For anyone serious about the history of ideas, Wellek’s work is the indispensable foundation. AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
Rene Wellek’s A History of Modern Criticism: 1750–1950 stands as one of the most ambitious projects in 20th-century literary scholarship. Spanning eight volumes published over nearly four decades (1955–1992), this masterwork attempted nothing less than a comprehensive, international history of literary theory and judgment in the West.
Once you locate your do not read it like a novel. Read it like a reference. a history of modern criticism rene wellek pdf
Wellek was an ardent defender of the idea that literature possesses its own unique ontological status, separate from historical or political tracts.
First published by Yale University Press from 1955 to 1992, the full work spans eight substantial volumes. A breakdown of the series is provided below: For anyone serious about the history of ideas,
Covering Victorian criticism, realism, and naturalism.
– Examines the profound philosophical shifts driven by German Transcendentalism (Kant, Schiller, Goethe, the Schlegels) and English Romanticism (Wordsworth, Coleridge). Spanning eight volumes published over nearly four decades
What sets Wellek’s history apart from a mere encyclopedia of critics is his strict, underlying methodology. Wellek was deeply skeptical of "impressionistic" criticism—criticism based merely on a reviewer's emotional whim or subjective taste.
For scholars, students, and bibliophiles navigating the dense waters of literary theory, the name René Wellek stands as a titan. His multi-volume masterpiece, , is not just a reference work; it is the definitive map of how we have thought about literature for the last two centuries.
As a historian, Wellek believed in the existence of an international "European criticism," a community of thinkers who borrowed from, reacted to, and faced similar problems across national lines. His history was a conscious effort to synthesize these threads, arguing that "simple addition is not synthesis" and that someone must make the connections among national traditions. To this end, his method was to read all major critical documents, digest and summarize their main arguments, connect them with related positions, and judge them by their cogency, consistency, and historical importance.