Critic speak is tough, but we've got you covered.
Quote :The Romantic Ideology: A Critical Investigation
[P]oems are social and historical products and…the critical study of such products must be grounded in a socio-historical analytic. This does not mean that “purely” stylistic, rhetorical, formal, or other specialized analyses cannot or will not be pursued. Quite the contrary…What it does mean is that all such specialized studies must find their raison d’etre in the socio-historical ground.
Poems aren’t just linguistic compositions. They are also social and historical compositions. That is, it’s not just words that go into the writing of a poem—there are social values, historical circumstances, and even economic issues that go into the writing of a poem. These things may not be obvious, but they’re there nonetheless. And our job as literary critics is to analyze that socio-historical context.
Of course, that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t analyze a poem’s style, its formal characteristics, its language (we are literary critics after all). But it’s just as important to pay attention to its socio-historical context as it is to pay attention to its linguistic or formal characteristics. As critics we should be working at both these levels, not just focusing on one at the expense of the other.
McGann’s words here are useful because they clarify how New Historicists approach close-reading. The point that McGann’s making is that we can do close reading as New Historicists, but it always has to be balanced by attention to issues that extend beyond the text.