The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism by Vincent B. Leitch

The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism Reviews

• 
  Nick

  This book does offer a huge selection of important critics. It is nice and heavy, and has a cool dust cover. As an introduction to theory for students, however, it is a bit overwhelming and doesn't offer much in the way of engagement with texts that other lit crit anthologies, such as Shirley Staton's "Literary Theory in Praxis" do. The elephant in the room with this book is that the editors lean heavily toward the theory of Derrida and Stanley Fish. Derrida may have the most extensive selection in here, and Guyatri Spivak has an essay. It may be telling that a large number of professors from the University of Illinois @Chicago, where Stanley Fish was formerly the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, are featured (Lennard Davis, Walter Benn Michaels, and Gerald Graff) while the book omits some key critics from the last twenty years (Frank Kermode and Slavoj Zizek, for example). Compared with the Longman 20th century lit crit Anthology, this criticism anthology seems heavy on the white guys, doing little to dispel the "totalitarian tinkerbell" thing. On the other hand, the Norton does have bell hooks and some great feminist criticism. Many of the black theorists and critics, particularly the men, seem to be lumped into their own "identity" category, which can be problematic. The Norton isn't inventing this trend, which has been around for awhile; but it isn't resisting it either. In all, I think there is a great background in criticism here, but in some of the ways I mentioned, this book is a product of a certain time and certain networks of influence, not an objective account of what has been most important nor most forward-looking in criticism and theory.
• 
  Andrew

  This is an excellent compendium of criticism for anybody seriously interested in literature. Its only flaw is its complete lack of non-Western criticism. The entire time I was reading it, I kept thinking, "What about Taoist literary theory or Confucian?" Then for that matter, what about the Sanskrit tradition or any Japanese or Arabic theory tradition? Simply nonexistent. It's a decent look at criticism, but it's very, very far from complete.
• 
  Leslie Wexler

  I have to give the Norton Anthology a 'really liked' it rating even though it was intensely painful to read and to carry around twice a week. This book is both a back and ball breaker. Toss away any notions of easy reading and delve into the introductions of most of the main theoretical arguments beginning with Plato and rounding out with "Theory is dead" criticism. I especially enjoyed the psychoanalytic theorists (especially Jacques Lacan), felt as though my discarded feelings regarding women's rights and responsibilities were revived with feminist critique (espcially my beloved Simone de Beauvoir -- I actually cried reading the Second Sex). I was challenged by Hegel, Heideigger, Barthes and Derrida in ways I've never even considered thinking before - and love their minds (even though I think Hegel is kind of kooky in his teleology.) The post-modernists kept my interest and have sparked my continued desire to follow trends in architecture as a mode of revealing new modes of living and thinking, but my favourite ... hands down is Foucault. God, to sit in that man's mind for a day (had he not died of AIDS) would be fascinating.
  
  Cracking open this book at the beginning of the school term, I knew I was in for something difficult but would ultimately change the way I looked at the universe. That has definitely happened, and has contributed to shaping my graduate studies moving forward.
• 
  Dusty

  Of the (too) many collections of essays on literary theory I have been compelled to buy by graduate school professors who refuse to agree upon one standard textbook -- this one is probably my favorite. At least, it's the one I'm most likely to refer back to. I say that despite the fact that it's seriously skimpy on texts written before 1900 (all of which are crammed into the first third of the book) and in Latin America (none, unless you count Gloria Anzaldúa, an American). These (glaring) omissions make possible the inclusion of what is probably an excessive number of hip Europeans and North Americans who are products of the cultural studies movement but, though I love them, aren't nearly as important long-term as, say, Émile Zola, Oswald de Andrade or Octavio Paz. Those problems aside, I like the book's introductions and appreciated that for a tome of nearly 3,000 pages it carries surprisingly well in a backpack. No risk of spinal injury. Anyway, if you're looking for a book of philosophy that contains an adequate mix of canonical musts (Plato, Freud, etc.) and others, you could do worse.
• 
  Mickey

  Studied this massive tome my junior year in college. It was where I first met the likes of Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault, Freud, and scores of other cultural critics. It was the first time I realized how many interesting ideas are out there. A good reference and introduction for people interested in training their critical thinking skills. (Favorites; 2500+ pages)
• 
  Rae

  Now that's I've completed Literary and Critical Theory, I'm honestly not sure what to say about it. I do think it's far to say I will never forget some of what I've learned, and I think more and more aspects of these theories will pop up in my life as I go along.
• 
  Biblio Curious

  I spent about a week reading the bios of everyone mentioned, who influenced who & skimming the samples of their work provided. So I didn't read this cover to cover like a novel. I did go to the Norton website & print out the table of contents to annotate while I read through this mammoth of a book. My end result is a list of books/theorists to explore and my 1st impressions of them jotted into a notebook or onto this table of contents.
  
