Stanley Edgar Hyman was a prominent American literary critic whose work sought to reshape the standards and methods of literary criticism in the mid-20th century. His critical approach is best understood through his major works, especially The Armed Vision, and his extensive career as a reviewer and essayist.
Key Features of Hyman’s Critical Views
Emphasis on Methodology and Modern Criticism
Hyman was deeply invested in the methods of modern literary criticism, arguing that the contemporary era was distinguished not necessarily by the quality of its critics, but by the sophistication and diversity of its critical methods. He believed that modern criticism benefited from "vast organized bodies of knowledge about human behavior" and new techniques, particularly those drawn from the social sciences, psychoanalysis, anthropology, and structuralism5.
Hyman advocated for an interdisciplinary approach, seeing literature as a human activity that could be analyzed with the same rigor as any other social phenomenon. He encouraged critics to ask questions about the relationship between a work and the author's life, social context, psychological motivations, and the broader patterns of myth and ritual5.
Rejection of Traditional Criticism’s Limitations
Hyman was critical of older critical traditions that viewed literature primarily as moral instruction or entertainment. Instead, he argued that criticism should explore deeper questions about meaning, structure, and cultural function5.
He also cautioned against reducing literature to mere historical or sociological documents, recognizing that such methods, if overextended, could overlook the individuality and artistic talent that make works unique5.
Judicious and Humane Criticism
Hyman's critical voice was characterized by moderation, practical sanity, and a modesty of tone. He was known for his lucid, flexible, and urbane writing style, often witty but rarely flamboyant2.
While capable of sharp critique, he tended to seek positive value in works, sometimes to a fault-his "benevolence" sometimes led him to be overly indulgent toward writers he considered serious, even if their work was flawed2.
Hyman was at his best when offering incisive critiques of overrated or poorly received works, but he was sometimes reticent to deliver harsh judgments on writers he respected, which some critics saw as a limitation2.
Breadth of Interests
Hyman’s criticism ranged widely, covering not only literature but also anthropology, mythology, and biblical studies. He brought a broad intellectual curiosity to his reviews, often drawing connections across disciplines23.
Influence and Legacy
Hyman's work helped to redefine the criteria and sensibilities of literary criticism in his era, promoting a more analytical, interdisciplinary, and humane approach to the study of literature34. He was also a respected teacher, influencing generations of students at Bennington College and beyond34.
Summary Table: Hyman’s Critical Approach
| Aspect | Hyman’s View |
|---|---|
| Methodology | Interdisciplinary, analytic, informed by social sciences |
| Attitude to Tradition | Rejects moralistic/entertainment-only views |
| Style | Lucid, urbane, often moderate and humane |
| Strengths | Breadth, incisiveness, wit, humane judgment |
| Weaknesses | Occasional over-indulgence, reticence in harsh critique |
In sum, Stanley Edgar Hyman’s critical views were marked by a commitment to methodological rigor, interdisciplinary analysis, and a humane, judicious tone. He played a significant role in shaping modern literary criticism, advocating for a deeper, more nuanced engagement with literature and its contexts235.