Art as a Technique

- Viktor Shklovsky

Introduction

Formalism, as the word itself indicates, refers to the theory that believes in the primacy of form.

Russian Formalism originated and flourished in the 1920s and was suppressed by 1930s. As a

literary movement, Russian Formalism attacked the historical, sociological, philosophical and

other intrinsic approaches to literature. It proposed a scientific method of studying poetic

language. According to them, literature was simply a special use of language.

The movement shifted from Russia to East Europe to the United States. Boris Eichenbaum,

Roman Jakobson, Viktor Shklovsky and Boris Tomashevsky were the leading representatives

of Russian Formalism. It is mainly represented by the ‘Moscow Linguistic Circle’ founded in

1915 and ‘OPOJAZ’ in St. Petersburg, which stood for ‘Society for the Study of Poetic

Language’ founded in 1916.

The essay, “Art as a Technique” by Viktor Shklovsky is a seminal work in Russian Formalism. It

is divided in two parts. The first part explains the concept of defamiliarisation. It states that in

literature, the experience of understanding the object is of importance while the object itself is

not as important. To this effect, literary devices became the focus. In the second part, he

elaborates on poetic language and how it is different from ordinary language since it is

defamiliarised.

Tenets

It started as a linguistic enquiry into literary techniques under a group called OPOJAZ, which

was a product of Moscow Linguistic Circle.

The basic premise is the belief that poetic language is different from the ordinary use of

language.
Formalists believe in scientific study of textual dynamics such as the use of words, syntax,

sounds and figures of speech.

They vehemently opposed symbolism and subjective interpretation of literature.

They maintained the difference between art and ordinary life.

Another belief that is central is the concept of literary facts. Formalists believe that literary facts

are given in the text and readers have to understand them through literary techniques. This

implies that it is possible to arrive at an objective and scientific understanding of the meaning

through literary techniques of a text.

Russian Formalism strongly advocated the exclusion of social, psychological and historical

approaches to literature. They were interested in the artistic devices of imaginative writing.

The focus was on the form of the text rather than the metaphysical concerns of literary criticism.

Another chief argument is that aesthetic effect of a text is the product of the literary devices

used. They define ‘literary’ as a special use of language. In effect, Formalism attacked the

mystical posturing of poets.

Formalists claim that literary language become distinct by distorting practical language.

In the final phase of Formalism, critics like Bakhtin and Thomashevsky began exploring other

formats of fictions like the narrative and motif.

Art as a Technique

Viktor Shklovsky promotes mechanical formalism under the umbrella of Russian Formalism. His

essay ‘Art as a Technique’ is a seminal work in Russian Formalism. It is largely about the

function of art and poetic language in literature.

Symbolist, Alexander Potebnya that art means to think in images. Shklovsky argues that art

forms like music and architecture do not have images. He says that art is rather a technique

that helps recover the sensation of life.

Perception becomes habitual in life, which leads to an automatic or mechanical life. Humans

develop ‘algebrization’ which is explained as automation of perception. “Habitualization devours

works, clothes, furniture, one’s wife, and the fear of war.” This tendency, he argues, creates the

economy of perceptive effort.

Theory of Defamiliarisation

Shklovsky coined this term in his essay ‘Art as a Technique’. He explains that it is an artistic

technique to “distinguish poetic from practical language on the basis of former’s perceptibility.”

The technique of art is to make objects unfamiliar, make the forms difficult, to increase the

difficulty and length of perception. “Art is a way of experiencing the artfulness of an object: the

object is not important.” (Shklovsky)

He argues that familiar objects are not significant and art removes objects from the automatism

of perception so that one has to spend more time to understand them.

Poetic Language

In the second part of the essay, Shklovsky talks about how poetic language is a defamiliarised

language. The language of poetry and the practical language have very different functions.

Practical language is used for communication purposes, whereas the language of poetry has no

such practical purpose. It’s objective is to defamiliarised and lengthen the time and effort in

perception.

Poetic language is roughened and difficult, and it removes automatism of perception. He says

that in poetry language deviates from syntax and phonetic structures. The physical sound of

words when used in everyday language is defamiliarised and becomes prominent. This formal
prominence is the basis of poetry. Shklovsky states, “Poetic speech is formed speech, because

defamiliarisation is found almost everywhere form is found.”

He anticipates a futuristic concept of “trans sense language” where language contains in itself a

sense of unintelligibility. Shklovsky categorizes folklores, nursery rhymes, and religious rituals in

the group of trans-sense language. He argues that in these kinds of work, sound is more

important than sense. Shklovsky also extends the use of defamiliarisation to the study of fiction.

He says that in fiction, the story (fabula) and the plot (syuzhet) are different. While the story is a

linear progression of events, a plot may unfold in any manner as chosen by the author. Some

novelists defamiliarised the art of story telling with the help of narrative devices.

