The Heresy of Paraphrase
Sarah Guayante
Literary criticism prioritizes the analysis of literary texts. But, what does analysis look like? What distinguishes an analysis of the poem from a summary of the text, a translation of the text, or a paraphrase?
In a well-wrought chapter, Cleanth Brooks describes what he calls “the heresy of paraphrase”–the act of deriving meaning from either a paraphrase or translation of the text rather than an analysis of its contents. Rather than trying to either paraphrase the poem—finding its meaning by ignoring the flowery language of the text—or translate the poem—finding the meaning by translating from the language of the author’s time to our own—Brooks suggests that we focus our attention on the form of the text. For Brooks, form is content.
But the reader may well ask: is it not possible to frame a proposition, a statement, which will adequately represent the total meaning of the poem; that is, is it not possible to elaborate a summarizing position which will “say” briefly and in the form of a proposition, what the poem “says” as a poem, a proposition which will say it fully and will say it exactly, no more and no less? Could not the poet, if he had chosen, have framed such a proposition? Cannot we as readers and critics frame such a proposition?
The answer must by that the poet himself obviously did not—else he would not have had to write his poem. We as readers can attempt to frame such a proposition in our effort to understand the poem; it may well help toward an understanding. Certainly, the efforts to arrive at such propositions can do no harm if we do not mistake them for the inner core of the poem—if we do not mistake them for “what the poem really says.”
[…]
The essential structure of a poem (as distinguished from the rational or logical structure of the “statement” which we abstract from it) resembles that of architecture or painting: it is a pattern of resolved stresses. Or, to move closer still to poetry by considering the temporal arts, the structure of a poem resembles that of a ballet or musical composition. It is a pattern of resolutions and balances and harmonizations, developed through a temporal scheme.[1]
Watch the YouTube channel Readacted explain Cleanth Brooks’s argument here.
Key Terms
- Summary: Identifies the main idea of the text. Introduces or contextualizes the argument for the reader.
- Paraphrase: Extracts meaning from the text and re-interprets this meaning in one’s own words. Explains a concept or idea to the reader.
- Translation: Identifies how the diction and syntax creates a barrier to interpretation. Re-writes that diction and syntax in language that’s easier for the reader to understand. Re-directs the reader’s focus from the language of the text to the ideas.
- Analysis: Directs the reader’s attention to the formal details of the text—diction, syntax, rhythm, meter, or imagery—in order to explain how these formal devices work together to create meaning.
- Brooks, Cleanth. The Well-Wrought Urn: Studies in the Structure of Poetry. (London: Denis Dobson Ltd, 1960), 188, 186. ↵
Cleanth Brooks's chapter "Heresy of Paraphrase" is from his book The Well-Wrought Urn. The words "well-wrought" mean well written or well constructed. By using this phrase, the author is including a poorly constructed pun.
She thinks she's much funnier than she really is.
