Showing papers in "Poetics Today in 1984"
••
TL;DR: In this article, a note on translation of Epic and Novel from the Prehistory of Novelistic Discourse forms of time and of the Chronotope in the Novel Discourse in the novel glossary index is given.
Abstract: Acknowledgments A Note on Translation Introduction Epic and Novel From the Prehistory of Novelistic Discourse Forms of Time and of the Chronotope in the Novel Discourse in the Novel Glossary Index
1,015 citations
••
621 citations
••
179 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a general model of the structuring of space within the narrative text and examine the problems arising from the use of the term space with regard to the literary text.
Abstract: The purpose of this study is to present a general model of the structuring of space within the narrative text. The term space is used here to mean specifically the spatial aspects of the reconstructed world. This seems natural and rather obvious, but the term can be applied to the literary text in various ways and is, itself, far from unambiguous. It is.necessary, then, to examine the whole range of problems arising from the use of the term with regard to the literary text. If this task as a whole lies outside the scope of the present study, we can at least clarify one essential aspect of it: the relationship between space and time in the narrative text. 1. THE ASYMMETRY OF TIME AND SPACE IN THE NARRATIVE
136 citations
••
72 citations
••
43 citations
••
TL;DR: Metaphor is a curious case. On the one hand, there is an endless cross-disciplinary procession of theoretical books and papers on the subject as mentioned in this paper, and on the other hand, one wave peaked in the nineteen fifties and sixties, another has developed in recent years.
Abstract: Metaphor is a curious case. Perhaps it reflects the current state of poetics in relation to other fields of the humanities. On the one hand, there is an endless cross-disciplinary procession of theoretical books and papers on the subject. One wave peaked in the nineteen fifties and sixties, another has developed in recent years. Important contributions have been made to the clarification of the basic
38 citations
••
TL;DR: A critical introduction to an important, yet relatively little understood corpus of literary theory is given in this article, which is free of jargon and aims not to oversimplify difficult issues.
Abstract: A critical introduction to an important, yet relatively little understood corpus of literary theory. Although free of jargon, it aims not to oversimplify difficult issues.
26 citations
••
••
TL;DR: The Structure of Reality in Fiction in Fiction as discussed by the authors is a theoretical frame within which these notions will be explicated, thus avoiding idle metaphysical or metaphorical chat, which is based on the empirical work of constructivist scientists (e.g., Humberto R. Maturana, Francisco Varela, Ernst von Glasersfeld, Heinz von Foerster, Ruprecht Riedl, and others).
Abstract: No scientific analysis of the theme "The Structure of Reality in Fiction" can proceed without a basic clarification of the notions "reality" and "fiction." Any discussion of this or related subjects necessarily entails far-reaching ontological, metascientific, and object-theoretical concepts and models (cf. S.J. Schmidt 1976, 1980-1982, 1980a). In this paper I will outline a theoretical frame within which these notions will be explicated, thus avoiding idle metaphysical or metaphorical chat. This theoretical frame is based on the empirical work of constructivist scientists (e.g., Humberto R. Maturana, Francisco Varela, Ernst von Glasersfeld, Heinz von Foerster, Ruprecht Riedl, and others). Since literary scholars tend not to be familiar with constructivist epistemology and its empirical foundation, I have undertaken the following excursus into biology and physiology in the hope that it will help clarify the differences between constructivist positions and those which have been developed without empirical (scientific) foundations in the history of philosophy (e.g., solipsism). Moreover, a detailed account of constructivist epistemology may help prevent possible misunderstandings of my conception of literature, fiction, and reality. It must be emphasized beforehand, however, that the following discussion does not present completely novel thinking. For instance, certain scientists have at various times maintained that meaning is a matter of convention and subjectivity. But such assumptions, as a rule, lack a consistent theoretical and empirical base, nor has it been made clear what conclusions can (could, should) be drawn from them.
••
TL;DR: In this paper, K. L. Lópezpezpez et al. describe the rhetorique de l'illusion and les limites de la representation: la perspective dans "
Abstract: La rhetorique de l'illusion et les limites de la representation : la perspective dans " K. L. "
••
TL;DR: For instance, this paper argued that the stereotype is a screen and therefore an obstacle to representation, and that it would be the opposite and negation of representation in every attempt to seize hold of a reality which is by definition diversified and complex.
