Voir ce que je vois, voir ce que je m’attends à voir : degré zéro de l’écriture du voyage et écriture littéraire du voyage. En citant Henri Michaux et Michel Butor

IF 0.2 0 LITERATURE Interlitteraria Pub Date : 2021-12-31 DOI:10.12697/il.2021.26.2.3
J. Bessière
{"title":"Voir ce que je vois, voir ce que je m’attends à voir : degré zéro de l’écriture du voyage et écriture littéraire du voyage. En citant Henri Michaux et Michel Butor","authors":"J. Bessière","doi":"10.12697/il.2021.26.2.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: To see what I expect to see: travel writing's degree zero and literarytravel narratives. With references to Henri Michaux and Michel Butor. This essay examines what arguments can be put forward to explain why readers and critics view travel writing as literary. It offers an answer that does not imply any coded definition of literature and literary works: literary travel writing is the mimesis of the questioning which characterises any literary work. This questioning rests on: \n1. The duality of travellers’ perceptions of the foreign lands they discover. They see what they see and what they expect to see; their perceptions are mediated and unmediated, and consequently reflexive and congruent with the cognitive undecipherability of the foreign lands. \n2. The paradox of the situation of the traveller/writer. Abroad, the traveller is not viewed as a foreigner; the least difference he/she embodies highlights a paradoxical cognitive undecipherability. The effect of the auctorial enunciation is limited by this paradox. \n3. The reflexive construction of the piece of travel writing. Because they bar any meta-description of the foreign land and its people, the duality of perceptions and the traveller’s paradox make the evocations of places and people at once autonomous and implicitly related. \n4. The behaviourist approach to the people of the foreign land(s). These restrictions to the traveller’s power to interpret makes the behaviourist approach obligatory. People of foreign lands can be viewed as objective entities. \n5. The implicit inferences that human objective entities motivate and suggest an overall questioning. These critical and theoretical views utilise references to Michaux’s and Butor’s travels abroad and their travel writing.","PeriodicalId":41069,"journal":{"name":"Interlitteraria","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interlitteraria","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12697/il.2021.26.2.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: To see what I expect to see: travel writing's degree zero and literarytravel narratives. With references to Henri Michaux and Michel Butor. This essay examines what arguments can be put forward to explain why readers and critics view travel writing as literary. It offers an answer that does not imply any coded definition of literature and literary works: literary travel writing is the mimesis of the questioning which characterises any literary work. This questioning rests on: 1. The duality of travellers’ perceptions of the foreign lands they discover. They see what they see and what they expect to see; their perceptions are mediated and unmediated, and consequently reflexive and congruent with the cognitive undecipherability of the foreign lands. 2. The paradox of the situation of the traveller/writer. Abroad, the traveller is not viewed as a foreigner; the least difference he/she embodies highlights a paradoxical cognitive undecipherability. The effect of the auctorial enunciation is limited by this paradox. 3. The reflexive construction of the piece of travel writing. Because they bar any meta-description of the foreign land and its people, the duality of perceptions and the traveller’s paradox make the evocations of places and people at once autonomous and implicitly related. 4. The behaviourist approach to the people of the foreign land(s). These restrictions to the traveller’s power to interpret makes the behaviourist approach obligatory. People of foreign lands can be viewed as objective entities. 5. The implicit inferences that human objective entities motivate and suggest an overall questioning. These critical and theoretical views utilise references to Michaux’s and Butor’s travels abroad and their travel writing.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
看到我所看到的,看到我期望看到的:零度的旅行写作和旅行文学写作。引用亨利·米修和米歇尔·布托的话
摘要:看到我期待看到的:旅行写作的零度与文学旅行叙事。还有亨利·米肖和米歇尔·布托。本文探讨了可以提出哪些论点来解释为什么读者和评论家将旅行写作视为文学。它提供了一个答案,并不意味着对文学和文学作品有任何编码的定义:文学旅行写作是对任何文学作品特征的质疑的模仿。这个问题基于:1;旅行者对他们所发现的异国他乡的双重看法。他们看到他们所看到的和他们期望看到的;他们的感知是中介的和非中介的,因此是反身性的,与外国土地的认知不可破译性一致。2. 旅行者/作家处境的矛盾。在国外,旅行者不会被视为外国人;他/她所体现的最小差异凸显了一种矛盾的认知不可译性。作者阐述的效果受到这个悖论的限制。3.旅游文章的反身结构。因为它们禁止任何对外国土地和人民的元描述,感知的二元性和旅行者的悖论使得对地方和人的唤起既自主又隐含相关。4. 对待外国人民的行为主义方法。这些对旅行者解释能力的限制使得行为主义方法势在必行。外国人可以被看作是客观的实体。5. 人类客观实体的隐含推论激发并提出了一个全面的质疑。这些批判性和理论性的观点引用了米肖和布托的国外旅行和他们的旅行写作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Interlitteraria
Interlitteraria LITERATURE-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Heart to Heart: The Power of Lyrical Bonding in Romantic Nationalism “This Land Is Your Land”: A Note on America as a Nation of “Varied Carols” The Role of Lyrics in Estonian Literature: Three Exemplary Cases Traducir poesía es descubrir los volcanes sepultados debajo de los pies. A propósito de Valitud tõlkeluulet 1970–2020 (Selección de la poesía traducida, 1970–2020), por Jüri Talvet “In a Miracle Wellspring” of Goethe’s Poetry: Comments on the Role of Translated Poetry in a Small Literature
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1