Deformation forms the course of literary history

The Russian Formalists and Czech Structuralists argued that foregrounding devices such as deformation and deautomatization are central to literature. They saw that such devices build a pressure for novelty into literature. Literature must change constantly because readers gradually become used to and bored with initially novel and interesting deformations. Formalist and Structuralist theorists saw that literature should change but could not explain the direction in which it would change. They hypothesized that the direction of change is determined by extra-literary sociocultural forces. I argue that this hypothesis may be wrong. If we examine the way in which people think of novel word combinations in the first place, we can formulate a theory that explains the direction of literary change. Production of novelty often involves movement away from ordinary waking consciousness toward an altered state of consciousness. Within the confines of a given style, to produce something even more novel, poets must regress to an even more altered state of consciousness. The state of mind in which a poem is produced to some extent determines the words used in the poem. Given that the pressure for novelty is always present whereas other forces acting upon poets vary, we can predict the direction in which poetry tends to move from the alterations in consciousness required to produce ever more novel poetry. Statistical analyses of several poetic traditions show that this is, indeed, the main direction in which poetry evolves.