Abstract: As a cultural model through which we perceive, interpret, and describe reality, the stereotype is necessarily linked with representation. Its preconstructed forms provide representation with foundations; they guarantee its possibility and legibility at the same time. This point of view, without any doubt, flagrantly contradicts public opinion, which opposes the stereotype to the accurate reproduction of reality that is to say, to the "living character," to the "faithful depiction of feelings," and to scenes described as "natural." In every attempt to seize hold of a reality which is by definition diversified and complex, the stereotype would act as a screen and therefore as an obstacle; in this sense it would be the opposite and the negation of representation. The persistent dichotomy between the "real" and the "conventional" is nevertheless, as we know, largely illusory in art. If it is true, as Gombrich (1960) has shown for the plastic arts, that all vision is conditioned by preexisting schemas, it is just as obvious that the literary text relies heavily on accredited models. Between the calm comfort of realistic illusion, and the irritation caused by the stereotype, there is only a very relative distance: that which separates the naturalized model where the reader confuses the stereotyped forms with reality as he sees it, from the prefabricated mold which he denounces as excessive codification and mere distortion of reality. The Russian Formalists' concept of "automatization" was designed to account for this process wherein convention stiffens and congeals. To really understand the stereotype in its constitutive relations with representation in fiction, it is, however, important to go beyond the original notion of automatization. The stereotype does indeed testify to the omnipresence of models which are not simply changeable literary conventions, but global cultural
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors make a claim for the case that all presentation of reality in fiction should be seen in its subjective aspects and that the mediation brought about by the use of language has its source in the process of interaction of subjects that aspire toward the being taken for granted of certain meanings by all parties concerned.
Abstract: In this article, I will approach the problem of reality in fiction within the framework of the basic subjectivity of all discourse The notion of "subjectivity," both as the opposite of (illusory) objectivity, and as subject-dependency, but in the first place considered as activity of subjects, will be amply discussed First I will briefly present the rather commonplace view that all discourse is subjective As far as the relation between reality and discourse is concerned, there is no basic difference between history and fiction (see also Smith 1978) The fallacy of an "objective" difference is rooted in our traditional interpretation of Aristotle's notion of mimesis, seen as fiction This concept has been open to recent interpretation It is precisely on the basis of our revision of Aristotle's ideas as well as of the theoretical work done in the field of narratology that I wish to make a claim for the case that all presentation of reality in fiction should be seen in its subjective aspects The mediation brought about by the use of language has its source in the process of interaction of subjects that aspire toward the being taken for granted of certain meanings by all parties concerned This effort cannot be but rhetorical The unavoidable use of rhetoric in social behavior is a political act Criticism of this process requires a detailed analysis of discursive subjects and the way they communicate meanings The case of the Samson and Delilah tale (Judges 13-16) serves to illustrate the point
••
TL;DR: The authors compare the main analytic frameworks and methods of contemporary linguistics and offer a unique overview of linguistic theory, revealing the common concerns of competing approaches, and provide the means by which linguists and others can judge what are the most useful models for the task in hand.
Abstract: This handbook compares the main analytic frameworks and methods of contemporary linguistics. It offers a unique overview of linguistic theory, revealing the common concerns of competing approaches. By showing their current and potential applications it provides the means by which linguists and others can judge what are the most useful models for the task in hand. Distinguished scholars from all over the world explain the rationale and aims of over thirty explanatory approaches to the description, analysis, and understanding of language. Each chapter considers the main goals of the model; the relation it proposes between lexicon, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and phonology; the way it defines the interaction between cognition and grammar; what it counts as evidence; and how it explains linguistic change and structure.
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors analyze the problem of the identity and ontological status of the literary work and the two primary aims of literary criticism: interpretation and evaluation, and demonstrate that all four issues are conceptually very closely related and that positions on one inevitably influence positions on the others.
