《Literary Theory》的原文摘录

  • 如果一部小说问世了,它的产生是因为它以其独无二的特点激发了一种情感,是这种情感使这些形式有了生命,在阅读和回忆的行为中,它重复小说程式的曲折变化,并且也许会给这些读者继续借以面对世界的规则或形式带来某种变化。一首诗很可能不留任何痕迹地消失,但也有可能在人们的记忆中留下印象,并且引起重复的行为。它的述行性并不是单独的、可以一次完成的行为,而是一种重复,这种重复使它重复的形式有了生命。 (查看原文)
    Kaushik 1赞 2019-11-16 15:48:20
    —— 引自章节:7 述行语言
  • 文学不仅使身份成为一个主题,它还在建构读者的身份中起了很大的作用。文学的价值一直与它给予读者的经验相联系,它使读者知道在特定的情况下会有什么感受,由此得到了以特定方式行动并感受的性格。文学作品通过从角色的视角展现事物而鼓励与角色的认同。 诗歌和小说都是以要求认同的方式对我们述说的,而认同是可以创造身份的:我们在与我们所读的那些人物的认同中成为我们自己。长久以来,人们一直指责文学鼓励年轻人把自己当作小说中的人物,并以类似的方式去寻找满足:离家出走,去经历大都市的生活;信奉并追随男女主角,像他们一样反叛长辈,而且在尚未体验世界之前就厌倦了一切,或者倾其一生去追求爱,并试图再创那些小说和抒情诗里的爱情情景。人们批评文学以认同的方式腐蚀了世界。与此相反,文学教育的捍卫者却一直希望文学会通过他人的经验和认同的方式使我们成为更优秀的人。 (查看原文)
    Kaushik 1赞 2019-11-16 15:52:19
    —— 引自章节:8 身份、认同和主体
  • 关于理论的两个例子(福柯和德里达)都说明了理论涉及推测性的实践:对欲望、语言等等的解释对已经被接受的思想提出了挑战。它们就是这样激励你重新思考你用以研究文学的那些范畴。 (查看原文)
    不锈钢兔砸 2013-03-21 21:01:17
    —— 引自第15页
  • What is literature? ... but in fact it has not seemed to matter very much. ... There appear to be two main reasons. First, since theory itself intermingles ideas from philosophy, linguistics, history, political theory, and psychoanalysis, why should theorists worry about whether the texts they're reading are literary or not? ... Second, the distinction has not seemed central because works of theory have discovered what is most simply called the 'literariness' of non-literary phenomena. Qualities often thought to be literary turn out to be crucial to non-literary discourses and practices as well. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • For twenty-five centuries people have written works that we call literature today, but the modern sense of literature is scarcely two centuries old. ... The modern Western sense of literature as imaginative writing can be traced to the German Romantic theorists of the late eighteenth century ... Prior to 1800 literature and analogous terms in other European languages meant 'writings' or 'book knowledge'. ... They were instances of larger category of exemplary practices of writing and thinking, which included speeches, sermons, history and philosophy. Students were not asked to explain what they are 'really about'. On the contrary, students memorized them, studied their grammar, identified their rhetorical figures and their structures or procedures of argument. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • What is literature? What makes us (or some other society) treat something as literature? What involved in treating things as literature in our culture? (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • Literature, we might conclude, is a speech act or textual event that elicits certain kinds of attention. It contrasts with other sorts of speech acts, such as imparting information, asking questions, or making promises. Most of the time what leads readers to treat something as literature is that they find it in a context that identifies it as literature: in a book of poems or a section of a magazine, library, or bookstore. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • We have a complicated structure here. We are dealing with two different perspectives that overlap, intersect, but don't seem to yield a synthesis. We can think of literary works as language with particular properties or features, and we can think of literature as the product of conventions and certain kind of attention. Neither perspective successfully incorporates the other, and one must shift back and forth between them. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • 1. Literature as the 'foregrounding' of language 2. Literature as the integration of language 3. Literature as fiction 4. Literature as aesthetic object 5. Literature as intertextual or self-reflexive construct (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • To study something as literature, this account tells us, is to look above all at the organization of its language, not to read it as the expression of its author's psyche or as the reflection of society that produced it. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • One reason why readers attend to literature differently is that its utterances have a special relation to the world - a relation we call 'fictional'. The literary work is a linguistic event which projects a fictional world that includes speaker, actors, events, and an implied audience (an audience that takes shape through the work's decisions about what must be explained and what the audience is presumed to know). Literary works refer to imaginary rather than historical individuals (Emma Bovary, Huckleberry Finn), but fictionality is not limited to characters and events. Deictics, as they are called, orientational features of language that relate to the situation of utterance, such as pronouns (I, you) or adverbials of place and time (here, there, now, then, yesterday, tomorrow), function... (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • In fiction, the relation of what speakers say to what authors think is always a matter of interpretation. So is the relationship between events recounted and situations in the world. ... The context of fiction, though, explicitly leaves open the question of what the fiction is really about. Reference to the world is not so much a property of literary works as a function they are given by interpretation. ... The fictionality of literature separates language from other contexts in which it might be used and leaves the work's relation to the world open to interpretation. