理论启发而非理论基础的批评:走向文学阐释的半批评方法

Q2 Arts and Humanities Studia Anglica Posnaniensia Pub Date : 2019-03-01 DOI:10.2478/stap-2019-0002
K. Besbes
{"title":"理论启发而非理论基础的批评:走向文学阐释的半批评方法","authors":"K. Besbes","doi":"10.2478/stap-2019-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The present article is written almost a decade and a half after the reticent announcement of the death of literary theory by a number of scholars around the world. But during all these years, the humanities have not managed to drive Theory out of the seminar rooms of English departments, nor have the anti-theory proponents managed to remove it from the syllabi of English studies or even from the shelves of specialized libraries. After all these years, English studies academicians find themselves still doing Theory: holding conferences on how to conduct literary studies, organizing debates on how to launch new approaches that could possibly replace critical theories, and encouraging research into less-theorized methods of literary interpretation that could respond to the ineluctable need for a method in studying literature. For good or ill, whether we admit it or not, the echoes of literary theories continue to linger behind the scenes of all debates about literature and literary studies. The question is therefore not how to bring those echoes to silence, but rather how to find a way out of the post-theory deadlock by proposing what I have chosen to name the semeiocritical method as a theory-inspired, rather than theory-based approach to literature. The present article seeks to answer two questions: (1) how can we benefit from the lessons of literary theory without systematically doing theory or being methodically loyal to theories? and (2) how can we maximize the effects of literary interpretation in such a way as to cover as many aspects as possible of the signifying processes in the literary text while maintaining interpretive consistency?","PeriodicalId":35172,"journal":{"name":"Studia Anglica Posnaniensia","volume":"54 1","pages":"21 - 41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Theory-Inspired Rather than Theory-Based Criticism: Towards a Semeiocritical Method for the Interpretation of Literature\",\"authors\":\"K. Besbes\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/stap-2019-0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The present article is written almost a decade and a half after the reticent announcement of the death of literary theory by a number of scholars around the world. But during all these years, the humanities have not managed to drive Theory out of the seminar rooms of English departments, nor have the anti-theory proponents managed to remove it from the syllabi of English studies or even from the shelves of specialized libraries. After all these years, English studies academicians find themselves still doing Theory: holding conferences on how to conduct literary studies, organizing debates on how to launch new approaches that could possibly replace critical theories, and encouraging research into less-theorized methods of literary interpretation that could respond to the ineluctable need for a method in studying literature. For good or ill, whether we admit it or not, the echoes of literary theories continue to linger behind the scenes of all debates about literature and literary studies. The question is therefore not how to bring those echoes to silence, but rather how to find a way out of the post-theory deadlock by proposing what I have chosen to name the semeiocritical method as a theory-inspired, rather than theory-based approach to literature. The present article seeks to answer two questions: (1) how can we benefit from the lessons of literary theory without systematically doing theory or being methodically loyal to theories? and (2) how can we maximize the effects of literary interpretation in such a way as to cover as many aspects as possible of the signifying processes in the literary text while maintaining interpretive consistency?\",\"PeriodicalId\":35172,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Anglica Posnaniensia\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"21 - 41\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Anglica Posnaniensia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/stap-2019-0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Anglica Posnaniensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/stap-2019-0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文是在世界各地许多学者沉默地宣布文学理论消亡近十五年后写的。但在这些年里,人文学科并没有把理论赶出英语系的讨论室,反理论的支持者也没有把它从英语研究的教学大纲中删除,甚至从专门图书馆的书架上删除。这么多年过去了,英国研究学者们发现自己仍然在做理论:召开关于如何进行文学研究的会议,组织关于如何推出可能取代批判性理论的新方法的辩论,鼓励研究理论化程度较低的文学解释方法,以满足对文学研究方法不可避免的需求。无论好坏,无论我们是否承认,文学理论的回声仍在所有关于文学和文学研究的辩论的幕后徘徊。因此,问题不在于如何让这些回声沉寂下来,而在于如何找到摆脱后理论僵局的方法,提出我所选择的义理批判方法,将其命名为一种受理论启发的文学方法,而不是基于理论的文学方法。本文试图回答两个问题:(1)如果不系统地做理论,不有条不紊地忠于理论,我们如何才能从文学理论的教训中受益?以及(2)我们如何在保持解释一致性的同时,尽可能多地涵盖文学文本中的意符过程,最大限度地发挥文学解释的效果?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Theory-Inspired Rather than Theory-Based Criticism: Towards a Semeiocritical Method for the Interpretation of Literature
Abstract The present article is written almost a decade and a half after the reticent announcement of the death of literary theory by a number of scholars around the world. But during all these years, the humanities have not managed to drive Theory out of the seminar rooms of English departments, nor have the anti-theory proponents managed to remove it from the syllabi of English studies or even from the shelves of specialized libraries. After all these years, English studies academicians find themselves still doing Theory: holding conferences on how to conduct literary studies, organizing debates on how to launch new approaches that could possibly replace critical theories, and encouraging research into less-theorized methods of literary interpretation that could respond to the ineluctable need for a method in studying literature. For good or ill, whether we admit it or not, the echoes of literary theories continue to linger behind the scenes of all debates about literature and literary studies. The question is therefore not how to bring those echoes to silence, but rather how to find a way out of the post-theory deadlock by proposing what I have chosen to name the semeiocritical method as a theory-inspired, rather than theory-based approach to literature. The present article seeks to answer two questions: (1) how can we benefit from the lessons of literary theory without systematically doing theory or being methodically loyal to theories? and (2) how can we maximize the effects of literary interpretation in such a way as to cover as many aspects as possible of the signifying processes in the literary text while maintaining interpretive consistency?
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Studia Anglica Posnaniensia
Studia Anglica Posnaniensia Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Aesthetic Pleasure and Negative Aesthetic Experience in the Old English Martyrology Review: Forgeries and Historical Writing in England, France, and Flanders, 900–1200 By Robert F. Berkhofer III. The Boydell Press, 2022. Pp. xi, 348 EmCat-Eng: A catalogue of 1,759 basic emotion terms in English What’s in a Title? Some Remarks on the Semantic Features of Kenning-Like Titles in George R. R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire Series Urban Imagery in the Old English Exodus and its Hermeneutics
×
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