The Basis of Formalism and Its Limitations

Abstract

Many opinions have been discussed about the place of literature in society so far. The overwhelming majority is of the opinion that literature is a mirror of society. On the other hand, Formalism, as a literary theory, argues that the purpose of literature is literariness. Therefore, it is accepted as a rebellion against the understanding of literature dating back to the 1900s. Instead, it is suggested that a literary work should be studied as text-oriented. Furthermore, Formalists argue that the language of the work should be examined in terms of its literary elements, that is intrinsic, rather than extrinsic. That is the reason why they are criticized by other literary critics focusing on biographical, sociological, psychological, religious or historical issues. Their approach draws on those of Ferdinand de Saussure. Combining the views of many theorists, they make text-oriented literary studies. Formalism is often confused with official or legal correspondence. The reason why formalist criticism is associated with official and legal correspondence is linguistics. However, etymologically, Formalism is a word that is not related to formality but form. Formalism is considered a rebellion against the literary understanding of the period in which it was born. Besides, Formalism has different dimensions. Formalism is a criticism applied with varying techniques in both poetry and prose. This study seeks to answer such questions as what formalist criticism is, how it is applied to poetry and prose, and criticism made for and against it. At the end of the study, one is expected to have a reader-level knowledge of Formalist criticism.