Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.
Chargement... Literature against philosophy, Plato to Derrida : a defence of poetry (édition 1995)par Mark Edmundson
Information sur l'oeuvreLiterature against Philosophy, Plato to Derrida: A Defence of Poetry par Mark Edmundson
Aucun Chargement...
Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre. aucune critique | ajouter une critique
This timely book argues that the institutionalisation of literary theory, particularly within American and British academic circles, has led to a sterility of thought which ignores the special character of literary art. Mark Edmundson traces the origins of this tendency to the ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry, in which Plato took the side of philosophy; and he shows how the work of modern theorists - Foucault, Derrida, de Man and Bloom - exhibits similar drives to subsume poetic art into some 'higher' kind of thought. Challenging and controversial, this book should be read by all teachers of literature and of theory, and by anyone concerned about the future of institutionalised literary studies. Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque |
Discussion en coursAucunCouvertures populaires
Google Books — Chargement... GenresClassification décimale de Melvil (CDD)809.1Literature By Topic History, description and criticism of more than two literatures PoetryClassification de la Bibliothèque du CongrèsÉvaluationMoyenne:
Est-ce vous ?Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing. |
What really charms about this book is its devotion. You could counter his point with sour grapes ("but YOU're using Foucault - that's theory!" Yeah, but like, not to push lit around; more to push THEORY around, and give lit some breathing room. The idea of theory as essentially aggressive, not to say totalitarian, is a new one here and really resonates.) And it's like, okay Derrida, differance, that's a lot less actively totalitarian or whatevs, but then you're attacking, in the end, the notion that literature can say ANYthing, as opposed to the pedestrian ("it says what I want" of de Man's blindness/insight bit. Even Harold Bloom comes in for his bit of the wagging finger, with his "scraps at the feast" ever-fading conception of the poetic tradition.
And lest this all sound too austere, that's when Edmundson turns around and says "but Bloom's a lover, even if 'The Anxiety of Influence' catches him on a bad day." And gives Derrida his credit for anti-fascist action. And is not too hard on the New Historicists, really: "good-hearted but incomplete." Actually, he doesn't have much new to say about them, but it was 1995 so I guess he felt he had to make the effort.
And sticks it to de Man, woo! And advocates tirelessly for the power of poetry to help you achieve that old "examined life" and better know who you are. And fights the good fight. ( )