theoryofliteratu00inwell

322 Notes [pp. 132-140
23. O. Walzel, "Shakespeares dramatische Baukunst," Jahrbuch der
Shakespearegesellschaft, LII (1916), pp. 3-35 (reprinted in Das
Wortkunstzverk, Mittel seiner Erforschung, Leipzig, 1926, pp.
302-25).
24. Ibid. (Berlin, 1917), esp. Gehalt und Gestalt im Kunstzverk des
Dichters, Wildpark-Potsdam, 1923, pp. 265 ff. and 282 ff.
25. Fritz Strich, Deutsche Klassik und Romantik, oder Vollendung und
Unendlichkeit, Munich, 1922. Cf. also the criticism in Martin
Schiitze, Academic Illusions, Chicago, 1933, pp. 13, 16.
26. Cf. Christopher Hussey, The Picturesque: Studies in a Point of View,
London, 1927, p. 5.
27. Jakob Burckhardt, Die Kultur der Renaissance in Italien, Vienna,
pp. 202-3.
28. There is a good discussion of these theories in Pitirim Sorokin's Social
and Cultural Dynamics, Vol. I, Cincinnati, 1937. Cf. also W, Pas-
sarge, Die Philosophic der Kunstgeschichte in der Gegenwart, Berlin,
1930.
29. E. Legouis and L. Cazamian, Histoire de la litterature anglaise, Paris,
1924, p. 279.
CHAPTER XII
The Analysis of the Literary Work of Art
1. Sir Sidney Lee, The Place of English Literature in the Modern Uni-
versity, London, 191 3
London, 1929, p. 7).
2. Cf. bibliography, Section III.
(reprinted in Elizabethan and Other Essays,
3. E.g., Oskar Walzel, Wechselseitige Erhellung der Kilnste, Berlin,
191 7; Gehalt und Gestalt im Kunstzverk des Dichters, Potsdam, 1 923 ;
Das Wortkunstzverk, Leipzig, 1926.
4. For studies of the Russian movement cf. Manfred Kridl in American
Bookman (1944), pp. 19-30; Nina Gourfmkel in Le Monde Slave,
VI (1929), pp. 234-63; and V. Zhirmunsky, in Zeitschrift fur
siavische Philologie, I (1925), pp. 117-52.
5. Cf. esp. William Empson, Seven Types of Ambiguity, London, 1930;
F. R. Leavis, Nezv Bearings in English Poetry, London, 1932; Geof-
frey Tillotson, On the Poetry of Pope, 1938.
6. Cf. bibliography, Section IV.
7. L. C. Knights, Hozv many Children had Lady Macbeth?, London,
1933, pp. 15-54 (reprinted in Explorations, London, 1946, pp. I 5-
54), states the case against the confusion of drama and life well. The
writings of E. E. Stoll, L. L. Schikking, and others have particularly
emphasized the role of convention and the distance from life in drama.