Poems have an organic unity, an autonomy that resolves contending aspects. The New Critics were more writers than philosophers, and the radical criticism of the sixties pounced on the shortcomings. New Criticism was not literary analysis, but often the justification of a small canon of works arbitrarily selected for study and admiration. Critics are not detached reporters, but approach their work with allegiances, preconceptions and cultural heritages. Communities maintain the very concept of literature, and these communities have common expectations.
Poems are cultural artifacts, and only make full sense if studied in their social context.
The new radicalism should have been liberating. The content of a poem was important again, as were the outlooks, experiences and social values of their creators. Literature was not the preserve of universities or gentlemen scholars, but rejoined everyday life. Anything and everything. The small presses were deluged with material of no particular interest, and therapeutic classes for the retired or unemployable rejected standards altogether.