Four Different Writings on Literary Theory by Three Different Men

Transcription

1 Igl 1 Natasha Igl Pennington English 305 September 23 rd October 28th, 2016 Four Different Writings on Literary Theory by Three Different Men Abstract of Iser Iser, Wolfgang. Introduction. How to do Theory, Blackwell, 2006, pp Iser discusses, how theory developed from an ontological base to a more contemplative function for art and literature. Interpretation of art and literature, or the sister arts, happens naturally as someone views a painting or reads a poem. Iser highlights two different theories: hard-core and soft theories. Hard-core theory is what a natural science is more likely to use in order to problem solve and create facts about the world. Soft theory focuses more on trying to understand the meaning within the sister arts. This theory delves more into the many aspects of the sister arts such as how they are structured, their overall message, and how they communicate to audiences. Other theories that Iser highlights are phenomenological theory, hermeneutical theory, and gestalt theory. These theories help establish the different ways people interpret art and how they do so. Phenomenological theory grapples with how a work exists while hermeneutical theory observes how an audience understands or interprets a work of the sister arts. Lastly, gestalt theory sets its sight on how an audience looks at a work and notices its outlining argument or pattern. Through these explorative interpretations and functions, theory helps lift boundaries that are set by discourse. Keyword Search of Graff

2 Igl 2 Graff, Gerald. Taking Cover in Coverage. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, gen. ed. Vincent Leitch, 2 nd ed, Norton, 2010, pp Subjects: literary theory; departmentalize literature; field-coverage model; literature curriculum; ideology; teaching; cultural studies; genres; periods; positivistic methodology; humanities; administrative tyranny; average-to-poor student Summary of Eagleton Eagleton, Terry. Introduction: What is Literature? Literary Theory: An Introduction, anniversary ed, U of Minnesota P, 2008, pp In Literary Theory: An Introduction, Terry Eagleton tries to prove that literature has no objective definition because of people viewing literature through society s eyes. Viewing life through ssociety s predetermined values are what Eagleton refers to as ideologies,. Ideology is a conceived group of beliefs and ideas that are shaped by the culture in which someone grows up in. Eagleton also states that literature is undefinable because of people s changing valuejudgements. Value-judgements are similar Similar to ideologies, however, value-judgements are people s base their decisions on what is defined as literature by based on the time in which they live and their experiences instead of a general society conscious. Simply put, Eagleton uses ideology and value-judgements as a way to disprove or conflict with previous definitions of literature. He begins with discussing the difference between fact versus fiction. Fact writing generally is seen in science writing while fiction is believed to be more of a novel, a creative work compared to the apparent dull texts in the sciences. Despite their seeming difference, Eagleton states that the difference between fact and fiction is blurred and not truly distinct. In

3 Igl 3 the past, news reports and novels appeared on the same plane of fiction, not fact. Today, some see the Bible as fact while others view it as fiction. Because of these differences, Eagleton points out that determining what is fact and what is fiction is based on opinions. Trying to label one as more creative or imaginable is overshadowed by opinion. even more so. Creativity itself is a subjective concept, an opinion that one would hold over a work. Eagleton uses different authors, some of which write for the sciences, like Charles Darwin, while others are considered more of an artist, like William Shakespeare, to convey his point.. Here he questions what it means to be creative and how literature is defined by language being used in an imaginative or peculiar way. Such distinctions are based on a person s underlying value-judgements. Eagleton next discusses literature as he moves on to the Russian Formalists ideas. The Russian Formalists looked at literature in general as poetry, according to Eagleton. As they studied literature, they deformed ordinary language in order to estrange themselves from it until it was unrecognizable from the norm in order to estrange themselves from it. Formalism only wanted to study how the structure of the language and its parts form the work. Through their observations, they drew on how language in literature had its own rules, structures, and devices that would construct a piece. For example, a Russian Formalist would be caught up in how the allegory in the novel Animal Farm is formed through Stalinism instead of it being an allegory of Stalinism. They also focused on how language flaunted itself to gain attention from its audience.. Yet, they do not take into account how normal speech works. Though, as Eagleton points out, this is wise as the concept of there being a unanimous language is an illusion of cultures. No culture has as a united language, especially in literature. Eagleton references whathow is normal slang for alleyway like ginnel may seem poetic to some and just everyday speech in to other parts of a country or state to emphasize the disconnect of normal

