Talk:Theory of Literature

Feedback
Great article here. I wish more lit theory articles on WP were this cogent and comprehensive.

A few minor points:
 * "Their success in presenting a unified voice has fallen under criticism"... they were criticized for succeeding at this, or for a lack of success at this? The following sentences present a range of views and don't quite clarify this for me.
 * Per MOS:QUOTE, "As much as possible, avoid linking from within quotes, which may clutter the quotation, violate the principle of leaving quotations unchanged, and mislead or confuse the reader." The article does this in several places, such as "history of philosophy" or "old New Critic", though the latter may be unavoidable.
 * "highly indulgent in formalism" --this phrase confused me.

That's all I've got. This looks very solid and ready to truck right through GA and FA. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:11, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Khazar!
 * Changed to "been debated".
 * HoP removed, New Critic... well, it's pretty key.
 * I tried linking "formalism". Hopefully that works better.
 * Cheers! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:27, 28 October 2012 (UTC)