Digitale Mittler und literarische Vermittlungen. Clemens J. Setz’ Bot. Gespräch ohne Autor

IF 0.6 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM Journal of Literary Theory Pub Date : 2023-07-18 DOI:10.1515/jlt-2023-2003
N. Binczek
{"title":"Digitale Mittler und literarische Vermittlungen. Clemens J. Setz’ Bot. Gespräch ohne Autor","authors":"N. Binczek","doi":"10.1515/jlt-2023-2003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract How ›literary mediation‹ is observed from the perspective of literature is discussed in this paper on the basis of Clemens J. Setz’ Bot. Gespräch ohne Autor. It is described here as a network of multiple operations and interconnections that take up excerpts of what has already been published and combine them with something new, and, at the same time, it is made recognizable as a fundamental moment of literature. What is reconstructed here on the basis of and from an exemplum is systematically relevant. The systematic connections that are of interest here, in turn, can only be made plausible by means of the text. This constellation is theoretically indissoluble. This paper discusses this using both the notion of ›epitext‹ and incorporating the concept of ›mediation‹ unfolded by Bruno Latour. It brings the two together and opens the theoretical territory of ›literary mediation and promotion‹. It follows that mediation is defined as an operation that transforms, that is, not conserves and preserves, transferred into terms of literary mediation: not simply explains and comments, but transforms by inscribing and imprinting itself on what it mediates, is emphasized here. For the understanding of literary mediation, it follows that – instead of being in the service of a literary text conceived as an unchanging entity – it is always modifying and translating it in order to continually bring it forth as something new. While peritexts, however supplementary, constitute compact units, the epitextual perspective brings about their spatial and temporal dispersion. Literature is to be grasped epitextually not as a unity, but as an ensemble or network of different elements, references, and functions that project into a virtually expanded environment of a text. With such a reformulation of the concept of literature, it is stated that epitexts are not attributed to the mediation of literature, but to literature, and that the boundary between these areas is thought to be permeable. The article examines how a text file becomes a printed text and how this shapes the understanding of ›digital literature‹. This also addresses the problem of big data, which requires distant reading procedures and to which Bot. Gespräch ohne Author reacts in a specific way, by capturing context-independent »word distributions« (Piper 2018, 43) to use them for new connectivities. The article reveals the shifts between the possibilities of digitization, its literary adaptations, and a literature oriented to the categories of work, author, and book. It is not concerned with replacing texts designed according to traditional criteria with digital surfaces, but rather with pointing out the untranslatability of one system into the other. An untranslatability, however, that can only be demonstrated in the process of translation, the médiation. By taking up concepts of digital culture and incorporating them by quoting, reflecting, and parodying them, the book, consisting of printed paper bound between two covers, allows them to emerge in a disguise as mediators who participate in its shaping. On the one hand, it suggests that there can be no non-digital literature in a digital ecology, even if it ultimately presents itself in paper form; but, on the other hand, it also suggests that an artificial intelligence can only be described as text or code. It can show that and how literature subjects its mediations or the institutional and medial processes linked to literary mediation to (literary) scrutiny and thereby continually negotiates its own literariness. Where mediation meets the concept of literature, it is also challenged as a literary-theoretical category. With the help of the conceptual pair peri- and epitext, which corresponds to the distinction between literature and literary mediation, as well as with the inclusion of Bruno Latour’s concept of the ›médiateur‹, not only the category of the work in the sense of a stable entity distinguishable from its context is questioned, but also – directly related to this – the authorial function as a collectivity of technical operations was traced. A questioning that takes on a particular urgency under the auspices and with the instruments of digitality, bringing to light the traditional concepts of literature as (re)translations, which is exemplified by the transfer of a digital data set into a printed book.","PeriodicalId":42872,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Literary Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Literary Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jlt-2023-2003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract How ›literary mediation‹ is observed from the perspective of literature is discussed in this paper on the basis of Clemens J. Setz’ Bot. Gespräch ohne Autor. It is described here as a network of multiple operations and interconnections that take up excerpts of what has already been published and combine them with something new, and, at the same time, it is made recognizable as a fundamental moment of literature. What is reconstructed here on the basis of and from an exemplum is systematically relevant. The systematic connections that are of interest here, in turn, can only be made plausible by means of the text. This constellation is theoretically indissoluble. This paper discusses this using both the notion of ›epitext‹ and incorporating the concept of ›mediation‹ unfolded by Bruno Latour. It brings the two together and opens the theoretical territory of ›literary mediation and promotion‹. It follows that mediation is defined as an operation that transforms, that is, not conserves and preserves, transferred into terms of literary mediation: not simply explains and comments, but transforms by inscribing and imprinting itself on what it mediates, is emphasized here. For the understanding of literary mediation, it follows that – instead of being in the service of a literary text conceived as an unchanging entity – it is always modifying and translating it in order to continually bring it forth as something new. While peritexts, however supplementary, constitute compact units, the epitextual perspective brings about their spatial and temporal dispersion. Literature is to be grasped epitextually not as a unity, but as an ensemble or network of different elements, references, and functions that project into a virtually expanded environment of a text. With such a reformulation of the concept of literature, it is stated that epitexts are not attributed to the mediation of literature, but to literature, and that the boundary between these areas is thought to be permeable. The article examines how a text file becomes a printed text and how this shapes the understanding of ›digital literature‹. This also addresses the problem of big data, which requires distant reading procedures and to which Bot. Gespräch ohne Author reacts in a specific way, by capturing context-independent »word distributions« (Piper 2018, 43) to use them for new connectivities. The article reveals the shifts between the possibilities of digitization, its literary adaptations, and a literature oriented to the categories of work, author, and book. It is not concerned with replacing texts designed according to traditional criteria with digital surfaces, but rather with pointing out the untranslatability of one system into the other. An untranslatability, however, that can only be demonstrated in the process of translation, the médiation. By taking up concepts of digital culture and incorporating them by quoting, reflecting, and parodying them, the book, consisting of printed paper bound between two covers, allows them to emerge in a disguise as mediators who participate in its shaping. On the one hand, it suggests that there can be no non-digital literature in a digital ecology, even if it ultimately presents itself in paper form; but, on the other hand, it also suggests that an artificial intelligence can only be described as text or code. It can show that and how literature subjects its mediations or the institutional and medial processes linked to literary mediation to (literary) scrutiny and thereby continually negotiates its own literariness. Where mediation meets the concept of literature, it is also challenged as a literary-theoretical category. With the help of the conceptual pair peri- and epitext, which corresponds to the distinction between literature and literary mediation, as well as with the inclusion of Bruno Latour’s concept of the ›médiateur‹, not only the category of the work in the sense of a stable entity distinguishable from its context is questioned, but also – directly related to this – the authorial function as a collectivity of technical operations was traced. A questioning that takes on a particular urgency under the auspices and with the instruments of digitality, bringing to light the traditional concepts of literature as (re)translations, which is exemplified by the transfer of a digital data set into a printed book.
