Traditions in our discourse about literature - Revision history

Anna Auguscik: /* The history of our modern discourse of literature */

2009-10-21T10:06:07Z

The history of our modern discourse of literature

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:06, 21 October 2009
Line 33:		Line 33:

	==The history of our modern discourse of literature==		==The history of our modern discourse of literature==
	~~was the topic of our Wintersemester’s lecture.~~ The discussion of literature~~, we said,~~ appropriated established debates in order to find a more attractive topic and through that a wider audience.		The discussion of literature appropriated established debates in order to find a more attractive topic and through that a wider audience.

	*Those who discussed literature adopted and reconfigured the debates of poetry, rhetoric, and fiction.		*Those who discussed literature adopted and reconfigured the debates of poetry, rhetoric, and fiction.

Olaf Simons: /* Literature */

2008-04-17T08:35:35Z

Literature

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:35, 17 April 2008
Line 49:		Line 49:


	[[Category:Handout\|Literature]]		[[Category:Handout:Literature and Culture\|Literature]]

134.106.88.55 at 10:35, 5 June 2007

2007-06-05T10:35:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:35, 5 June 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	An awareness of different and not always compatible discourses pervades our modern literary studies. You cannot speak of a “first person narrator offering a monologue” in a poem. The first person narrator is “narratology”, the “monologue” is "poetics of the drama".		An awareness of different and not always compatible discourses pervades our modern literary studies. You cannot speak of a “first person narrator offering a monologue” in a poem. The first person narrator belongs to the tradition of “narratology”, the “monologue” belongs to the tradition of "poetics of the drama".

	The different discourses mix, yet they do not completely mix within our own discourse of literary criticism. "Metaphor" is a term from rhetoric – it can, however, unlike the "first-person narrator" be found in a political speech, a commercial advertisement, a Shakespeare play, or a ~~Hemmingway~~ story.		The different discourses mix, yet they do not completely mix within our own discourse of literary criticism. "Metaphor" is a term from rhetoric – it can, however, unlike the "first-person narrator" be found in a political speech, a commercial advertisement, a Shakespeare play, or a Hemingway story.

	The complex situation (how do I know what word to use in what context?) is the result of the complex history underlying our modern debate of literature:		The complex situation (how do I know what word to use in what context?) is the result of the complex history underlying our modern debate of literature:

Olaf Simons: /* The discussion of poetry */

2007-05-31T17:57:30Z

The discussion of poetry

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:57, 31 May 2007
Line 13:		Line 13:
	===The discussion of poetry===		===The discussion of poetry===
	provided		provided
	* the perspective on (formerly “poetic” now “literary”) genres, on their different ways of "delighting" and "instructing" audiences, their different "~~aesthetics~~" ~~leading to~~ different forms of perfection, their different "rules"		* the perspective on (formerly “poetic” now “literary”) genres, on their different ways of "delighting" and "instructing" audiences, their different "aesthetic" requirements (which result in different forms of perfection to be achieved in each genre), their different "rules"
	*the debate on the poet or poetess, his (or her) craftsmanship or genius (if not madness) which enables him or her to create works even without a perfect knowledge of their laws, his or her readiness to violate rules in order to achieve special effects		*the debate on the poet or poetess, his (or her) craftsmanship or genius (if not madness) which enables him or her to create great works even without a perfect knowledge of their laws, his or her readiness to violate rules in order to achieve special effects
	*the debate on the critic who has to develop a poetological expertise comprising both knowledge about the rules of poetry and a personal taste to judge how artistic aims are achieved		*the debate on the critic who has to develop a poetological expertise comprising both knowledge about the rules of poetry and a personal taste to judge how artistic aims are achieved

Olaf Simons: /* The discussion of literature */

2007-05-31T17:53:58Z

The discussion of literature

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:53, 31 May 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:
	... until around 1750 the debate of “learning”, “scientific publications” – provided		... until around 1750 the debate of “learning”, “scientific publications” – provided

	* the institutions~~: i.e.~~ literary journals, literary histories, the continuing academic and at the same moment public discussion of publications, and		* the institutions such as literary journals, literary histories, the continuing academic and at the same moment public discussion of publications, and
	* the discursive modalities: literature is “discussed” in a fundamentally scholarly exchange, i.e. in an exchange of competing judgments which the participants must be able to support their views rationally.		* the discursive modalities: literature is “discussed” in a fundamentally scholarly exchange, i.e. in an exchange of competing judgments in which the participants must be able to support their views rationally.