4 Igl 4 language. Bringing his attention back to the Russian Formalists, Eagleton highlights how the Formalists saw literature byin coaxing fictional works into speech. Doing so, Eagleton mentions the novel Hunger by Knut Hamson. Providing the example of squiggly handwriting in a conversation, Eagleton argues that the Formalists would view this conversation as literary because of it bringing in a fictional work, a.k.a. a reference to a novel. In short, the Formalists ventured to find literature in the strange and general as poetry. After the Formalists, Eagleton draws his attention on how people view literature through non-pragmatic discourse. Literature can be interpreted in a variety of ways as people relate themselves to the written work. One whole sentence could mean a number of different things to two separate people. Eagleton uses an example of a sign that states that dogs must be carried on the escalator. He points out that some people may read this as people need to own and carry a dog in order to ride the escalator. Words are easily misread as people s brains function differently. Eagleton refers to this as non-pragmatic discourse, which means that a phrase is referring to the general being of an object rather than the object itself. For example, Eagleton pulls in the excerpt of a Shakespearean sonnet in which he refers to his lover as a rose. Pointing out that the narrator is not actually stating that his lover looks similar to a rose, Eagleton clarifies how language does not serve in a practically way in literature as it does in science textbooks. People then can easily read in a non-pragmatic matter and miss the meaning altogether. Because of this, Eagleton argues that literature has no essence due to how easily people misread the material. Also, people change their minds about what is valued as literature over time because of their different experiences in life. Eagleton calls a similar idea of different views the value transitive term which means people s values change in specific situations too. In life, people do not stay the same person from their birth to their death. If they did, then society would

5 Igl 5 not have problems with defining literature or anything else. What is literature in the eighteenth century appears differently than what is considered literature in the twenty-first century or even further in the future. As time moves on with new authors, what literature is being written is different compared to what was written in the past. Building up to his thesis, Eagleton then describes what value-categories are. According to Eagleton, hhow people describe works are based on value-categories or value-judgements,, according to Eagleton. Value-judgements are based on knowledge that is influenced by interests and ideologies that people grow up surrounded by. Following value-judgements, iideology is a culture s collected values based on its people s beliefs. More specifically, Eagleton says ideology is the largely concealed structure of values which informs and underlies our factual statements the way in which what we say and believe connects with the power-structure and power-relations of the society we live in (13). He further engages in how ideology is related to the modes of feeling, valuing, and perceiving in the maintenance of social power. the way in which people s beliefs connect with their form of society. Some may hold certain beliefs higher than others, like religion or morals. If a person grew up in a communist government, say under Stalin, they would view a novel differently than a capitalist American. A communistic foreign culture will most likely not look fondly on a work decreeing free speech or poking fun at a form of government. From growing up around a specific ideology, people look at texts and the world through that ideology s lens and value-judgements. Eagleton brings up that valuejudgements open the doorway to how literature is supposed to be judged as fine. For example, one would not compare a movie bus ticket with a Shakespeare play and compare the merits of the two. People can agree that these are not on the same level of writing. However, people can compare a science-fiction work with a realistic novel and determine which appears more

6 Igl 6 creditable as literature. Even how people judge a work can change based on the times in which a person lives. As Eagleton states, what is philosophy one century may be literature the next or vice versa. Times do change how people look at the world. Eagleton concludes his paper with his thesis that literature cannot be objective. Ideology is too ingrained into a person s psyche in order to look past it. The beliefs of one s culture is broken too far into a person s being to separate himself or herself objectively. Literature will always be seen as a reflection on a society s values. Subjectivity will continue to dominate objectivity in the literature field. Evaluation of Eagleton In Literary Theory: An Introduction, Terry Eagleton claims that literature cannot be defined without people s judgments seeping in. Every time people read a work, they form some interpretation of the story based on their current generation and the ideologies they were raised among, shaping them in how they read and whytheir political structure s ideologies and the subgovernmental positions in schools. Eagleton is correct that literature cannot be viewed objectively. Schools in the country decide what is considered appropriate literature for their students based on the officials past learning experiences and the strict guidelines in the literary canon that influences what is literature. Throughout my schooling, I have been exposed to the bias of my high school s English curriculum, supporting Eagleton s claim while observing the possibility of a change in ideology. In my high school, Eagleton is correct that people do not look at literature objectively as my curriculum ignored many books. For my advanced English classes, my teachers had a list of books that they were expected to decide what to teach us from. Many of these novels appeared

