PKn, letnik 25, št. 2, Ljubljana, december 2002
kot dejanje prestopanja meje. Intervju-dialog s profesorjem dr. Wolfgangom
Iserjem (prevedla Jelka Kernev Štrajn)......................
za refleksijo historične pripovedi (Alenka
mednarodni kongres IGEL (Marijan Dović)......................
Kako pisati literarno zgodovino danes?
(Matjaž Zaplotnik) ..
Društva SDPK 1998–2002 (Marijan Dović)........ 101
Razprava analizira problem literarnega razvoja na različnih ravneh, od razvoja posameznih avtorskih opusov do razvoja posameznih nacionalnih literatur, večjih literarnih regij, evropske in svetovne literature v celoti, literarnih smeri in obdobij, vrst ali zvrsti. V tem okviru razločuje različne tipe literarnega razvoja, njegove notranje in zunanje vzroke. Ob evropski literaturi preverja možnost razvojnega periodiziranja s pomočjo duhovnozgodovinske metode in prihaja do sklepa, da je ta vidik potrebno dopolniti z ahistorično tipološkim. Evropski model literarnega razvoja ne pride v poštev za razlago orientalskih literatur starega in srednjega veka, pač pa je v nji mogoča uporaba tipološkega aspekta.
An introduction to a historical-typological systematics of literary development. The article analyses the problem of literary development on various levels, from the development of individual authors and their work, to the development of national literatures, literary orientations and periods, types and genres. Within this framework a differentiation is made between different types of literary development, and their internal and external causes. The possibility of a developmental periodisation with the application of the geistesgeschichtliche method is tested on European literature, with the conclusion that this aspect needs to be complemented by ahistorical and typological aspects. A European model of literary development cannot be applied in the interpretation of the oriental literatures of Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Applying the typological aspect is, however, feasible.
article explains the metaphorical meaning of the notion of development,
comparing it with its original meaning in the natural sciences, and discovering
that research into literary development also demands a definition of the agent,
a substratum, of the foundation of the development. This substratum is portrayed
differently on different levels: in the development of some authorial opus, as a
persona of the real author, in the development of national literature, as a
language. A specific problem is posed by the determination of a substratum’s
development in supra-national units (European, world, oriental literature),
literary periods and orientations, types and genres. In all these cases it is
impossible to explain a development without a prior determination of the
notional ‘essence’ of these terms. The article refers to different
developmental models and in illustrative cases outlines the roles played in them
by internal and external causes. This is the basis for the second part of the
article, which questions the possibility of a conceptually coherent analysis of
development in European literatures or European literature as a whole. This
seems possible to achieve with the application of the geistesgeschichtliche
method, which explains a succession of literary periods and orientations on the
basis of the metaphysical grounds that determine ‘the life world’ of
historical humans. From this perspective the development of European literature
from Antiquity to post-modernism is outlined. It turns out that the historicity
of notions concerning periodisation need to be complemented by those concerning
typology (verism, hermeticism, classics), since it is only at the intersection
of the two that the real significance of literary notions is demonstrated. In
conclusion the article attempts a transfer of historical and typological notions
from the European literary framework to the oriental literature of the Antiquity
and the Middle Ages, and concludes that it is not possible to thus translate
historical concepts, because the substratum of these literatures are comprised
of different religious and metaphysical systems. Nevertheless, the use of
typological categories is justifiable even for these literatures, although in
the context of different historical developments.
Avtor se uvodoma dotakne problema določanja glavnih in stranskih likov v dramah ter predstavi specifične težave v zvezi s tem v antičnih tragedijah. Predlaga kriterij za določanje statusa dramskih likov v Sofoklovih delih. Kot važen element dramske resničnosti obravnava t. i. dramsko klimo. Pomen stranskega lika je predstavljen ob primeru lika vidca Tejrezije v Kralju Ojdipu.
Defining the supporting
characters in Sophocles’ tragedies, and their dramaturgical significance of
Tiresias in Oedipus
Rex. The article first deals with the problem of determining the main
and supporting characters in plays, and outlines specific problems correlated to
this issue in antique tragedy. A criterion for the determination of the status
of characters in Sophocles' work is then proposed. The so-called dramatic
climate is treated as an important element of dramatic reality. The significance
of the supporting character is illustrated in the case of the blind soothsayer
Tiresias in Oedipus Rex.
first deals with the problem of determining the main and supporting characters
in plays, and outlines specific problems related to the attribution of verse and
characters' status in classical tragedies. A criterion for the determination of
the status of characters in Sophocles' work is then proposed, which is combined
from two external/formal elements (a mention in the title, the scope of the
dramatic part of an individual character) and one element related to the content
(the role in the dramatic conflict). According to this criterion the chorus is
also considered as a supporting character. In addition to determining the status
of individual characters, the proposed analyses also provide insight into the
dramaturgic function and significance of supporting characters. The so-called
dramatic climate is treated as an important element of dramatic reality: if a
perspective of basic realism (Halliwell) is accepted, the category of dramatic
climate can be used to explain numerous motives for the actions of the dramatic
personas. The significance and influence of the supporting character is
illustrated in the case of the blind soothsayer Tiresias in Oedipus
Rex: it casts a contrastive light on the main character, creates a turning
point in the stream of events, and helps shape a particularly pointed,
tragically ironic situation.
se ukvarja z izkušnjo lepega kot možno stično točko med mistiko in novoveško
estetiko, razvoj katere – obravnavan v luči Gadamerjeve teze o
subjektiviranju estetike prek Kanta – je s tem položen na ozadje Platonove
filozofije in mistične estetike Dionizija Areopagita. Po drugi strani ugotavlja
razvojne linije estetike med Kantom in Iserjem, čigar teorija bralnega dejanja
pobija Kantovo tezo o manku spoznavne vrednosti v estetskem izkustvu. Ker to
ostaja zamejeno v odnos subjekt-objekt, se bralno dejanje – kljub analogiji z
mističnim vzponom k Bogu – dopolni samo v bralčevem spoznanju samega sebe.