	===The discussion of poetry===		===The discussion of poetry===

Olaf Simons: /* The discussion of poetry */

2007-05-31T17:23:09Z

The discussion of poetry

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:23, 31 May 2007
Line 14:		Line 14:
	provided		provided
	* the perspective on (formerly “poetic” now “literary”) genres, on their different ways of "delighting" and "instructing" audiences, their different "aesthetics" leading to different forms of perfection, their different "rules"		* the perspective on (formerly “poetic” now “literary”) genres, on their different ways of "delighting" and "instructing" audiences, their different "aesthetics" leading to different forms of perfection, their different "rules"
	*the debate on the poet or poetess, his (or her) craftsmanship or genius (if not madness) which enables him or her to create works without a perfect knowledge of ~~the art~~, his or her readiness to violate rules in order to achieve special effects		*the debate on the poet or poetess, his (or her) craftsmanship or genius (if not madness) which enables him or her to create works even without a perfect knowledge of their laws, his or her readiness to violate rules in order to achieve special effects
	*the debate on the critic who has to develop a poetological expertise comprising both knowledge about the rules of poetry and a personal taste to judge how artistic aims are achieved		*the debate on the critic who has to develop a poetological expertise comprising both knowledge about the rules of poetry and a personal taste to judge how artistic aims are achieved

Olaf Simons: /* The discussion of literature */

2007-05-31T17:21:34Z

The discussion of literature

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:21, 31 May 2007
Line 9:		Line 9:

	* the institutions: i.e. literary journals, literary histories, the continuing academic and at the same moment public discussion of publications, and		* the institutions: i.e. literary journals, literary histories, the continuing academic and at the same moment public discussion of publications, and
	* the discursive modalities: literature is “discussed” in a fundamentally scholarly exchange, i.e. in an exchange of competing judgments which the participants must be able to ~~supported by rational arguments~~		* the discursive modalities: literature is “discussed” in a fundamentally scholarly exchange, i.e. in an exchange of competing judgments which the participants must be able to support their views rationally.

	===The discussion of poetry===		===The discussion of poetry===

Olaf Simons: /* Literature */

2007-05-31T15:11:09Z

Literature

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:11, 31 May 2007
Line 42:		Line 42:
	==Literature==		==Literature==

	*[http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/anglistik/lit-wiss/intro-to-literature/d/1705_aristotle__poetry_dacier.pdf Aristotle, ''The Art of Poetry'', c 350 BC, translated into English by André Dacier (1705)]		*[http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/anglistik/lit-wiss/intro-to-literature/d/1705_aristotle__poetry_dacier.pdf Aristotle, ''The Art of Poetry'', c 350 BC, translated into English after the French translation by André Dacier (1705)]
	*[http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/anglistik/lit-wiss/intro-to-literature/d/1715_huet__history_of_romances.pdf Pierre Daniel Huet, ''History of Romances'', 1670, translated into English by Stephen Lewis (1715)]		*[http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/anglistik/lit-wiss/intro-to-literature/d/1715_huet__history_of_romances.pdf Pierre Daniel Huet, ''History of Romances'', 1670, translated into English by Stephen Lewis (1715)]
	:*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traitt%C3%A9_de_l%27origine_des_romans English Wikipedia Article - an extended excerpt of the Stephen Lewis translation]		:*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traitt%C3%A9_de_l%27origine_des_romans English Wikipedia Article - an extended excerpt of the Stephen Lewis translation]

Anton Kirchhofer: Sources of our discourse about the literature moved to Traditions in our discourse about literature

2007-05-31T13:03:57Z

Sources of our discourse about the literature moved to Traditions in our discourse about literature

← Older revision	Revision as of 15:03, 31 May 2007
(No difference)

Anton Kirchhofer at 13:01, 31 May 2007

2007-05-31T13:01:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:01, 31 May 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	An awareness of different and not always compatible discourses pervades our modern literary studies. You cannot speak of a “first person narrator offering a monologue” in a poem. The first person narrator is “narratology”, the “monologue” is "~~dramatology~~"~~. If you speak about a speech you can mention an “exordium”, referring to a play you have to speak about the “exposition”~~.		An awareness of different and not always compatible discourses pervades our modern literary studies. You cannot speak of a “first person narrator offering a monologue” in a poem. The first person narrator is “narratology”, the “monologue” is "poetics of the drama".

	The different discourses mix, yet they do not completely mix within our own discourse of literary criticism. A "~~metaphor~~" is rhetoric – it can, however, unlike the "first person narrator" be found in a political speech, a commercial advertisement, a Shakespeare play, or a Hemmingway story.		The different discourses mix, yet they do not completely mix within our own discourse of literary criticism. "Metaphor" is a term from rhetoric – it can, however, unlike the "first-person narrator" be found in a political speech, a commercial advertisement, a Shakespeare play, or a Hemmingway story.