7 Igl 7 to be written in the early twentieth century and primarily written by a white demographic, though we did look briefly at African American works. Other materials on the list of course included Shakespeare, William Blake, certain material from Edgar Allan Poe, and other famous authors. Obviously, some material like graphic novels and comic books never showed up in my courses. Comic books like Superman are not seen as literature, but Don Quixote is. Even though comic books can imitate a society s fears and struggles, they are still ignored in the classroom. Never once in my AP literature or language classes did I read an X-Men comic book. Instead, I read the likes of The Great Gatsby, The Sound and the Fury, The Stranger, and Crime and Punishment that followed the proper literature list my teachers were provided. I read about all of these old authors while never seeming to have time to actually read something written for my age that was published while I was living. Granted, I did like the majority of the material we read in class, but I still would have liked to pick up more books like Miss Peregrine s Home for Peculiar Children or the latest Rick Riordan book. The process of picking through what novels are considered literature are seemingly biased in form and content as X-Men deals with questions of racial tension in a different way then Uncle Tom s Cabin but touches on it all the same. The form of a novel or poem is valued much higher than colorful blocks of pictures and commentary. Yet, the classroom may not be doomed forever. Eagleton also looks at how people s ideologies in the future will be different then what present days will be. People in the present still appreciate Shakespeare because, mainly, we are taught his works are to be valued. From ninth grade onward, my school taught Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, and Hamlet. Eleventh grade was the odd year, but we were busy studying American authors from the start of settling Puritans. We can still find ways to relate to the issues Shakespeare s plays worked with, such as issues with family, scandal, and political corruption. Over time, the way people relate to

8 Igl 8 literature can change. AFrankly, s people s values shift, they can when looking at Shakespeare in a different light, and view Shakespeare s plays are as something completely different from how today views it, such asgreat reality TV material. In the future, he may be forgotten just as the many classic authors seem to diminish in the classroom. Reality TV may take Shakespeare s place as a valued experience. Many people today are clutched in the grasps of Keeping Up with the Kardashians and other reality shows. Superhero movies also are prevalent in the market today. Maybe in the future, superhero comics will be the new main literature. Classrooms today already have replaced works like Fahrenheit 451 with The Hunger Games, believing their students to be more capable to understand this text over older texts, such as The Lord of the Flies. When I look at my twelve-year old sister s reading list, I notice that other books and items I studied when I was her age have fallen off of the list such as Wringer, Charlotte s Web, and The Outsiders. Society is already turning away from the once deemed literary classics for a new source of entertainment, metaphor, and knowledge that is more current to today. Depending on the different technologies, materials, and conflicts that will arise, ffuture societal values will shift furtherhave shifted depending on the different technologies, materials, and conflicts that will arise. The curriculum could change if society changed enough, leaving literature to change or be forgotten. With how children are brought up in the classroom, there is no true way to look at literature objectively. Because of the way literature is dictated by schools through the literary canon, the materials studied in schools are biased against many materials while leaving a possibility of change. Eagleton is correct in how people use their values to dictate what is literature. With how children are brought up in the classroom reading only certain types of authors and genres, there is no true way to look at literature objectively. From the start of a

9 Igl 9 child s growing understanding, everything he or she views will be influenced by what is exposed to his or her upbringing. Schools will shape what the child will learn and in what way. The world will seep an opinion into everything he or she does while learning how to read. Human nature does this all on its own..

10 Igl 10 Works Cited Eagleton, Terry. Introduction: What is Literature? Literary Theory: An Introduction, anniversary ed, U of Minnesota P, 2008, pp Graff, Gerald. Taking Cover in Coverage. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism, gen. ed. Vincent Leitch, 2 nd ed, Norton, 2010, pp Iser, Wolfgang. Introduction. How to do Theory, Blackwell, 2006, pp