The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Limits of Critique
Abstract
Why must critics unmask and demystify literary works? Why do they believe that language is always withholding some truth, that critic's task is to reveal unsaid or repressed? In this book, Rita Felski examines critique, dominant form of interpretation in literary studies, and situates it as but one method among many, a method with strong allure-but also definite limits. Felski argues that critique is a sensibility best captured by Paul Ricoeur's phrase the hermeneutics of suspicion. She shows how this suspicion toward texts forecloses many potential readings while providing no guarantee of rigorous or radical thought. Instead, she suggests, literary scholars should try what she calls postcritical reading: rather than looking behind a text for hidden causes and motives, literary scholars should place themselves in front of it and reflect on what it suggests and makes possible. By bringing critique down to earth and exploring new modes of interpretation, The Limits of Critique offers a fresh approach to relationship between artistic works and social world.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Felski (2015) claims that elements of a post-critical attitude can be sighted in the works of Ludwig Wittgenstein, Stanley Cavell, and Jacques Rancière—authors whose ideas have found their way into the philosophy of education.”
From Post-criticality and the pursuit of an empirical philosophy of education: epistemology, methodology, ethics (2024) · cites this paper as Felski 2015
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
More than tools? Making sense of the ongoing digitizations of higher education
Castañeda, L., & Selwyn, N. (2018) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-018-0109-y · Cited by 445
“As Rita Felski (2015) reminds us, just because other work is not critical does not mean that it is un critical.”
BackgroundCultural geography II: The force of representations
Anderson, B. (2018) · Progress in Human Geography · doi:10.1177/0309132518761431 · Cited by 157
Saint‐Amour, P. K. (2018) · Modernism/modernity · doi:10.1353/mod.2018.0035 · Cited by 111
Faraway, So Close: Seeing the Intimacy in Goodreads Reviews
Driscoll, B., & Sedo, D. R. (2018) · Qualitative Inquiry · doi:10.1177/1077800418801375 · Cited by 90
Craig, C. J., You, J., Zou, Y., et al. (2018) · Teaching and Teacher Education · doi:10.1016/j.tate.2018.01.014 · Cited by 83
Metadata
- Authors
- Felski, R.
- Corresponding author
- Felski, Rita
- ORCID
- Felski, Rita
- Venue
- University of Chicago Press eBooks
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2015
- OpenAlex
- W2344967523
- Cited by
- 1,709
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 138 · 2025: 211 · 2024: 172 · 2023: 176 · 2022: 143 · 2021: 170 · 2020: 158 · 2019: 255 · 2018: 165 · 2017: 95 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 269.09
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- University of Chicago Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Literary Theory and Cultural Hermeneutics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Hermeneutics and Narrative Identity
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Contemporary Literature and Criticism
- Keywords
- literary criticism, critique, hermeneutics of suspicion, Paul Ricoeur, interpretation, demystification, literary theory, art and society
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