Abstract: The intentionally ambiguous title of my thesis suggests both the notion of the object at which literary criticism is directed and also the notion of the objective toward which it is directed. The first involves the problems of the identity and ontological status of the literary work, while the second involves the two primary aims of literary criticism: interpretation and evaluation. These four issues are individually analyzed in separate chapters, and my positions on them are presented and defended, while rival positions are critically examined. Moreover, I demonstrate that all four issues are conceptually very closely related and that positions on one inevitably influence positions on the others. [Continued in text ...]
••
••
TL;DR: The Turn of the Screw as mentioned in this paper is a classic example of the state of the art in the field of literary criticism, and it has been the subject of a great deal of controversy over the last few decades.
Abstract: Anyone who engages in even a fairly superficial study of the plethora of available interpretations of Henry James's famous story The Turn of the Screw must come to the conclusion that literary criticism has reached or perhaps has always been in a state in which, in Paul Feyerabend's words, \"anything goes.\" If being published in widely circulated and reputable journals is a standard for what counts as acceptable knowledge in this field of study, then the many and often utterly conflicting interpretations of this story seem to testify to either an extreme relativism or to an almost total absence of agreedupon general methodological principles. What to some may appear to be a sign of a healthy pluralism, others and I tend to sympathize with this latter group regard as an intellectual scandal. I would like to begin with a brief demonstration of this disturbing state of affairs by quoting at some length from an article by Brenda Murphy (1979) entitled \"The Problem of Validity in the Critical Controversy Over 'The Turn of the Screw.' \" Murphy begins her paper by simply compiling some of the results other critics of James's story have come to. This is what she has to say:
••
••
TL;DR: This paper argued that the more "fantastic" elements in a work, the more surely the work fits into the category of "realistic" literature, and that any fictional work that does not comply with the readers' intersubjective experience of the surrounding reality must necessarily be a "fiend" element.
Abstract: Popular opinion includes under the rubric of fantastic literature all those works which do not fall into the broad and misty class of "realistic" writing. The implication is that everything fictional that does not comply with the readers' intersubjective experience of the surrounding reality must necessarily be a "fantastic" element. Hence, the more "fantastic elements" in a work, the more surely the work fits into the category of "fantastic" literature. Even authors who recognize the "realism" fallacy' cannot help but discuss "the fantastic" in terms of the direct comparison between the fictional reality and the empirical one.2 Naturally, there is a disparity between such opinions and attitudes and recent insights into literature and its nature, the relations between reader and text, and semiotic phenomena in general. Moreover, such opinions and attitudes appear unreliable in the historical approach to literary phenomena which, developing during their evolution, resist all static and dichotomous divisions and classifications.
••
••
TL;DR: For instance, this article argued that the individual's separation from these primary processes is essential to the very production of the subject: through repression the subject acquires a position in the "symbolic order" in language, in the symbolic relations of family and state.
Abstract: Students of rhetoric have often described metaphor as a displacement, a veiling, of the "proper name"; hence, as the loss of an original presence.1 Similarly, psychoanalytic theorists have considered parapraxis or the tropes of hysteria as traces, veiling yet disclosing the workings of repression and the primary processes of the unconscious. In Lacanian theory, the individual's separation from these primary processes is essential to the very production of the subject: through repression the subject acquires a position in the "symbolic order" in language, in the symbolic relations of family and state.2 The subject becomes an author, a producer of sentences;
••
TL;DR: The Siervo's semantic content, however, remains a topic of considerable controversy: it is viewed by many as an extended glorification of Rodrl'guez del Padr6n as a martyr of love (on the model of Maci'as).
Abstract: The Siervo's semantic content, however, remains a topic of considerable controversy: It is viewed by many as an extended glorification of Rodrl'guez del Padr6n (both qua poet and qua protagonist) as a martyr of love (on the model of Maci'as) (Barbieto 1951). Others see it as a didactic tratado designed to illustrate the superiority of the intellect against the fickleness of fortune (here synonymous with courtly love) an interpretation which seems to be suggested by the work's full title (The Servant Free[d] of Love) (Bastianutti 1972). Still others find the Siervo to be an ultimately ambiguous text (very likely unfinished), in which it is difficult to determine whether love or intellect is being valorized in the final analysis.2