Search Results

The present age of omnipresent terrorism is also an era of ever-expanding policing. What is the meaning — and the consequences — of this situation for literature and literary criticism? Policing Literary Theory attempts to answer these questions presenting intriguing and critical analyses of the interplays between police/policing and literature/literary criticism in a variety of linguistic milieus and literary traditions: American, English, French, German, Japanese, Korean, Russian, and others. The volume explores the mechanisms of formulation of knowledge about literature, theory, or culture in general in the post-Foucauldian surveillance society. Topics include North Korean dictatorship, spy narratives, censorship in literature and scholarship, Russian and Soviet authoritarianism, Eastern European cultures during communism, and Kafka’s work.

Contributors: Vladimir Biti, Reingard Nethersole, Călin-Andrei Mihăilescu, Sowon Park, Marko Juvan, Kyohei Norimatsu, Péter Hajdu, Norio Sakanaka, John Zilcosky, Yvonne Howell, and Takayuki Yokota-Murakami.

Literary theory is a form of communication about literature, itself subject to historical determinants. It defines in each case what can be called “literature”; it also enables thoughtful observations on human self-interpretation in literature [27. 14]. At the beginning of the early modern period

[German version] In Graeco-Roman antiquity, literary theory (LT) is the realm of poets, their best-kept secret and a supplement to other disciplines. It is expressed implicitly rather than explicitly even by the literary critics and readers of antiquity. Since LT does not appear as an autonomous

In: Brill's New Pauly Online

190 Situating biblical narrative studies in literary theory and literary approaches Johannes C de Klerk ABSTRACT In literary studies of biblical texts one often encounters amazing ignorance of the intricacies of literary theory and the complexity of literary issues. This article addresses this

In: Religion and Theology

exchange, that is to say in the immediate wake of the restoration of democracy, between Walter Mignolo (already established in the United States), and Josefina Ludmer (then in charge of the seminar “Some Problems in Literary Theory” at the University of Buenos Aires). It represents a paradigmatic example

In: Journal of World Literature

1 Introduction University courses on the history of literary theory usually start with classical antiquity, sometimes with the aesthetic thoughts implied in the Homeric epics, sometimes with discursive texts (or at least passages) by Plato and Aristotle, focusing on literature exclusively. I would

In: Policing Literary Theory

1 Introduction University courses on the history of literary theory usually start with classical antiquity, sometimes with the aesthetic thoughts implied in the Homeric epics, sometimes with discursive texts (or at least passages) by Plato and Aristotle, focusing on literature exclusively. I would

In: Policing Literary Theory

reading them have mostly remained the same: in most cases, these works are read and understood through the mediation of Western, mostly Anglo-American, literary theory. 1 This phenomenon, and its relative invisibility in critical debates of World Literature, can, of course, be traced back to structural

In: Journal of World Literature
Karl Popper’s philosophy of science, with its focus on falsifiability and critical rationalism, provides a firm foundation for a theory of literary interpretation that avoids the pitfalls of many contemporary theories. Building on the work of Popper, John Eccles, Imre Lakatos, Ernst Gombrich, Louise DeSalvo and James Battersby, this study outlines the approach, sets it in a theoretical context, and applies the theory to challenging works by Anne Finch, Countess of Winchelsea, Jean Toomer, Shakespeare, Henry Fielding, J-M.G. LeClézio, J.M. Coetzee, Jonathan Littell, Patrick Modiano, Albert Schweitzer, Popper’s protégé William Warren Bartley III and the Gospel of Mark. The book concludes with a set of general principles for understanding literature as a mode of investigation in what Popper called the unended quest.

The term kepan 科判 means to divide a text into chapters and paragraphs. By explicating the context of Buddhist kepan and its influence on the explanation of Confucian classics, this paper tries to demonstrate how wide and profound this influence was on literary criticism in three aspects: literary criticism, fluency and coherence of writing, and relationships between the authors of literary theories and Buddhism in the early Tang Dynasty.

In: Frontiers of Literary Studies in China