Aesthetics Theory And Interpretation Of The Literary Work

This book introduces the reader to the literary work and to an understanding of its cultural background and its specific features, presenting basic topics and ideas in their historical context and development in Western culture.

This text introduces the notion of a new aestheticism - 'new' insofar as it identifies a turn taken by some contemporary thinkers towards the idea that focussing on the aesthetic impact of a work of art or literature has the potential to open different ways of thinking about identity, politics and culture.

Kolbas stakes out new territory in assessing the war over literary canon formation, a subject that contemporary polemicists have devoted much ink to. Throughout this succinct manuscript, Kolbas ranges through the sociology and politics of culture, aesthetic theory, and literary theory to develop his point that texts not only must should be situated in the historical and material conditions of their production, but also evaluated for their very real aesthetic content. One reason the is an important issue, Kolbas contends, is that the canon is not simply enclosed in the ivory tower of academia; its effects are apparent in a much wider field of cultural production and use. He begins by critiquing the conservative humanist and liberal pluralist positions on the canon, which either assiduously avoid any sociological explanation of the canon or treat texts as stand-ins for particular ideologies. Kolbas is sympathetic to the arguments of Bourdieu et. al. regarding positioning the canon in a wider "field of cultural production" than the university, but argues that theirs are purely sociological explanations of aesthetics (i.e., there is no objective aesthetic content) that ignore art's autonomous realm, which he argues -- a la Adorno -- exists (if only problematically). Ultimately, he argues that critical theory, particularly the arguments of Adorno on aesthetics, offers the most fruitful path for evaluating the canon, despite the approach's clear flaws. His vision is a sociological one, but one that treats the components of the canon as possessing objective aesthetic content, albeit content that shifts in meaning over history.

This book re-examines Adorno’s aesthetics, developing a new literary approach that aims to unveil hidden elements of Adorno’s thought. Farina proposes to read Adorno’s aesthetics as a literary theory of art, showing its efficacy in its comprehension of the most advanced trends of contemporary literature. As a result, this book provides an image of Adorno’s aesthetics as a complete, satisfying and consistent philosophy of literature, a robust theory which is able to stand its ground in contemporary aesthetic debate. Challenging the prevalent prejudice that defines Adorno’s thought, and especially his aesthetics, as ‘modernist’, Farina argues that Adorno's philosophy of literature shows its value precisely in its application to and comprehension of postmodern literature, such as the works of Thomas Pynchon, Don DeLillo and David Foster Wallace. Precise and compelling, this book provides a new paradigm for understanding Adorno’s theory of artwork, serving as an essential reference for researches investigating the relation between classical critical theory and contemporary art.

Combining cognitive and evolutionary research with traditional humanist methods, Nancy Easterlin demonstrates how a biocultural perspective in theory and criticism opens up new possibilities for literary interpretation. Easterlin maintains that the practice of literary interpretation is still of central intellectual and social value. Taking an open yet judicious approach, she argues, however, that literary interpretation stands to gain dramatically from a fair-minded and creative application of cognitive and evolutionary research. This work does just that, expounding a biocultural method that charts a middle course between overly reductive approaches to literature and traditionalists who see the sciences as a threat to the humanities. Easterlin develops her biocultural method by comparing it to four major subfields within literary studies: new historicism, ecocriticism, cognitive approaches, and evolutionary approaches. After a thorough review of each subfield, she reconsiders them in light of relevant research in cognitive and evolutionary psychology and provides a textual analysis of literary works from the romantic era to the present, including William Wordsworth’s “Simon Lee” and the Lucy poems, Mary Robinson’s “Old Barnard,” Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s “Dejection: An Ode,” D. H. Lawrence’s The Fox, Jean Rhys’s Wide Sargasso Sea, and Raymond Carver’s “I Could See the Smallest Things.” A Biocultural Approach to Literary Theory and Interpretation offers a fresh and reasoned approach to literary studies that at once preserves the central importance that interpretation plays in the humanities and embraces the exciting developments of the cognitive sciences.

This long-awaited translation of Das literarische Kunstwerk makes available for the first time in English Roman Ingarden's influential study. Though it is inter-disciplinary in scope, situated as it is on the borderlines of ontology and logic, philosophy of literature and theory of language, Ingarden's work has a deliberately narrow focus: the literary work, its structure and mode of existence. The Literary Work of Art establishes the groundwork for a philosophy of literature, i.e., an ontology in terms of which the basic general structure of all literary works can be determined. This "essential anatomy" makes basic tools and concepts available for rigorous and subtle aesthetic analysis.

Five Swedish scholars and theorists from different disciplines - literary studies, philosophy, and art history - discuss the multiplicity of principles of interpretation and provide a descriptive analysis of the concept of interpretation itself that clarifies the main features of the rationale underlying the interpretation of literature and the arts. Their discussion provides a much-needed bridge between analytical aesthetics and theoretical discussion within the individual aesthetic disciplines. The introduction and concluding remarks by the editors provide both a frame for discussion of the issues and a historical perspective on the debates about interpretation.