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
数字媒介和文学媒介。Clemens J.Setz的Bot.没有作者的对话
摘要本文在Clemens J.Setz的Bot.Gespräch ohne Autor的基础上,探讨了如何从文学的角度观察文学中介。在这里,它被描述为一个由多种操作和互连组成的网络,这些操作和互连吸收了已经发表的内容的摘录,并将其与新的内容相结合,同时,它也被视为文学的一个基本时刻。在一个例子的基础上和从一个例子中重建的东西是系统相关的。反过来,这里感兴趣的系统联系只能通过文本来变得合理。这个星座在理论上是不可分割的。本文使用›表文本的概念和Bruno Latour提出的›中介的概念对此进行了讨论。它将二者结合在一起,开辟了›文学调解与促进的理论领域。因此,中介被定义为一种转化的操作,也就是说,不是保存和保存,转移到文学中介的术语中:这里强调的不是简单的解释和评论,而是通过将自己刻在中介上并将其压印在中介上来转化。对于文学中介的理解,它不是为被视为不变实体的文学文本服务,而是总是对其进行修改和翻译,以不断地将其作为新的东西呈现出来。虽然周边文本,无论多么补充,都构成了紧凑的单元,但表层视角带来了它们的空间和时间分散。文学不是作为一个整体来理解的,而是作为一个不同元素、参考和功能的集合或网络,投射到文本的虚拟扩展环境中。通过对文学概念的重新表述,可以看出,表文本不是文学的中介,而是文学的中介。这些领域之间的边界被认为是可渗透的。本文探讨了文本文件如何成为印刷文本,以及这如何塑造对›数字文学的理解。这也解决了大数据的问题,大数据需要远程阅读程序,Bot.Gespräch ohne Author以特定的方式做出反应,通过捕捉上下文无关的“单词分布”(Piper 2018,43)将其用于新的连接。这篇文章揭示了数字化的可能性、其文学改编以及面向作品、作者和书籍类别的文学之间的转变。它并不关心用数字表面取代根据传统标准设计的文本,而是指出一个系统到另一个系统的不可翻译性。然而,这种不可译性只能在翻译过程中表现出来,即翻译。这本书采用了数字文化的概念,并通过引用、反思和戏仿将其融入其中,由装订在两个封面之间的印刷纸组成,使它们伪装成参与其塑造的媒介。一方面,它表明,在数字生态中不可能有非数字文学,即使它最终以纸质形式呈现;但另一方面,它也表明,人工智能只能被描述为文本或代码。它可以表明,文学是如何将其中介或与文学中介相关的制度和中介过程置于(文学)审查之下,从而不断地协商其自身的文学性的。在调解与文学概念相遇的地方,它作为一个文学理论范畴也受到了挑战。借助与文学和文学中介之间的区别相对应的概念对旁文本和外文本,以及布鲁诺·拉图尔的›中介概念,不仅作品的类别在可与上下文区分的稳定实体的意义上受到质疑,但与此直接相关的是,作者作为技术操作集体的功能也被追溯。这是一个在数字化手段的支持下具有特殊紧迫性的问题,揭示了文学作为(再)翻译的传统概念,例如将数字数据集转移到印刷书中。
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
Journal of Literary Theory
Journal of Literary Theory LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
Die Autonomie der Literatur auf dem Prüfstand. Bourdieus feldtheoretischer Ansatz als Alternative zu soziologistischen Kurzschlüssen Experiencing Literary Audiobooks: A Framework for Theoretical and Empirical Investigations of the Auditory Reception of Literature Autor und Subjekt im lyrischen Gedicht: Rezension und Neukonzeption einer Theorie der lyrischen Persona Die Literaturautonomie im deutschen Rechtssystem. Grenzen, Widersprüche und literaturtheoretische Potenziale Ästhetische Autonomie zwischen Ethik und Ästhetik
×
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