The Critical Frame in Literary Scholarship

An open laptop with a screen displaying a literature review. There is a steaming cup of coffee to the left of the computer and piles of books around it.

Every researched argument in literary studies has a critical frame that locates its main interpretive claim (i.e., its thesis) in ongoing critical conversations. In peer-reviewed scholarly articles, this frame may be positioned after an extensive literature review (or an introductory overview of historical context). In successful undergraduate papers, this frame should come sooner (ideally in the first, second, or third paragraphs).

Critical frames are statements that specify the singularity and importance of the paper’s thesis. They isolate the aspects of the work(s) the paper will address, differentiating the paper’s claim from claims already offered in existing scholarship.

Every critical frame should include:

  1. the specific aspect(s) of the literary work(s) that will be addressed
  2. an acknowledged consensus within the scholarship on the literary work(s)
  3. a defined issue/idea/controversy within the critical scholarship on the literary work(s)
  4. a direct address of (or answer to) the defined issue/idea/controversy
  5. an indication of how the address of (or answer to) this issue/idea/controversy is an original contribution to existing scholarship

An important qualification regarding originality: Undergraduate students are not held to the same level of attainment as advanced scholars in the field. An original contribution for an undergraduate student could be a competent synthesis of well-vetted sources that provides slightly different evidence for already established interpretations.

An important reminder regarding research: A writer cannot convincingly outline the current state of the field, or identify a site for intervention, without thoroughly reviewing* the scholarly output in the field. This review should include an appraisal all reputable sources, not merely an examination of sources a writer can easily access online.

*Expectations for the thoroughness of a review will be tempered by the volume of existing research. No instructor will expect students to review all the scholarship on Shakespeare or Milton. They can reasonably expect a student to survey the existing scholarship on a writer such as Stevie Smith.

Practical advice for undergraduates

  1. Make sure you review top scholarly sources. Start with the premier database in English Studies (the MLA Bibliography), use appropriate filters (selecting “peer reviewed” and “exclude dissertations”), and select print as well as electronic sources. Prioritize full-length articles over notes or queries and seek guidance from your instructor re: source quality.
  2. Use the process of research to help you determine points of consensus in the field. Results lists can indicate recurrent topics and methodological approaches. Well-crafted article titles indicate the thrust of theses. Initial searches can go a long way toward establishing “what people are saying.”
  3. Focus on particulars. All your research should address the same work(s) and topic. The distinction is in the details. Don’t focus on the generalities you find in SparkNotes overviews. Look at the specifics of each claim and see what you can build from there.
  4. Don’t use omission to make an argument. Ignoring the work that agrees with you doesn’t give you an original argument. It actually undermines your claims and calls into question your integrity as a researcher.
  5. Remember that original contributions are part of a critical conversation. Look for ways you can *add* to the argument. Scholarship productively builds off what came before it. No one is expecting you to reinvent the wheel (or discover completely new organisms). See if you can provide supplementary evidence for published claims, put divergent works of scholarship in dialogue with one another, or complicate methodological approaches.

A final reminder: The key to an effective critical frame is a mastery of the existing scholarship. Researchers must access the right materials, read the scholarship for comprehension, and effectively synthesize that critical work in their own writing.

While there is no set formula for an original contribution, Dr. Vander Zee provides a useful framework for showcasing scholarly research in a thesis statement. Feel free to use his dueling thesis template.