Russian Formalism Vs. New Criticism Analysis

Before we begin analysing and contrasting two schools and methods of interpretation, we must address the prose. In particular, that New Criticism was predominantly concerned with verse while being mostly contemptuous of prose – especially in the form that it came from JC Ransom. Although he did not endeavour to do himself, he briefly touches upon the possibility of applying his approach to prose.
To some extent, comparing Russian formalist theory to New Criticism is akin to comparing apples to oranges. To elaborate, whereas the Vanderbilt school of New Criticism does not even attempt to analyse prose, Russian formalist theory does.
From a Russian point of view and in a linguistic milieu, the definition of literature is most straightforwardly summarised by Jakobson as that which

What became of these theories is equally fascinating. Russian structuralism provided a platform to the ideas of one Russian who declared that all literary language epitomised class struggle – Bakhtin. Take for example, the reasons for conservatives wanting to alter the word “slave” to “worker” in a textbook. Whereas one is ostensibly vague, the other is quite transparently not - though both are political. Even in contemporary discussions about literature, such examples still persist.
New Criticism provided us a method of understanding vague political ideology. This is no way is a disservice to Ransom and other supporters of New Criticism and does not confer that they required political ideology. It is because the philosophies of Ransom have found themselves duly ignored by a vast majority in the technological age. Agricultural societies in the western world worth admiration no longer