	The complex situation (how do I know what word to use in what context?) is the result of the complex history underlying our modern debate of literature:		The complex situation (how do I know what word to use in what context?) is the result of the complex history underlying our modern debate of literature:

	===The ~~debate~~ of literature===		===The discussion of literature===
	... ~~till~~ around 1750 the debate of “learning”, “scientific publications” – provided		... until around 1750 the debate of “learning”, “scientific publications” – provided

	* the institutions: i.e. literary journals, literary histories, the continuing academic and at the same moment public discussion of publications, and		* the institutions: i.e. literary journals, literary histories, the continuing academic and at the same moment public discussion of publications, and
	* the discursive modalities: literature is “discussed” in a fundamentally scholarly exchange, i.e. in an exchange of competing judgments which the participants must be able to supported by rational arguments		* the discursive modalities: literature is “discussed” in a fundamentally scholarly exchange, i.e. in an exchange of competing judgments which the participants must be able to supported by rational arguments

	===The ~~debate~~ of poetry===		===The discussion of poetry===
	provided		provided
	* the perspective on (formerly “poetic” now “literary”) genres, on their different ~~means to~~ "~~delight~~" and "~~instruct~~" audiences, their different "aesthetics" leading to different forms of perfection, their different "rules"		* the perspective on (formerly “poetic” now “literary”) genres, on their different ways of "delighting" and "instructing" audiences, their different "aesthetics" leading to different forms of perfection, their different "rules"
	*the debate of the poet or poetess, his (or her) craftsmanship or genius (if not madness) which enables him or her to create works without a perfect knowledge of the art, his or her readiness to violate rules in order to ~~reach~~ special effects		*the debate on the poet or poetess, his (or her) craftsmanship or genius (if not madness) which enables him or her to create works without a perfect knowledge of the art, his or her readiness to violate rules in order to achieve special effects
	*the debate of the critic who has to develop a poetological expertise comprising both knowledge about the rules of poetry and a personal taste to judge how artistic aims are achieved		*the debate on the critic who has to develop a poetological expertise comprising both knowledge about the rules of poetry and a personal taste to judge how artistic aims are achieved

	===The ~~debate~~ of rhetoric===		===The discussion of rhetoric===
	provided		provided

	* an established analysis of the effectiveness of speech (whether verse or prose)		* an established analysis of the effectiveness of speech (whether verse or prose)

	===The ~~debate~~ of fictions (and their deeper meaning)===		===The discussion of fictions (and their deeper meaning)===
	...was traditionally located in the field of theological studies, where it was used to analyse and interpret biblical texts – it provided		...was traditionally located in the field of theological studies, where it was used to analyse and interpret biblical texts – it provided

	* a complex set of interpretive modes ~~renging~~ from the literal to the allegorical, anagogical, and moral interpretation of scripture		* a complex set of interpretive modes ranging from the literal to the allegorical, anagogical, and moral interpretation of scripture
	* – with Huet’s ''Treatise on the Origin of Romances'' – an approach to ~~write~~ histories of fiction in which fictional works can be		* – with Huet’s ''Treatise on the Origin of Romances'' – an approach to writing histories of fiction in which fictional works can be
	:* understood as formed by the different use people made and make of fictions in different cultures		:* understood as formed by the different use people made and make of fictions in different cultures
	:* analysed as expressions of our changing understanding of the world		:* analysed as expressions of our changing understanding of the world
Line 37:		Line 37:
	*Those who discussed literature adopted and reconfigured the debates of poetry, rhetoric, and fiction.		*Those who discussed literature adopted and reconfigured the debates of poetry, rhetoric, and fiction.
	*The belles letters, the market of fashionable knowledge, became the object of the new literary debate.		*The belles letters, the market of fashionable knowledge, became the object of the new literary debate.
	* Expertise Aristotle and his successors had provided in the fields of poetics went into the schools of modern “literary criticism”. It is manifest ~~today~~ especially in the schools of “New Criticism” and “Structuralism”		* Expertise Aristotle and his successors had provided in the fields of poetics went into the schools of modern “literary criticism”. It was manifest in the 20th century especially in the schools of “New Criticism” and “Structuralism”. In the field of "narratology", 20th-century literary studies produced a new poetics of narrative fictions.
	* Expertise Huet brought into our discussion went into the production of the first histories of literature at the beginning of the 19th century. The 19th century histories moved Huet's project with its international perspective to an ensemble of national projects designed to inspire political debates of the nations' individual "characters", "cultures" and "historical developments". Huet's perspective is manifest today in schools of literary studies from those of "New Historicism" to those of "Cultural Studies" (aiming at a discussion of works in different cultural contexts).		* Expertise Huet brought into our discussion went into the production of the first histories of literature at the beginning of the 19th century. The 19th century histories moved Huet's project with its international perspective to an ensemble of national projects designed to inspire political debates of the nations' individual "characters", "cultures" and "historical developments". Huet's perspective is manifest today in schools of literary studies from those of "New Historicism" to those of "Cultural Studies" (aiming at a discussion of works in different cultural contexts).