Shklovsly concludes the essay with a typical non-romantic statement. He argues that

sentiments cannot be the mainstay of art. Art is trans emotional and unsympathetic. He reminds

that even emotions in a work of art are the products of a different point of view, and in this, the

point of view also becomes a technique.

Formalism took birth in Russia and spread to East Europe and United States. It holds the view

that aesthetic effect in literature is produced by literary devices and hence it focuses sharply on

these devices. It brought to the fore the study of devices such as narrative, poetic language,

plot, motifs, figures of speech, among others. Through his essay “Art as a Technique”,

Shklovsky indicates that true technique of art is to make objects unfamiliar, and to make the

forms difficult to understand so as to increase the difficulty and length of perception. He attacks

historical and romantic traditions in literary criticism and suggests an intense formal analysis of

literature. He argues that practical language is used for regular communication while poetic

language has a higher purpose than practicality. The Formalists’ poignant differentiation

between poetic and practical use of language has helped in evolving a scientific basis for the

study of literature.

Theory of Defamiliarisation / Poetic Language

of studying poetic language. It began as a linguistic enquiry into literary techniques under a

group called OPOJAZ, which was a product of Moscow Linguistic Circle.The basic premise is

the belief that poetic language is different from the ordinary use of language. It attacked the

historical, sociological, philosophical and other intrinsic approaches to literature. The essay, “Art

as a Technique” by Viktor Shklovsky is a seminal work in Russian Formalism. It is divided in

two parts. The first part explains the concept of defamiliarisation. It states that in literature, the

experience of understanding the object is of importance while the object itself is not as

important. To this effect, literary devices became the focus. In the second part, he elaborates

on poetic language and how it is different from ordinary language since it is defamiliarised.

Art as a Technique

Viktor Shklovsky promotes mechanical formalism under the umbrella of Russian Formalism. His

essay ‘Art as a Technique’ is a seminal work in Russian Formalism. It is largely about the

function of art and poetic language in literature.

In his essay, Shklovsky attacks Russian symbolism by analyzing the statement of Russian

Symbolist, Alexander Potebnya that art means to think in images. Shklovsky argues that art

forms like music and architecture do not have images. He says that art is rather a technique

that helps recover the sensation of life.

Perception becomes habitual in life, which leads to an automatic or mechanical life. Humans

develop ‘algebrization’ which is explained as automation of perception. “Habitualization devours

works, clothes, furniture, one’s wife, and the fear of war.” This tendency, he argues, creates the

economy of perceptive effort.

Defamiliarisation

Shklovsky coined this term in his essay ‘Art as a Technique’. He explains that it is an artistic

technique to “distinguish poetic from practical language on the basis of former’s perceptibility.”
The technique of art is to make objects unfamiliar, make the forms difficult, to increase the

difficulty and length of perception. “Art is a way of experiencing the artfulness of an object: the

object is not important.” (Shklovsky)

He argues that familiar objects are not significant and art removes objects from the automatism

of perception so that one has to spend more time to understand them.

He provides a series of examples of defamiliarisation in literature. Many novels and poems

have employed defamiliarisation to stretch the time of perception. An example of this is Leo

Tolstoy’s novel, ‘Shame’. He says that Tolstoy describes familiar objects as if were seeking

them for the first time, by not naming them directly. Flogging as a concept was not named

directly. He quotes from the novel,

To strip people who have broken the law, to hurl them to the floor, and to wrap their bottoms

with switches.” (Tolstoy, Shame)

This description doesn’t use the term flogging. Instead, the readers have to spend more time to

understand and make the connection. Shklovsky also discusses another novel by Tolstoy,

Kholstomer, where the narrator in the novel thinks about private property and hears various

names being called out. The narrator also sees a restricted view of the world, that appears only

straight in front of him, and he has no lateral vision. The readers take time to realize that the

narrator is a horse with blindfolds, and hence the world seen through its eyes become

unfamiliar and difficult.

Thus, Shklovsky explains that the difference is the key to creation of art and the prevention of

‘over-automization’ which causes an individual to ‘function as though by formula’. The purpose

of art is to impart the sensation of things as they are perceived and not as they are known. The

technique of art is to make objects ‘unfamiliar’, to make forms difficult to increase the difficulty

and length of perception because the process of perception is an aesthetic end in itself and it

must be prolonged.
Poetic Language

In the second part of the essay, Shklovsky talks about how poetic language is a defamiliarised

language. The language of poetry and the practical language have very different functions.

Practical language is used for communication purposes, whereas the language of poetry has no

such practical purpose. It’s objective is to defamiliarised and lengthen the time and effort in

perception.

