There is no interpretation without contextualisation. Few scholars would question this statement,... more There is no interpretation without contextualisation. Few scholars would question this statement, not least because including information provided by the context (broadly construed) is pervasive in interpretations across theories as divergent as New Criticism and New Historicism. Whereas there can be no doubt as to the importance of ›context‹, some rather crucial issues concerning text and context have prompted disagreement, if they have been addressed at all. The term ›context‹ itself requires clarification since it is often used rather differently and with a meaning that remains vague. It is a matter of debate which contexts are relevant to interpretation. Various models of how text and context interact have been suggested in different theories of literature. Taken together, issues such as these constitute a fundamental problem of literary theory today.
There are various reasons why readers may fi nd a literary text interesting. Some take an interes... more There are various reasons why readers may fi nd a literary text interesting. Some take an interest in the topic, some in the views of its author, others simply read for the sake of reading or because they enjoy the way it is written. Hardly anyone – with the possible exception of those who love Tristram Shandy or admire the novels of Samuel Beckett – is likely to say ‘I fi nd the text interesting because it refl ects upon itself’. This attitude raises memories of Groucho Marx who did not want to belong to any club that would accept him as a member. Why should a reader care for literary texts because they do not care for the reader but for themselves? According to Roman Jakobson, however, refl exivity defi nes a literary text in the fi rst place,1 and, arguably, this defi nition fares better than any other so far: if we defi ne a literary text as a representation of life, the text cannot be marked off from historical or philosophical texts without introducing further distinctions.2 If we defi ne it as an expression of thoughts or feelings, then letters, diaries, and autobiographies would count as the purest forms of literature. If we defi ne it as the source of instruction and delight, it is on a par with recipes or guide books. Style and rhetoric are also not distinctive, since advertisements are stylish and political
In der Systemtheorie Niklas Luhmanns spielen die Begriffe „Selbstreferenz“ und „Beobachtung“ eine... more In der Systemtheorie Niklas Luhmanns spielen die Begriffe „Selbstreferenz“ und „Beobachtung“ eine Schlusselrolle. Um die Frage zu beantworten, was die Systemtheorie fur literaturwissenschaftlicheZwecke leistet, muste man prufen, was die beiden Schlusselbegriffe zu diesen Zwecken beitragen. Die Diskussion ist eroffnet. Dietrich Schwanitz hat den Begriff der Selbstreferenz auf Literatur angewandt und gezeigt, wie die drei literarischen Hauptgattungen uber ihre jeweilige Selbstreferenz bestimmt werden konnten: uber die Selbstreferenz der Sprache (Lyrik), des Erzahlens (Roman) und bestimmter Interaktionsformen (Drama)1. Luhmann selbst hat den Versuch unternommen, moderne Kunst und Literatur mit Hilfe des Beobachtungsbegriffs zu beschreiben2. Seine These lautet: Moderne Kunst und Literatur zeigen ein paradoxes Problem, die Beobachtbarkeit des Unbeobachtbaren.
There is no interpretation without contextualisation. Few scholars would question this statement,... more There is no interpretation without contextualisation. Few scholars would question this statement, not least because including information provided by the context (broadly construed) is pervasive in interpretations across theories as divergent as New Criticism and New Historicism. Whereas there can be no doubt as to the importance of ›context‹, some rather crucial issues concerning text and context have prompted disagreement, if they have been addressed at all. The term ›context‹ itself requires clarification since it is often used rather differently and with a meaning that remains vague. It is a matter of debate which contexts are relevant to interpretation. Various models of how text and context interact have been suggested in different theories of literature. Taken together, issues such as these constitute a fundamental problem of literary theory today.
There are various reasons why readers may fi nd a literary text interesting. Some take an interes... more There are various reasons why readers may fi nd a literary text interesting. Some take an interest in the topic, some in the views of its author, others simply read for the sake of reading or because they enjoy the way it is written. Hardly anyone – with the possible exception of those who love Tristram Shandy or admire the novels of Samuel Beckett – is likely to say ‘I fi nd the text interesting because it refl ects upon itself’. This attitude raises memories of Groucho Marx who did not want to belong to any club that would accept him as a member. Why should a reader care for literary texts because they do not care for the reader but for themselves? According to Roman Jakobson, however, refl exivity defi nes a literary text in the fi rst place,1 and, arguably, this defi nition fares better than any other so far: if we defi ne a literary text as a representation of life, the text cannot be marked off from historical or philosophical texts without introducing further distinctions.2 If we defi ne it as an expression of thoughts or feelings, then letters, diaries, and autobiographies would count as the purest forms of literature. If we defi ne it as the source of instruction and delight, it is on a par with recipes or guide books. Style and rhetoric are also not distinctive, since advertisements are stylish and political
In der Systemtheorie Niklas Luhmanns spielen die Begriffe „Selbstreferenz“ und „Beobachtung“ eine... more In der Systemtheorie Niklas Luhmanns spielen die Begriffe „Selbstreferenz“ und „Beobachtung“ eine Schlusselrolle. Um die Frage zu beantworten, was die Systemtheorie fur literaturwissenschaftlicheZwecke leistet, muste man prufen, was die beiden Schlusselbegriffe zu diesen Zwecken beitragen. Die Diskussion ist eroffnet. Dietrich Schwanitz hat den Begriff der Selbstreferenz auf Literatur angewandt und gezeigt, wie die drei literarischen Hauptgattungen uber ihre jeweilige Selbstreferenz bestimmt werden konnten: uber die Selbstreferenz der Sprache (Lyrik), des Erzahlens (Roman) und bestimmter Interaktionsformen (Drama)1. Luhmann selbst hat den Versuch unternommen, moderne Kunst und Literatur mit Hilfe des Beobachtungsbegriffs zu beschreiben2. Seine These lautet: Moderne Kunst und Literatur zeigen ein paradoxes Problem, die Beobachtbarkeit des Unbeobachtbaren.
Uploads
Papers by Stephan Mussil