Literary autonomy has been a central tenet of modernist and post-modernist literary criticism. Modernist writers such as James Joyce and Virginia Woolf experimented with new forms of narrative that challenged traditional notions of plot, character, and setting. They believed that literature should be free from the constraints of realism and should instead focus on exploring the inner workings of the human mind. Post-modernist writers such as Jorge Luis Borges and Italo Calvino took this idea even further, arguing that literature is a game of language that has no inherent meaning. They believed that the reader should be free to interpret a work of literature in any way they see fit.
Literary autonomy has been criticized on a number of grounds. Some critics argue that it is impossible to completely separate a work of literature from its context. They argue that the author's biography, the historical context in which it was written, and the reader's personal experiences all play a role in shaping our understanding of a work of literature. Others argue that literary autonomy leads to a lack of engagement with the real world. They believe that literature should be used to explore social and political issues, and that it should not be confined to the realm of pure aesthetics.
Despite these criticisms, literary autonomy remains an important concept in literary criticism. It has helped to free literature from the constraints of traditional forms and expectations, and it has allowed for a greater diversity of voices and perspectives in literature.