Since the linguistic turn in the early 20th century， some new characteristics also influenced the research of literature theory. For instance， some schools， such as New Criticism and Structuralism， focused on the research of literary texts and endowed the concept of text with highly profound meanings. Much more attention was paid to interpret the text and different ways of interpretation came into being. From the abundant connotation of texts， we can have a better understanding of different literary theories. In the essay， the author means to carry out a comparative analysis of textual view between New Criticism and New Historicism， for both of them are closely related with the texts and renowned for their viewpoints of text. The author will elaborate on the similarities and differences of them， and the differences will be illustrated concretely so as to grasp the essence of the theories.
　　When it comes to the similarities， it seems that they are not relevant at all. However， there is a close relationship of inheritance and negotiation between them. From the academic experience of Stephen Greenblatt， the pioneer of New Historicism， it can be found that his experience implies the colonization of New Historicism by New Criticism to some extent（Shao 12）. Besides， both criticisms emphasize the importance of text and are easy to put into practice.
　　Comparatively speaking， the differences outweigh the similarities， and the differences between New Criticism and New Historicism will be expounded from two main aspects： the historical background and the content. First of all， the historical background are quite different. As for New Criticism，， it emerged in England in the 1920s， came into being in the America in the 1930s， took a dominant position in the America from 1940s to1950s， and began to get judged and denounced in the 1960s. Before the birth of New Criticism， the romanticism had been the mainstream and foundation of western literature of the 19th century. The romanticism renders the literary works as “the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings： it takes its origin from emotion recollected in tranquility” so that the literary critics concentrate on the experience and background of the author and the social context instead of the text itself. Afterwards， New Criticism， which highlighted the text， challenged the traditional trend and became the brave betrayer. In terms of New Historicism， it appeared in 1980s after the post-structuralism declined. Precisely speaking， it already emerged at the end of 1970s and brought new way of research for literary criticism. What’s more， the critics of New Historicism had absorbed the thoughts from other schools， including the ideological thought from the western Marxism and the theory of “discourse power” by Foucault. Since the New Historicism both criticized and inherited its preceding theories， it eventually smashed the boundaries of the world， the author， the literary works and the readers and mixed them together， creating a new school of criticism with new textual view.