Ok, I used Claude-AI to explain to me the theoretical assumptions behind “close reading”. Maybe this will help:
The close reading approach is rooted in several key theoretical assumptions:
Text-Centrism:
Close reading emphasizes the primacy of the text itself, rather than external factors like author biography, historical context, or reader response.
The belief is that the meaning of a text can be discovered through a rigorous, immanent analysis of the language, structure, and internal logic of the work.
Hermeneutics:
Close reading is influenced by hermeneutical theories about the interpretive process.
The assumption is that texts contain layers of meaning that can be gradually uncovered through a careful, iterative process of reading, analysis, and reflection.
New Criticism:
Close reading has its origins in the New Critical school, which rejected biographical and historical approaches in favor of formalist analysis focused on the text itself.
New Critics believed that the literary work was an autonomous aesthetic object, whose meaning could be discerned through close attention to its internal structures and patterns.
Attention to Language:
Close reading emphasizes the close, nuanced analysis of language – diction, syntax, figurative devices, etc.
The assumption is that the aesthetic and semantic power of a text is encoded in its linguistic fabric, which must be meticulously examined.
Rhetorical Analysis:
Close reading incorporates techniques from rhetorical analysis, examining how a text’s language, structure, and style shape its persuasive or argumentative force.
This assumes that texts are fundamentally acts of communication that can be unpacked using rhetorical principles.
Suspicion of Subjectivity:
While close reading acknowledges the role of the reader, it generally seeks to minimize the influence of individual or subjective interpretations.
The goal is to develop readings that are as objective and text-grounded as possible, based on rigorous analytical methods.
Belief in Depth over Breadth:
Close reading favors intensive, penetrating analysis of a small, select portion of text over a more expansive, superficial treatment.
The assumption is that profound insights can be derived from focused, meticulous engagement with a text’s details and complexities.
Collectively, these theoretical underpinnings position close reading as a scholarly, methodical approach to textual interpretation – one that prizes careful, discipline-specific analysis over more impressionistic or subjective modes of engagement.
Of course, close reading has been critiqued and expanded upon by various literary theorists over time. But these core assumptions continue to shape the close reading paradigm and its application in the humanities.
[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]