LITERARY CRITICISM AND THE “APORIAS” OF READING LITERATURE

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24193/subbphilo.2019.4.19

Keywords:

literary reading, terminology, Cratylism, aporia, literary criticism.

Abstract

Literary Criticism and the Aporias of Reading Literature. In this article, we will note the fact that literary criticism, whether in the Antiquity, the Middle Ages, or even in later, in romantic and modern streams, has the text as basis of judgment. This judgment develops with regard to the fictional world retrospectively, whether as evaluation or interpretation, subjectively or with tendencies towards objectivity, bearing impressionistic or scientific claims, and its value is communicating on behalf of the literary art. Literary criticism, which needs to be derived from readings of literature, is nowadays construed as the hegemony of theories that have sometimes harmed its humanity. When transformed into our critical discourse, these theories have often managed to kill the pleasure game that is reading literature. Part of our literary criticism still prioritises the tendency towards the phraseology and rhetoric of terminological formulations and arbitrary notions rather than the direct confrontation with the nature and naturalness of the literary text. Hence, Cratylus’ ideality of motivation would suit our opinion on literature and our culture in general.

REZUMAT. Critica literară și aporiile lecturii literare. În acest articol vom insista asupra faptului că literatura critică, fie cea din antichitate, din evul mediu, sau de mai târziu, din romantism sau modernism, are textul ca fundament de evaluare. Această evaluare se formează în jurul lumii ficționale retrospectiv, fie ca judecată sau interpretare, în mod subiectiv sau cu tendințe de obiectivitate, conținând afirmații științifice sau cu caracter de impresie, iar valoarea ei este aceea de comunicare în numele artei literare. Critica literară, care ar trebui să derive din lecturi literare, este azi concepută ca hegemonie a teoriilor care, uneori, i-au știrbit din umanism. Transformate în discurs critic, aceste teorii au sfârșit adesea prin a ucide plăcerea jocului de a citi literatură. O parte din critica literară contemporană acordă încă prioritate tendinței către frazeologia și retorica formulărilor terminologice și noțiunilor arbitrare, în detrimentul confruntării directe cu natura și naturalețea textului literar. De aceea, idealismul motivației așa cum apare în Cratylos s-ar potrivi opiniei noastre despre literatură și culturii noastre în general.

Cuvinte cheie: lectură literară, terminologie, cratylism, aporie, critică literară.

Author Biography

Nysret KRASNIQI, Faculty of Philology, University of Prishtina, Kosovo. Email: nysret.krasniqi@uni-pr.edu

Nysret Krasniqi is an Associate Professor at the Department of Albanian Literature, Faculty of Philology, University of Prishtina, Kosovo. He teaches Modern Albanian Literature, Theory and Literary Criticism and Mythology. Scientific research; philosophy of literature, theory and criticism, literature and ideology, literature and identity. Nysret Krasniqi is the author of several books and articles including Autori në letërsi [Authorship in Albanian literature], Udha kratilike [Cratylus’ path], Harta letrare [Literary mapping], Thymos ect. Nysret Krasniqi is a member of editorial team of Studime [Studies] journal, Academy of Sciences and Arts of Kosova and of Filologji [Philology] Journal of Faculty of Philology in Prishtina, Kosovo. Email: nysret.krasniqi@uni-pr.edu.

References

Abrams M. H. (1971), The Mirror and the Lamp. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Aristotle. (1995), Poetics, (trans. Stephen Halliwell), London: Leob Classical Library - Harvard University Press

Bakhtin M. M. (2006), The Dialogic Imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Barthes J. (1998), The Pleasure of the Text. New York: Hill and Wang.

Barthes R. (2000), “Writers, Intellectuals, Teachers” in A Barthes Reader. London: Vintage.

Bowra M. C. (1970), Naslede simbolizma. Beograd: Nolit

Curtius E. R. (1971), Evropska knjizevnost i latinsko srednjovekovlje. Zagreb: Matica Hrvatska.

Derrida J. (1998), Of Grammatology. Baltimore & London: John Hopkins University Press.

Eliot T. S. (1982), Ese te zgjedhura. Prishtinë: Rilindja.

Genette G. (1984), “Structuralism and Literary Criticism” in Figura. Prishtinë, Rilindja.

Habib M. A. R. (2003), A History of Literary Criticism. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing

Hamiti S. (2005), Tematologjia. Prishtinë: Academy of Science of Kosova.

Hamiti S. (2009), Albanizma. Prishtinë: Academy of Science of Kosova.

Horace. (1926), Satires, Epistles and Ars Poetica, (trans. H.R. Fairclough), London: Leob Classical Library - Harvard University Press.

Krasniqi N. (2008), Udha kratilike. Prishtinë: AIKD.

Leavis F. R. (1998), Revaluation. Chicago: EP.

Plato: Cratylus, (trans: Benjamin Jowett), The Internet Classical Archive, available at http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/cratylus.html [Acessed 12. 11.2019)

Qosja R. (1979), Dialogje me shkrimtarët. Prishtinë: Rilindja.

Qosja R. (1985), Historia e letërsisë shqipe. Prishtinë: Rilindja.

Rothenber J. (2003), An Interview with Harold Bloom, originally published as “Rant Against Cant” in The Atlantic Monthly, 2003, Available at http://www2.idehist.uu.se/distans/ilmh/Ren/sh-bloom-interview.htm [Acessed 02.11.2019]

Rugova I. (1987), Refuzimi estetik. Prishtinë: Rilindja

Saussure de F. (2002), Kursi gjuhësisë së përgjithshme. Tirana: Dituria.

Sigmund F. (2000), Psikanaliza e artit dhe e letërsisë. Tirana: Dituria.

Simion E. (2010), “The End of Literature?” in Economy Transdisciplinarity Cognition, Vol. XIII, Issue 1, 2010, pp. 125-137.

Todorov T. (2007), Letërsia në rrezik. Prishtinë: Buzuku.

Downloads

Published

2019-12-15

How to Cite

KRASNIQI, N. (2019). LITERARY CRITICISM AND THE “APORIAS” OF READING LITERATURE. Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Philologia, 64(4), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.24193/subbphilo.2019.4.19

Issue

Section

Articles