The correct answer is 1 because it aligns with the principles of formalism.
In literary theory, formalism is the approach that treats literature as an independent art form, separate from historical, social, or biographical contexts. Formalist critics focus solely on the text itself, analyzing its structure, language, symbols, and literary devices without considering external influences like the author’s intentions or the historical moment of the text's creation. They view literature as "a world unto itself," with intrinsic qualities that are universal and self-contained.
Here's how each option relates to formalism:
"Literary texts are universal and transcend history: the historical context of their production and reception has no bearing on the literary work, which is aesthetically autonomous, having its own laws, being a world into itself."
This option reflects the formalist belief that literature should be analyzed on its own terms, without influence from external historical or cultural factors. This autonomy and self-contained "world" of the text is central to formalist thinking, making this the correct answer.
"The historical context of a literary work is integral to a proper understanding of it..."
This option contradicts formalism because it asserts that historical context is essential to understanding the text, which is closer to a historicist approach.
"Literary works can help us to understand the time in which they are set..."
This option aligns more with realist or historicist views, suggesting that literature serves as a reflection of its historical moment.
"Literary texts are bound up with other discourses and rhetorical structures..."
This suggests a more intertextual or cultural approach, seeing literature as interconnected with other historical discourses, which is not consistent with formalism's isolated view of the text.
In summary, option 1 accurately represents the formalist perspective of literature as an autonomous art form, making it the correct answer.
Year-wise PYQs
