, postcolonial
scholars—including Edward Said—revealed the ways literature contributed to sustaining
imperial worldviews, particularly through depictions of colonized peoples and the so-
called “Orient.”
Assignment 3
Unique No:
Due 2025
,Theoretical Approaches to English Language and Literature
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Perspectives in Literary Studies
Introduction
The study of literature has long been shaped by debates on how texts should best be
understood. Some scholars argue that literature should be examined as an autonomous
artistic entity, with primary focus on its style, structure, and use of language. Others
contend that texts cannot be separated from the cultural, historical, and ideological
forces that shape both their production and reception. This essay explores these two
traditions: intrinsic approaches, which concentrate on textual form and internal
coherence, and extrinsic approaches, which situate works within their wider cultural and
political frameworks. The discussion outlines the main assumptions of each approach,
highlights their respective strengths and weaknesses, and considers whether
contemporary literary studies gain more from choosing one perspective or by combining
both.
Intrinsic Approaches: Literature as an Autonomous Art Form
Intrinsic approaches gained prominence in the early twentieth century as a reaction
against earlier methods that placed excessive weight on biography or historical
background. Proponents of this view argued that literature should be assessed on its
own merits rather than as a reflection of an author’s personal life or historical context.
Movements such as Russian Formalism and Anglo-American New Criticism exemplify
this tradition. Formalists like Viktor Shklovsky and Roman Jakobson emphasized the
distinct techniques that set literary language apart from everyday communication.
Shklovsky introduced the notion of defamiliarization, arguing that literature refreshes
perception by unsettling routine ways of viewing the world. Jakobson, on the other
hand, articulated the concept of the poetic function of language, which highlights how
literary texts emphasize their own form rather than merely pointing to external reality.
Similarly, New Critics in Britain and the United States—including Cleanth Brooks, W.K.
Wimsatt, and Monroe Beardsley—focused on uncovering the text’s internal unity. They
, dismissed approaches reliant on authorial intention or reader response, warning against
what they termed the intentional fallacy. Instead, they championed close reading, a
method that pays detailed attention to symbolism, paradox, imagery, and structure to
reveal a work’s inner harmony.
From this perspective, literature is viewed as possessing inherent order and meaning,
which can be uncovered through careful textual analysis. Such an approach treats
literature primarily as art, distinct from social commentary or historical record.
Extrinsic Approaches: Literature as a Social and Historical Construct
Extrinsic perspectives take the opposite stance, asserting that literary texts cannot be
fully understood without considering the broader contexts that shape them. In this view,
literature is inseparable from the social, ideological, and historical forces within which it
is embedded.
Marxist criticism has been one of the most influential schools within this tradition.
Building on the ideas of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, it regards culture as a reflection
of material and economic structures. Later thinkers such as Raymond Williams
expanded this view through cultural materialism, which acknowledges that literature
both influences and is influenced by prevailing ideologies. Marxist critics argue that texts
expose the tensions of class conflict and must be analyzed as part of wider social
dynamics.
Feminist literary criticism provides another key strand of extrinsic analysis. Figures like
Elaine Showalter highlighted how women’s voices have been marginalized in the literary
canon and how texts often reinforce patriarchal ideologies. Similarly, postcolonial
scholars—including Edward Said—revealed the ways literature contributed to sustaining
imperial worldviews, particularly through depictions of colonized peoples and the so-
called “Orient.”