Modern aesthetics and mysticism. The paper explores the experience of the beautiful as possibly a common ground between mysticism and modern aesthetics. The evolution of the latter - considered in the light of Gadamer’s thesis on the subjectification of aesthetics since Kant - is thus set against the background of Platonic philosophy and the mystical aesthetics of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. On the other hand, it is interested in the aesthetics between Kant and Iser whose theory does not agree with Kant's thesis about the lack of cognitive value in the aesthetic experience. Despite the striking analogy with the mystical ascent to God, the aesthetic experience remains limited in the subject-object relationship, and that is why also the act of reading ends only in the reader's cognition of himself.
The paper explores the
experience of the beautiful as possibly a common ground between mysticism and
modern aesthetics. The evolution of the latter -
considered in the light of Gadamer’s thesis on the subjectification of
aesthetics since Kant -
is thus set against the background of Platonic philosophy and the mystical
aesthetics of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. In Platonic philosophy, the
beautiful as light had ontological value through which phenomena came into
presence; reversely, through the phenomena, their invisible source of light came
into presence. As a reflection of Light, each object was transparent, and
therefore its appearance was a dimension that surpassed mere sensual value.
Since its sensual beauty emanated from elsewhere,
it could inspire love for the object and thus cause the turn to the source of
light, paideia. In mystical aesthetics,
the relationship of equality between the two dimensions of transparency and
sensual appearance gained bias, as each sensual (or intellectual) image of God
was considered to be a dissimilar image -
that is to say, only a means of ascending towards “the super-essential Godhead,”
and thus to be eliminated in the very process of ascending. The function of
negating dissimilar images was to resist slippage into subject-object
relationship, and to use the negation as a tool in experiencing emptiness,
finally leading to unknowing.
Modern object, on the other
hand, is an independent entity with a nontransparent sensual shell. This is the
result of the subject’s lack of interest in the object as an object: the
beautiful object exists only as much as it is made present by the light of the
subject’s consciousness. According to Kant, the beautiful is not a property of
the object, nor is it a property of its imagined picture, but it is the subject’s
sense of inner harmony as the result of the play of its imagination and thought
in perceiving the object. Since this play does not end up in knowledge of the
object, the beautiful loses both ontological value and the access to truth. This
reduction of the beautiful to the merely aesthetical notwithstanding, in
Kant’s philosophical system aesthetic experience functions as a zone that
relativises the scientific way of gaining knowledge and refreshes our cognitive
faculties with its playful nature.
Aesthetic experience is
finally regranted the power of grasping the truth with Heidegger, Gadamer and
Iser. This return back, however, takes place on a new level. In experiencing its
own inner harmony, the subject takes itself
Iser claims -
for the object of its knowledge. But the truth or sense that it gets hold of in
the process is limited to the range of its own subjectivity. In the 20th
century, aesthetic experience remains limited to modern consciousness, failing
to reach the region of the alétheia,
the mystical unio, the unknowing. What
it manages to form is only a pseudototality. But it might be enough to be aware
of the two extremes of experiencing the beautiful to be able to catch, in the
act of experiencing aesthetic pseudototality, a glimpse of -
not the originally beautiful -
but at least the consciousness that it exists.
V prispevku obravnavam širše teoretično ozadje, na podlagi katerega je empirična literarna znanost (ELZ) razvila specifičen koncept literarnega sistema in teoretično-metodološki aparat. Gre za radikalni konstruktivizem kot novo epistemološko in spoznavno paradigmo ter za sistemsko teorijo, ki ponuja okvir za razlago literarnega sistema in njegove umeščenosti v sodobno družbo.
Radical constructivism and systemic theory as theoretical grounds of empirical literary studies. On the basis of an extensive theoretical background, also provided in this article, empirical literary studies (ELS) developed a specific concept of a literary system and a theoretical-methodological apparatus. The article deals with radical constructivism, which has developed as a new epistemological and cognitive paradigm, and a systemic theory, which offers a framework for the interpretation of a literary system and its status in contemporary society.
systematic-empirical approaches have developed in the last two decades, the most
penetrating of which are empirical literary studies (ELS), as proposed by
Siegfried J. Schmidt et al. The article deals with the wider philosophical and
theoretical grounds of ELS, where radical constructivism and systemic theory
prove to be of key prominence. The essence of radical constructivism is a
cognitive theory with far-reaching consequences. It is based on biological
discoveries (Maturana, Varela) on auto-poetic concepts and functionally closed
life systems, on neurological-physiological discoveries concerning the structure
and function of the nervous system (Roth, Förster) suggesting that the brain as
an operatively closed system is able only to construct on cybernetic
psychological cognitive models (von Glasersfeld) which describe the construction
of the entire cognitive world (concepts of identity, movement, and also time and
place), and, finally, on Luhmann’s transference of auto-poetic concepts to a
model of social systems. Only an analysis of these starting points can enable a
full comprehension of how ELS construct their subject, how they define and
explain a literary system and its evolution, and the origin of its aversion
towards interpretative and hermeneutic traditions. It appears that empirical
literary studies based on such presuppositions do not or should not have much in
common with older models of empirical science.