Thoughts on literary criticism by Dr Alok Mishra

These are snippets from the thoughts shared by Dr Alok Mishra in an interview on literary theory and criticism. The link to the published interview will be provided at the end of this post once it is live.

Meaningful literary criticism is not guided by a willingness to win but by the readiness to lose. Rigidity in a critic’s thought often mars the objectivity and hampers the act of criticism.

A true literary critic must remain passionately unbiased, detached and unstringed. Characters, events, episodes, emotions, and intellect – virtually every quality of the work and characters in it – must remain mere objects of analysis to him.

In the early years of the academic sphere, literary criticism often remains harsh and unfair toward antagonists. It is sad. Those poor characters are just doing their job, the job of making the protagonists appear righteous!

A literary critic’s job may be likened to playing the devil’s advocate – listening to the mute voices, understanding the unexpressed thoughts, realising the action-hiatus, and arguing against oneself to reach the fairest conclusion.

I will always say literary criticism is easier compared to analysing your most faithful friend. In a literary work, all the shades, facets and perspectives are bare, somewhere hidden in the text. Of your truest friend, you might not have seen it all!

A literary critic has to take two simultaneous sides – of the characters and of the artist who brought those characters to life.

Ultimately, literary criticism remains like the job description of a nishkam yogi described by Sri Krishna in the battlefield sermons of the Bhagavad Gita. The literary critic cannot attach himself to any character or be overwhelmed by any melodramatic episode. The observations of a literary critic must remain focused on finding all the possible aspects, to the minute levels, that other academic readers might benefit from.

Dr Alok Mishra
January 13, 1:30 AM