Literary Form and Ethical Content

IF 0.1 Q3 Arts and Humanities Disputatio (Spain) Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.2478/disp-2021-0013
P. Lamarque
{"title":"Literary Form and Ethical Content","authors":"P. Lamarque","doi":"10.2478/disp-2021-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper offers a qualified endorsement of Terry Eagleton’s striking claim that “a work’s moral outlook … may be secreted as much in its form as its content”. A number of points are raised in defence of the claim: an argument for the inseparability, under certain conditions, of form and content in a literary work; an idea of moral content, not as derived moral principle, but as inward-facing interpretation grounded in an ethical vocabulary; the possibility of internal and external perspectives on fictional characters; and an emphasis on emotions expressed in, rather than caused by, narrative. Three literary examples are explored, to show how vocabulary, syntax, implicature, and tone, contribute to the emergence of moral salience. A consequence drawn is that the ethical stance readers take to a scene or incident is partially shaped by the narrative modes of its presentation. The overall perspective of the paper is that of aesthetic autonomism: the view that the aesthetic value of a work of literature is distinct from, and not reducible to, any instrumental moral values (positive or negative) attributed to the work.","PeriodicalId":52369,"journal":{"name":"Disputatio (Spain)","volume":"1 1","pages":"245 - 263"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Disputatio (Spain)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/disp-2021-0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The paper offers a qualified endorsement of Terry Eagleton’s striking claim that “a work’s moral outlook … may be secreted as much in its form as its content”. A number of points are raised in defence of the claim: an argument for the inseparability, under certain conditions, of form and content in a literary work; an idea of moral content, not as derived moral principle, but as inward-facing interpretation grounded in an ethical vocabulary; the possibility of internal and external perspectives on fictional characters; and an emphasis on emotions expressed in, rather than caused by, narrative. Three literary examples are explored, to show how vocabulary, syntax, implicature, and tone, contribute to the emergence of moral salience. A consequence drawn is that the ethical stance readers take to a scene or incident is partially shaped by the narrative modes of its presentation. The overall perspective of the paper is that of aesthetic autonomism: the view that the aesthetic value of a work of literature is distinct from, and not reducible to, any instrumental moral values (positive or negative) attributed to the work.
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
文学形式与伦理内容
本文对特里·伊格尔顿(Terry Eagleton)的惊人论断——“一部作品的道德观……可能隐藏在其形式和内容之中”——提供了有保留的认可。有人提出了一些观点来捍卫这一主张:在某些条件下,文学作品的形式和内容是不可分割的;一种道德内容的概念,不是作为衍生的道德原则,而是作为基于伦理词汇的面向内部的解释;小说人物的内部视角和外部视角的可能性强调在叙事中表达的情感,而不是由叙事引起的情感。三个文学的例子被探讨,以显示如何词汇,句法,含义和语气,有助于道德突出的出现。由此得出的结论是,读者对一个场景或事件的道德立场在一定程度上是由其呈现的叙事模式塑造的。本文的整体观点是美学自主主义:认为文学作品的美学价值不同于,也不能归结为任何归于作品的工具性道德价值(积极的或消极的)。
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
Disputatio (Spain)
Disputatio (Spain) Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
35 weeks
期刊最新文献
Indexicals in Fiction Comparatives in Context Introduction: Varieties of Context-Sensitivity in a Pluri-Propositionalist Reflexive Semantic Framework First-Person Plural Indexicals Formalizing English Contextuals
×
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