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • For Immanuel Kant, the primary theorist of modern Western aesthetics, the aesthetic is the name of the attempt to bridge the gap between the material and the spiritual world, between a world of forces and magnitudes and a world of concepts. ... A literary work is an aesthetic object because, with other communicative functions initially bracketed or suspended, it engages readers to consider the interrelation between form and content. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • Aesthetic objects, for Kant and other theorists, have a 'purposiveness without purpose'. There is a purposiveness to their construction: they are made so that their parts will work together towards some end. But the end is the work of art itself, pleasure in the work or pleasure occasioned by the work, not some external purpose. Practically, this means that to consider a text as literature is to ask about the contribution of its parts to the effect of the whole but not to take the work as primarily destined to accomplishing some purpose, such as informing of persuading us. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • Recent theorists have argued that works are made out of other works: made possible by prior works which they take up, repeat, challenge, transform. This notion sometimes goes by the fancy name of 'intertextuality'. A work exists between and among other texts, through its relations to them. To read something as literature is to consider it as a linguistic event that has meaning in relation to other discourse ... The poem has meaning in relation to the tradition that makes it possible. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • Literature is a practice in which authors attempt to advance or renew literature and thus is always implicitly a reflection on literature itself. ... Novels are at some level about novels, about the problems and possibilities of representing and giving shape or meaning to experience. So Madame Bovary can be read as an exploration of relations between Emma Bovary's 'real life' and the way which both the romantic novels she reads and Flaubert's own novel make sense of experience. One can always ask of a novel (or a poem) how what it implicitly says about making sense relates to the way it itself goes about making sense. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • Finally, the 'literariness' of literature may lie in the tension of the interaction between the linguistic material and readers' conventional expectations of what literature is. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • One thing that is crucial is a special structure of exemplarity at work in literature. A literature work - Hamlet, for instance - is characteristically the story of a fictional character: it presents itself as in some way exemplary (why else would you read it?), but it simultaneously declines to define the range or scope of that exemplarity - hence the ease with which readers and critics come to speak about the 'universality' of literature. The structure of literary works is such that it is easier to take them as telling us about 'the human condition' in general than to specify what narrower categories they describe of illuminate. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • But the combination of offering universality and addressing all those who can read the language has had a powerful national function. ... works of literature - particularly novels - helped to create national communities by their postulation of and appeal to a broad community of readers, bounded yet in principle open to all who could read the language. ... In fact, the more the universality of literature is stressed, the more it may have a national function ... (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
  • What we have here, after all, is an institution based on the possibility of saying anything you can imagine. This is central to what literature is: for any orthodoxy, any belief, any value, a literary work can mock it, parody it, imagine some different and monstrous fiction. ... literature has been the possibility of fictionally exceeding what has previously been thought and written. For anything that seemed to make sense, literature could make it nonsense, go beyond it, transform it in a way that raised the question of its legitimacy and adequacy. (查看原文)
    Alitha 1赞 2013-10-28 21:42:59
    —— 引自第41页
<前页 1 2 3 4 5 6 后页>