Poetic language is roughened and difficult, and it removes automatism of perception. He says

that in poetry language deviates from syntax and phonetic structures. It produces a slowness of

perception. For instance, the word ‘sunne’ is to be understood as ‘sun’ and the word ‘fyre’ is to

be read as ‘fry’. He indicates that archaism, obscure style and conceits are used in the same

objective. However, he reminds that if there are too many experiments in poetic language, the

occasional use of simple language will also do the trick.

Shklovsky says that when every object of the world becomes familiar to us we become

habituated. Our everyday life becomes a life of ‘prose perceptions’, which means that tiling

becomes known but not perceived. But against these prose perception there is a world of art

which, Shklovsky says, “exists that one may recover the sensation of life; it exists to make one

feels things, to make the stone stony. The purpose of art is to impart the sensation of things as

they are perceived and not as they are known.” According to Shklovsly, in the process of

defamiliarisation the worldly object is taken out of the area of prose perception and placed in

the arena of art. It draws our attention to the artifice of literary text. For example, he states, “A

dance is a walk which is felt even more accurately, it is a walk which is constructed to be felt.”

The language of poetry is oblique, torturous, difficult and attenuated. The physical sound of

words when used in everyday language is defamiliarised and becomes prominent. This formal

prominence is the basis of poetry. Shklovsky states, “Poetic speech is formed speech, because

defamiliarisation is found almost everywhere form is found.” He refers to fellow poet and critic,

Leo Jakubinski who had brought in the idea of phonetic roughening that is, using unfamiliar
sounds in poetry. He also calls poetry as an impeded language as observed in poems by

Pushkin. He states that both rhythm and disordering of rhyme can create defamiliarisation in

poetic language.

He anticipates a futuristic concept of “trans sense language” where language contains in itself a

sense of unintelligibility. Shklovsky categorizes folklores, nursery rhymes, religious rituals in the

group of trans-sense language. He argues that in these kinds of work, sound is more important

than sense. By proclaiming the supremacy of sound over sense, he makes a deliberate break

with the earlier school of symbolists, which took every word / sound in a poem as having a

function.

Poetry practices a form of controlled violence on practical language, which is thereby deformed

and compels out attention to its constructed nature. For them, literary studies consist of

especially the poetic language, as themes are inconsistent and tend to be centrifugal. The

notion of literariness, which is central to the Formalist School, is achieved by the process of

differentiation. It also gives literary studies a scientific status, which helps in understanding the

coherence of the system. To view a text as literary, the context of non-literary has to be brought

in.

Shklovsky offers examples of defamiliarisation in poetic language. He says that sexuality and

love are defamiliarised in poetry from the days of Boccacio to the modern poets. In Boccacio’s

Decameron, one finds that ‘catching nightingales’ has significant figurative implication of the

sexual act. Shklovsky maintains that erotic subjects are presented figuratively in metaphysical

poetry. Donne and other metaphysical poets refer to sexual organs thorugh “lock and key”,

“quiliting tools” and “bow and arrow”. He says that such devices make poetic language strange

and wonderful.

Shklovsky also extends the use of defamiliarisation to the study of fiction. He says that in fiction,

the story (fabula) and the plot (syuzhet) are different. While the story is a linear progression of
events, a plot may unfold in any manner as chosen by the author. Some novelists

defamiliarised the art of story telling with the help of narrative devices. He gives the example of

Tristram Shandy, a novel in which the narrative does not give any story of Tristram. Shklovsky

reminds that there are different story lines in the plot that emphasize the structure of the novel

rather than the story. He says that Sterne, by violating the form, forces the readers to view it

minutely. Readers become aware of the form of fiction once the form is violated.

Shklovsly concludes the essay with a typical non-romantic statement. He argues that

sentiments cannot be the mainstay of art. Art is trans emotional and unsympathetic. He reminds

that even emotions in a work of art are the products of a different point of view, and in this, the

point of view also becomes a technique.

Conclusion

‘Art as a Technique’ is a seminal work in Russian Formalism by Viktor Shklovsky. It is largely

about the function of art and poetic language in literature. Shklovsky indicates that true

technique of art is to make objects unfamiliar, and to make the forms difficult to understand so

as to increase the difficulty and length of perception. He states “art is the way of experiencing

the artfulness of an object; the object is not important”. He attacks historical and romantic

traditions in literary criticism and suggests an intense formal analysis of literature. He argues

that practical language is used for regular communication while poetic language has a higher

purpose than practicality. He focuses sharply on these devices. This essay brought to the fore

the study of devices such as narrative, poetic language, plot, motifs, figures of speech, among

others. The Formalists’ poignant differentiation between poetic and practical use of language

has helped in evolving a scientific basis for the study of literature.