  Overall, it was very worthwhile to discover some schools of thought for how to examine literature. This anthology goes through the history of literary theory beginning with the ancient greeks and ending in the 1990s. The later years are more inclusive of African & feminist thinkers. There's also a great sample of disability in literature that's presented in such an interesting way.
• 
  Leah

  Oh boy - an anthology of literary criticism. It's for a class. We're trying to touch on all the major periods and modes. It's useful for someone, like me, who does not have time to read all of those philosophers and poets in-depth while taking two other classes and raising a child. How I sometimes wish this could be my only class this quarter - it's an enormous quantity of various and complex ways to look at the world through literature.
• 
  Jacob Hurley

  Excellent selection of texts from Plato's Republic to Stuart Moulthrop's McLuhanist evaluation of the internet. You can enter in knowing nothing and come out with a reasonable grasp of Marxism, formalism, german idealism, feminism, queer theory, reader-response theory... anything. I got this for only 20 bucks and over the course of a year and a half I got much more than my money's worth out of it. Highly recommended
• 
  Gemma

  Obviously have not read the whole thing! Its a beast of a book to carry around uni. But from what I did read I liked Postcolonialism the best and I really liked reading Freud's essays. Having studied him in A-level psychology I really liked being able to read the actual essays on dreams.
• 
  Notnotnerdygirl

  Super interesting, super helpful. A great look at theory over time - but there was a lot more politics (mostly Marxism) and theology than I was expecting.
• 
  Allegra

  No, I have not read every page of this book (lol)! But I am tired of seeing it on my "currently reading" shelf.
• 
  Sam Reader

  Fuck this book but also it’s probably the smartest book I own
• 
  Chrisanne

  I believe I left it blank because I never read the entire thing(thank you, compassionate professors).
  
  My thoughts now are that it is an incredibly convenient book but not, by far, the best of the contained writers' thoughts. It's definitely a compendium what they are often most known for. But I think that many have written better and thought better. As an anthology it does a good job and is helpful for those who don't necessarily want to read it all. But I would choose different selections.
• 
  Kris Rafferty

  Brilliant.
• 
  Miriam

  Even though it's one of the most humongous books I've ever owned, this Norton Anthology holds a special place in my heart. If this hadn't been a good read, all these travels from home to parent's home and to uni with it in my backpack would have been for nothing. My backaches would've been for nothing. But I feel I very much learned something from this beast. The Norton Anthology provides a very good biography of each author, which then gives you sufficient background knowledge to be able to understand the primary texts. I loved the diversity in their choice of authors (still way to go but it is an important step towards more inclusivity). So if you want to dabble into literary criticism out of free will or because you have to, I highly recommend this big friendly giant.
• 
  Mary Lynn

  This is a monstrous anthology; it was used as the primary textbook for my Critical Theory and Literary Criticism course (ENGL 602 at University of Maryland). I liked the course very much but it's a little hard for me to rate "how good" this Norton Anthology is; the excerpts were sometimes highly chopped up versions of much larger works. (And the material itself was, of course, dense and challenging.) One thing I found very helpful in this book were the author biographies before each of the critical works. They helped place the excerpt or essay in context and really enhanced my ability to understand the theory.
• 
  Marc LeBlanc

  I used this anthology in my Lit. Theory class last semester. Now, obviously we didn't read all 2500+ pages, but we did tackle a great deal of the essays. It is probably one of the most important/useful books in my library, one I find myself coming back to again and again for reference, or even just for fun. All in all it's a great collection of highly important and influential critiques and theories that should be owned by anyone who is even remotely serious about literature.
  
• 
  Sheena

  As much as I've hated carrying this doorstop around for an entire quarter, it's introduced me to some amazing critics and given a literary twist to a lot of authors that I had only read politically (Foucoult, Said, etc.). I look forward to reading more from it, if I ever have time, and I'm sure it will be a valuable reference tool for the future.
• 
  Calder

  I have to read this for a class in the fall. I'm an English Lit major and theory and philosophy are not my areas of interest or expertise- Foucault, Derrida and Deleuze, oh my! I'm a little intimidated and don't know how well I'm going to do with this material, but another student said read it, don't worry about understanding it; the penny will drop in a few weeks. I sure hope so.
• 
  Julie Ruble

  I love this book. Great introductions to theory and pithy excerpts from everyone from Aristotle to Stanley Fish. It's not the sort of thing you read through cover to cover. It's more of a reference book. Actually, I'm not going to lie, I know people who would enjoy reading this cover to cover :)
• 
  Adriana

  My biggest regret of last semester (maybe of my whole educational career so far, but I'm probably just being dramatic) is selling this book. I really wish I kept it, just for the sheer amount of articles it had from so many different scholars. UGH!
• 
  Donna Rae

  I am just starting this and I will be at it for a long time, it is quite a tome. But I like how it is set up... Just for starters it has 2 Table of Contents. I think this read will be an education in itself. I will read other books in between philosophers. More to come as I dive in.